Search

This report presents the procedures, results and conclusions of a study designed to compare the effectiveness of several feedback modes for correcting errors in computer-assisted instruction. Seventy-five university upperclassmen were taught 30 general science concepts by means of a computer-assisted adjunct auto-instruction program. Subjects were assigned to five strata on the basis of scholastic aptitude; in each stratum, subjects were randomly assigned to one of the five treatment groups which differed only with regard to feedback modes. A treatment X level analysis of variance was performed to determine whether differences existed between any of the treatment groups with respect to any of several variables tested. Group means were not significant with regard to SAT scores, pretest scores, or the time required for subjects to attain the criterion of 30 correct responses. Results indicated that the most significant factor in the rate of error correction by adjunct auto-instruction is guiding the subject to the correct response. The most significant factor in immediate retention is the amount of feedback information the subject receives. Analysis of variance tables are included. (LC)

Studies which have utilized low-error-rate linear type programs have not been able to compare the effectiveness of various modes of feedback in correcting error in programed learning. In the present study using 75 university students, it was possible to correct errors without teaching erroneous material by using materials designed to teach 30 commonly misunderstood concepts in general science by means of computer-assisted instruction (CAI). The five treatment groups differed only with respect to feedback modes which were no feedback; feedback of "correct" or "wrong"; feedback of the correct response; feedback appropriate to the student's response; and a combination of modes two, three, and four. Items missed were presented repeatedly until a criterion of correct response to each item had been attained. There are indications that the subjects who received feedback guiding them to the correct response were learning more effectively and performed better than those who were forced to "discover" the correct response. Data indicate that for correcting error, providing a student with a statement of which response was correct or why the correct response was correct may be the most valuable. The analysis of variance on posttest scores indicates that a combination of modes is slightly superior to some of the individual feedback modes in affecting immediate retention. (MT)

Seventy-five university upperclassmen were taught 30 general science concepts by means of a computer-assisted adjunct auto-instruction program. Treatment groups differed only with regard to feedback modes. The five modes compared were Group A (no feedback), Group B (feedback of "correct" or "wrong"), Group C (feedback of the correct response choice), Group D (feedback appropriate to the student's response), and Group E (a combination of the feedback modes of Groups B, C, and D). Subjects were assigned to 15 strata on the basis of scholastic aptitude. The five subjects in each strata were randomly assigned to one of five treatment groups. Analysis of variance was performed to determine whether differences existed between any of the groups with respect to several variables tested. The means of groups guided by feedback to the correct response (Groups C, D, E) were significantly better than the groups required to "discover" the correct response. No differences were found between subjects and their attitudes toward computer instruction, and no relationship was found between scholastic aptitude and any of the variables studied. (BC)

Takes a positive view of assigning scholastic grades to students. Advances several reasons why grades are beneficial. (HMV)

This article discusses problems imposed on students writing dissertations and makes distinctions between published research and dissertation research. (PD)

Essay calling for specific changes to be made in the DAVI-AASL Joint Standards. (LS)

This article defines intrinsic and adaptive (as opposed to linear) programing and summarizes the development of this approach to instruction. (Editor)

Teachers in instructional technology must be well prepared in their role if they are to meet requirements of their field. (CK)