2019
DOI: 10.1080/10573569.2019.1627967
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Feedback Provided Within Structured Reading Programs: A Systematic Review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, no systematic review has addressed this issue yet. Furthermore, feedback can be delivered through different formats (i.e., verbal, nonverbal, written, and visual/graphical) and content types (i.e., correct–incorrect, normative information, and designed to praise) [ 17 , 18 ]. These elements will generate varied effects on students’ motor skill learning in PE lessons.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, no systematic review has addressed this issue yet. Furthermore, feedback can be delivered through different formats (i.e., verbal, nonverbal, written, and visual/graphical) and content types (i.e., correct–incorrect, normative information, and designed to praise) [ 17 , 18 ]. These elements will generate varied effects on students’ motor skill learning in PE lessons.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It can reduce cognitive load and bring attention to a key part of the task; it can signal a gap between performance and the learning aim; and may provide information for correcting inappropriate task strategies (Johnson et al., 2017; Shute, 2008). It has also been established that feedback can be delivered in different ways, and therefore the effectiveness of feedback in part depends on its design (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Johnson et al., 2017; Narciss et al., 2014; Schrauben & Witmer, 2019; Shute, 2008). This has led to an effort to identify what makes feedback effective and a number of frameworks have been developed that seek to characterise it (Benton et al., 2018; Johnson et al., 2017; Narciss et al., 2014; Shute, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Across these frameworks a distinction is made between feedback that informs the learner about the correctness of their response, that is outcome feedback, and feedback that aims to evolve the learner's understanding, that is elaborative feedback 1 . Within games, outcome and elaborative feedback can be presented together (Johnson et al., 2017); however, it is elaborative feedback that has been evidenced to support the learner's understanding and lead to learning gains (Attali & van der Kleij, 2017; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Johnson et al., 2017; Schrauben & Witmer, 2019). Elaborative feedback seeks to scaffold the learner's thinking and influences further responses by providing additional information (Attali & van der Kleij, 2017); whilst outcome feedback is chiefly corrective.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%