No abstract

This study examines the effects of timing of corrective formative feedback on processing text information on question‐answering. Undergraduate students read an expository text and answered questions in two attempts. Students were randomly assigned to a no feedback, immediate feedback and delayed feedback conditions. Students in the feedback conditions received feedback on the correctness of their answer after the first attempt and were informed about the right answer after the second attempt. Students were prompted to restudy the text after failing in their first attempt. However, students in the no feedback condition were just prompted to search the text. All students were tested on question‐answering, corrective probability and a post‐test cued‐recall test. Results showed that: (a) feedback reduced the initial time reading the text; (b) feedback increased performance on question answering and cued‐recall; (c) delayed feedback produced no advantages over immediate feedback. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.

This study had two main purposes. First, to test how the availability of documents in multiple document reading might affect students' levels of cognitive load. Secondly, to develop an instrument that captures the different sources of load when working with multiple documents. A total of 125 secondary school students read four short texts on transgenic foods and subsequently responded to an open-ended question that required them to write an essay expressing their personal stance toward the topic. Participants in the experimental treatment condition (n = 54) were allowed to go back to the texts any time during the essay task, whereas their peers in the control condition (n = 71) were not allowed to do so. As hypothesized through the lens of cognitive load theory, the cognitive load arising from cognitive processes that in themselves do not contribute to learning (i.e., extraneous cognitive load) was somewhat lower in the experimental treatment condition, probably due to split attention effects in the control condition. However, no statistically significant differences were found in perceived task complexity or learning task performance. A reliable instrument to measure different sources of intrinsic and extraneous load in multiple document reading is provided. Implications of these findings for future research are discussed.

Elaborative feedback (EF) containing explanations on students' responses benefits learning. Computer‐based environments provide learners with EF in different ways, for example, on an immediate question‐by‐question basis or after answering a set of questions. Recent findings also suggest that delaying EF enhances learning. However, it is unclear to what extent different types of delayed‐EF favour students' performance. This study examines whether and how two types of delayed‐EF (question‐based vs. summative) influence students' question‐answering performance and final learning over immediate‐EF. One hundred thirty‐three secondary‐school students read a scientific text and answered 12 multiple‐choice questions in a computer‐based environment. A day later, students completed a final learning test with 20 open‐ended questions. Results showed that neither question‐based delayed EF nor summative delayed EF outperformed immediate EF. However, EF moderated the relationship between students' prior knowledge and their performance outcomes, suggesting that students with higher levels of prior knowledge receiving summative delayed EF benefited more.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract