Augmenting Computer-Interactive Self-Assessment with and Without Feedback

Abstract

Following a preexperimental assessment of computer-interactive math performance during VR 6 reinforcement and extinction, 4 regular education students and 2 students identified as behaviorally disordered participated in an A-BC-D-BC withdrawal of treatment design. Subsequent to baseline observations of math performance during self-assessment with and without accuracy feedback, students were trained in self-assessment procedures by way of a series of computer-interactive tutorials. During treatment, students were provided computer-displayed accuracy feedback plus reinforcement for correct self-assessments of their math performance. Reinforcement and feedback were gradually leaned, and in the final treatment condition, accuracy feedback was terminated; however, monetary reinforcement for correct selfassessment was sustained. Following treatment, students were given opportunities to perform math problems in the absence of reinforcement while self-assessing their performances with and without accuracy feedback. This was succeeded by a withdrawal condition and a final session in which students, again, were given an opportunity to self-assess with and without feedback from the computer. Outcomes suggest that subsequent to training computerinteractive self-assessment with feedback may facilitate high rates and long durations of math performance even in the absence of compensation. Implications regarding the augmental as a type of rule-governed behavior and the necessary and sufficient conditions for sustaining self-assessment as a learned reinforcer are discussed.

A Systematic Review of Pliance, Tracking, and Augmenting

“…This resulted in a final sample of nine journal articles, describing 14 experimental studies. However, after reading these papers, both reviewers discarded five studies (i.e., Gaschler, Marewski, Wenke, & Frensch, 2014; Hayes, Brownstein, Zettle, Rosenfarb, & Korn, 1986; McAuliffe, Hughes, & Barnes-Holmes, 2014, Experiment 1; Ninness, Ninness, Sherman, & Schotta, 1998) because they did not state in the abstract or introduction that their aim was to investigate pliance, tracking, and/or augmenting. In total, nine independent experimental studies were included (Figure 1).…”

Self-Assessment in the Development of Mathematical Problem-Solving Skills

“…During the last two decades, there has been a growing body of interest about selfassessment in the educational environment, especially because of evidence that it enhances student acquisition of some academic and social skills [1][2][3][4][5]14]. In addition, several studies revealed that self-assessment is a sine qua non for effective learning [2,6,15].…”

“…Feedback should be focused not only on strengths and weaknesses, but also on offering corrective advice, which leads students to higher order learning goals. In the research literature there are studies about this issue which compare self-assessment with and without feedback: Outcomes suggest that self-regulation with feedback helps students recognize mistakes and correct them because it directs them to a higher level of awareness and comprehension of failures [5,14].…”

“…You properly use the mathematical codes by employing plots and symbols, but there are some inaccuracies and/or mistakes. L4 (14)(15)(16)(17)(18) You analyze and interpret the key points, the essential information and the links between them completely and in a relevant way. You are able to skip distractors and use mathematical codes by employing plots and symbols with mastery and accuracy.…”

An emic perspective toward challenges and solutions of self- and peer-assessment in writing courses

“…The reviewed studies show that the "reliability and validity of self-assessment tends to be higher in relation to the ability of the learner, the amount of scaffolding, practice and feedback and the degree of advancement in the course, rather than chronological age" (Topping 2003, p. 65). There are also some other factors which researchers (eg, Fontana and Fernandes 1994;Ninness et al 1998;Ward et al 2002) consider to be effective in reliability and validity of self-assessment. In Topping (2003, p. 65) words these factors include "the nature of the subject area, the nature of the product or performance assessed, the nature and clarity of the assessment criteria, the nature of assessment instrumentation, and cultural and gender differences.…”