東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Can Reading Comprehension be Enhanced by Adding Feedback to Closed-Ended Practice Tests?

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Can Reading Comprehension be Enhanced by Adding Feedback to Closed-Ended Practice Tests?/
Author:	Hildenbrand, Lena.
Description:	1 online resource (71 pages)
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-02.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International84-02.
Subject:	Cognitive psychology. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=29330638click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798834055136

Can Reading Comprehension be Enhanced by Adding Feedback to Closed-Ended Practice Tests?
Hildenbrand, Lena.

Can Reading Comprehension be Enhanced by Adding Feedback to Closed-Ended Practice Tests? - 1 online resource (71 pages)

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-02.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Illinois at Chicago, 2022.

Includes bibliographical references

Many studies have demonstrated that practice testing on to-be-learned materials can be an effective learning activity. While most of the literature on practice testing is on retention, work on improving comprehension primarily has focused on open-ended activities such as short answer quizzes or having students write self-explanations. Recently, two studies demonstrated that closed-ended practice tests consisting of inference questions can improve students' comprehension outcomes. However, effects were modest and suggested that differences between closed-ended testing formats may exist. Known to augment testing effects, adding feedback may be one way to promote optimal learning from practice tests and further enhance their effectiveness. The goal of the present study was to test whether adding feedback to closed-ended practice tests (multiple choice, true-false) would improve learning. Additionally, it was of interest to test whether feedback would influence learners' metacomprehension accuracy (the accuracy of their judgments for how well they think they understand a given text). Results demonstrated that presenting practice test questions in a multiple-choice format improved comprehension over asking these same questions in a true-false format. However, feedback did not improve learning from the practice tests, and elaborative feedback increased the error in participants' judgments for how well they thought they understood the texts. One explanation for the failure to see benefits from feedback is that students may have only processed feedback superficially. The present study suggests that for practice tests consisting of closed-ended inference questions adding feedback may harm students' understanding of how well they have learned while not actually helping them learn at all.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2023

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798834055136Subjects--Topical Terms:

523881
Cognitive psychology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

LearningIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

542853
Electronic books.

Can Reading Comprehension be Enhanced by Adding Feedback to Closed-Ended Practice Tests?
LDR:03239nmm a2200433K 4500 001 2359682
005 20230917194933.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 241011s2022 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798834055136
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI29330638
035 $a (MiAaPQ)0799vireo3052Hildenbrand
035 $a AAI29330638
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Hildenbrand, Lena. $3 3700300
245 1 0 $a Can Reading Comprehension be Enhanced by Adding Feedback to Closed-Ended Practice Tests?
264 0 $c 2022
300 $a 1 online resource (71 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-02.
500 $a Advisor: Wiley, Jennifer.
502 $a Thesis (M.A.)--University of Illinois at Chicago, 2022.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Many studies have demonstrated that practice testing on to-be-learned materials can be an effective learning activity. While most of the literature on practice testing is on retention, work on improving comprehension primarily has focused on open-ended activities such as short answer quizzes or having students write self-explanations. Recently, two studies demonstrated that closed-ended practice tests consisting of inference questions can improve students' comprehension outcomes. However, effects were modest and suggested that differences between closed-ended testing formats may exist. Known to augment testing effects, adding feedback may be one way to promote optimal learning from practice tests and further enhance their effectiveness. The goal of the present study was to test whether adding feedback to closed-ended practice tests (multiple choice, true-false) would improve learning. Additionally, it was of interest to test whether feedback would influence learners' metacomprehension accuracy (the accuracy of their judgments for how well they think they understand a given text). Results demonstrated that presenting practice test questions in a multiple-choice format improved comprehension over asking these same questions in a true-false format. However, feedback did not improve learning from the practice tests, and elaborative feedback increased the error in participants' judgments for how well they thought they understood the texts. One explanation for the failure to see benefits from feedback is that students may have only processed feedback superficially. The present study suggests that for practice tests consisting of closed-ended inference questions adding feedback may harm students' understanding of how well they have learned while not actually helping them learn at all.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2023
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Cognitive psychology. $3 523881
650 4 $a Educational tests & measurements. $3 3168483
650 4 $a Reading instruction. $3 2122756
650 4 $a Psychology. $3 519075
650 4 $a Educational evaluation. $3 526425
650 4 $a Education. $3 516579
653 $a Learning
653 $a Metacognition
653 $a Practice testing
653 $a Feedback
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 lcsh $3 542853
690 $a 0633
690 $a 0288
690 $a 0535
690 $a 0621
690 $a 0443
690 $a 0515
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 783688
710 2 $a University of Illinois at Chicago. $b Psychology. $3 3174707
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 84-02.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=29330638 $z click for full text (PQDT)