Feedback in technology‐based instruction: Learner preferences

Abstract

This research investigates learner preferences for the format of feedback when using technology‐based instruction (TBI). The primary method of data collection was to provide subjects with a range of options for TBI feedback following responses to multiple‐choice questions and then observe their choices. A software tool both presented the feedback options and tracked subsequent interactions. Over a 3‐year period, data were collected relating to 2066 postgraduate students studying one or more of three items of TBI. These students responded to a total of 61 929 questions. In addition, a series of semi‐structured interviews were conducted which investigated why subjects made their choices and the factors that affect these choices. Recommendations to educators regarding the content, timing and delivery of TBI feedback are suggested.

¿Influye la Retroalimentación Correctiva en el Uso de la Retroalimentación Elaborada en un Entorno Digital?

“…Igualmente, ofrece información valiosa para el diseño de herramientas digitales en las que se proporcione retroalimentación al responder preguntas sobre los contenidos de un texto. Aunque la retroalimentación correctiva KR y KCR pueden interferir en el uso de la EF, parece necesario que los entornos digitales proporcionen ambos tipos de retroalimentación (Lefevre y Cox, 2016;Mason y Bruning, 2001), especialmente cuando se promueve el aprendizaje de conocimientos complejos (Tärning, 2018). Aunque nuestro estudio sugiere que el uso de la EF es reducido, especialmente cuando se recibe retroalimentación KCR, esta información parece ser útil para corregir el modelo de respuesta creado por los estudiantes cuando se aprenden conceptos complejos en el área de ciencias.…”

“…Estos autores sugieren que los entornos digitales deben a) proporcionar retroalimentación, b) ofrecer EF para las respuestas correctas, c) proporcionar retroalimentación clara y focalizada en la tarea, d) ofrecer EF de tipo explicativo en las preguntas que evalúan la aplicación del material estudiado y e) permitir a los estudiantes revisar las preguntas. Los resultados de este estudio mostraron que los estudiantes prestan especial atención a la retroalimentación KR inicialmente y a la retroalimentación KCR cuando responden incorrectamente, por lo que la precisión de las respuestas es un factor esencial para comprender el uso de la EF (Lefevre y Cox, 2016). En un estudio con la metodología pensar-en-voz-alta, Máñez, Vidal-Abarca, Kendeou y Martínez (2019) analizaron el procesamiento de una EF que contenía KR, KCR y pistas para mejorar la comprensión de los contenidos evaluados.…”

The model of technology of university engineering students’ foreign language training in conditions of multilingual education in Kazakhstan

“…Other attempts of foreign researchers to define educational technology are based on only one of its features, for instance: educational technology as technical teaching aids [4], educational technology as the educational process [5], and educational technology as a set of knowledge [4]. Present researchers of educational technology problems also note the changing context of its meaning and dissolving boundaries of its essence [6]. Therefore, the UNESCO defines educational technology as a doublenatured structure: on the one hand, these are audiovisual aids, computers and other various sorts of hard and software; on the other hand, it is the methodology of planning, realizing and evaluating the learning process and knowledge acquisition 5 .…”

“…The first one officially accepted in 1979 states that "pedagogical technology is a complex integrative process including people, ideas, means and ways of the organization of educational activity for the analysis of problems and the management of the process of solving problems covering all aspects of knowledge acquisition". Thus, pedagogical technology was considered to be the strictly scientific designing and exact reproduction of pedagogical actions guaranteeing success 6 . facilitating learning and improving performance by creating, using, and managing appropriate technological processes and resources 7 .…”

The Design and Development of Identification of Students' Misconceptions in Individualized Learning Environment (iSMILE) System

“…Students can monitor their learning progress using the feedbacks (Bell & Cowie, 2001). Effective feedback can help to identify learner's specific errors or misconceptions related with the concept (Attali, 2015;Shute, 2008), improve learning and performance (Attali, 2015;Hattie & Timperley, 2007;Lefevre & Cox, 2016;Sadler, 1989;Yuan & Kim, 2015), increase learner's confidence and motivation to learn (Yuan & Kim, 2015). With the introduction of technology, the effectiveness of feedback delivery can be improved with more accuracy (Pacheco-Venegas, López, & Andrade-Aréchiga, 2015).…”