Michael L. Epstein

Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique Promotes Learning and Corrects Inaccurate first Responses

Multiple-choice testing procedures that do not provide corrective feedback facilitate neither learning nor retention. In Studies 1 and 2, the performance of participants evaluated with the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF AT), a testing method providing immediate feedback and enabling participants to answer until correct, was compared to that of participants responding to identical tests with Scantron answer sheets. Performance on initial tests did not differ, but when retested after delays of 1 day or 1 week, participants evaluated with the IF AT demonstrated higher scores and correctly answered more questions that had been initially answered incorrectly than did participants evaluated with Scantron forms. In Study 3, immediate feedback and answering until correct was available to all participants using either the IF AT or a computerized testing system on initial tests, with the final test completed by all participants using Scantron forms. Participants initially evaluated with the IF AT demonstrated increased retention and correctly responded to more items that had initially been answered incorrectly. Active involvement in the assessment process plays a crucial role in the acquisition of information, the incorporation of accurate information into cognitive processing mechanisms, and the retrieval of correct answers during retention tests. Results of Studies 1-3 converge to indicate that the IF AT method actively engages learners in the discovery process and that this engagement promotes retention and the correction of initially inaccurate response strategies.

Provision of Feedback during Preparation for Academic Testing: Learning Is Enhanced by Immediate but Not Delayed Feedback.

Students prepared for classroom examinations by completing practice tests, with selected items from these practice tests repeated, in either the original or in a modified wording, on classroom examinations and a final examination. The availability of immediate self-corrective feedback on Study 1 practice tests (0, 3, or 6 practice tests) was varied, while in Study 2, the timing of feedback provided during practice tests (immediate, end of test, 24-hour delay, control) was varied. Performance on examinations was elevated by the provision of immediate feedback on practice tests in both studies, especially when test items were presented in their original wording, with some generalization observed on items presented in a modified wording. Predictions made in accordance with the interference-perseveration hypothesis and the delayretention effect were not supported. These results demonstrate considerable potential for immediate self-corrective feedback, delivered during test preparation through the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique, to enhance performance on classroom examinations and to promote the retention of factual information during the academic semester.

Immediate Feedback during Academic Testing

Performance on two multiple-choice testing procedures was examined during unit tests and a final examination. The Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique provided immediate response feedback in an answer-until-correct style of responding. The testing format which served as a point of comparison was the Scantron form. One format was completed by students in introductory psychology courses during unit tests whereas all students used the Scantron form on the final examination. Students tested with Immediate Feedback forms on the unit tests correctly answered more of the final examination questions which were repeated from earlier unit tests than did students tested with Scantron forms. Also, students tested with Immediate Feedback forms correctly answered more final examination questions previously answered incorrectly on the unit tests than did students tested previously with Scantron forms.

THE ROLE OF FEEDBACK DURING ACADEMIC TESTING: THE DELAY RETENTION EFFECT REVISITED

Students completed 5 quizzes during the semester using tesponse formats that provided no feedback (word-processed answer sheet, Scantron form), delayed feedback (end of test, 24 hours), or immediate feedback while answering each test item. Administered 2 weeks after students had completed the 5th quiz, the final examination consisted of 50 items, with 10 items randomly selected from each quiz. Scores on each quiz, time to complete each quiz, and average study time per quiz did not differ as a function of response format. Students demonstrated the highest recall, the most accurate identification of initial responses, the most confidence in their answers, and the least amount of perseverative incorrect responding on those final examination items that were originally responded to when immediate feedback was provided. These same students demonstrated less recall, less identification accuracy, lower confidence in their answers, and more perseverative incorrect responding on those final examination items that were originally responded to when either end of test or delayed feedback had been provided. Students’ self-reports assessing how response format affected learning, retention, and confidence were consistent with quantitative outcomes. The present results support prior’ demonstrations that combining immediate feedback with the opportunity to answer until correct not only assesses, but also teaches, in a manner that promotes the retention of course materials across the academic semester.

Efficacy of Error for the Correction of Initially Incorrect Assumptions and of Feedback for the Affirmation of Correct Responding: Learning in the Classroom.

Participants completed 5 classroom examinations during which the timing of knowledge of results (no feedback: Scantron form; delayed feedback: end-of-test, 24 hour delay; immediate feedback: educator, response form) and iterative responding (1 response, up to 4 responses) were manipulated. At the end of the semester, each participant completed a 100-item final examination which included 10 items randomly selected from each classroom examination, plus 50 entirely new items. Neither the source of feedback nor the number of responses permitted influenced performance on classroom examinations but both factors interacted significantly to enhance the final examination performance of participants provided with immediate feedback and iterative responding. The correction of initially inaccurate strategies by combining immediate feedback with iterative responding was not differentially effective as a function of information source: educator or the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF AT) form. For these participants, response identification accuracy, confidence ratings, and retention were higher and inaccurate perseverative responding was lower. Performance on the final examination permits the preliminary quantification of how immediate feedback coupled with iterative responding, when used during classroom examinations that contain items that will be repeated on a cumulative final examination, not only assesses student knowledge but also teaches in a manner that promotes the retention of course materials.

Enhancing Learning in the Introductory Course.

In an examination of the effects of timing of feedback on student learning, participants were randomly assigned to complete five introductory course tests using either control (Scantron form) or one of three feedback (end-of-test, 24-hr delay, immediate) procedures. A cumulative final examination with 50 new items and 10 items repeated from each course test was used to assess retention during the academic semester. Fifty final examination items, administered at postcourse intervals of 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, were used to measure longer-term retention. The provision of feedback at either the end of a test or after a 24-hr delay, relative to control procedures, increased retention for 3 to 5 weeks during the semester. Robust enhancement of retention at all intervals was observed only when immediate feedback was provided. The magnitude of the immediate feedback effect indicates that students benefit from affirmation of correct responding and notification of incorrect responding during classroom tests and suggests noteworthy potential for creating learnable moments during which students validate and self-correct their knowledge stores.

Effectiveness of Feedback During the Testing of Preschool Children, Elementary School Children, and Adolescents with Developmental Delays

Students in Grades 1, 3, 5, and 7 studied test materials presented within the context of a story, and then responded to a 10-item quiz using either a Scantron form or an Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF AT) form (Study 1). The retention of these materials was examined 1 week later using IF AT forms. Students evaluated with the IF AT demonstrated an overall increase in scores on the follow-up quiz; students evaluated with Scantron forms demonstrated an overall decrease in scores. In Study 2, the acquisition and retention of basic academic readiness materials by children preparing to enter the educational system was evaluated using either the IF AT or a Scantron form. Five 10-item tests were completed by each child, 1 per week, with 2 items randomly selected from each week’s test for inclusion on the final examination. Children evaluated with the IF AT demonstrated significantly higher scores on the final examination and on readministrations of the final examination 1 and 3 months later. The enhancement of retention was particularly prominent when developmental status was considered. In Study 3, 4 adolescents with mild mental retardation studying 6 life-skills modules were tested with only IF AT forms, only Scantron forms, or with IF AT forms on 3 modules and Scantron forms on 3 modules. The distribution of performance on each module was overlapping; the student tested with only IF AT forms demonstrated the highest percentage of retention while the student tested with only Scantron forms demonstrated the lowest percentage of retention. The beneficial effects of corrective feedback observed in Studies 1-3 were similar to those observed previously in our laboratory, supporting the results of prior studies conducted with university students and highlighting the critical role of feedback during the assessment of children and adolescents, including those with developmental delays.

Feedback Facilitates the Acquisition and Retention of Numerical Fact Series by Elementary School Students with Mathematics Learning Disabilities.

The effects of feedback to assist elementary school students classified as either normally achieving (NA) or with a mathematics learning disability (MLD) in acquiring the fact series of 0 to 9 for the operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division were examined in Study 1. The acquisition of each fact series was facilitated by immediate, but not by delayed feedback, the latter of which was no more effective than control procedures. The students with math disabilities were tested with either delayed feedback or a Scantron form in Study 1, then participated in Study 2, in which they were provided with feedback from either an educator or the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF AT). The beneficial effects of immediate feedback reported in Study 1 were replicated and extended during maintenance which continued for as many as 25 sessions. The effects of auditory feedback provided by an educator and visual feedback provided by the IF AT were compared with the effects of combined auditory and visual feedback provided by the Write-Say method in Study 3. The integrated presentation of auditory and visual feedback was no more effective than the use of either modality, separately. The comparable effectiveness of feedback by an educator and by the IF AT, and the nonsynergistic effects of combining auditory with visual feedback, suggests that a response medium such as the IF AT has considerable adjunctive potential to assist in the instruction of elementary school students with special learning needs

Acquisition and Retention of Esperanto: The Case for Error Correction and Immediate Feedback

Participants completed 5 laboratory examinations during which the number of responses permitted (1 response, up to 4 responses) and the timing of feedback (no feedback control: Scantron form; delayed feedback: end-of-test, 24-hr delay; immediate feedback: assistant, response form) were manipulated. Participants completed a 100-item cumulative final examination which included 10 items from each laboratory examination, plus 50 entirely new items; this cumulative examination was presented again 3 and 6 months later to determine if the timing of feedback affected retention. Timing of feedback and opportunity to engage in iterative responding (IR) interacted significantly to enhance the cumulative final examination performance of participants provided with immediate feedback, with comparable performance demonstrated when immediate feedback was provided by either an experimental assistant or the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF AT) form. Together with prior reports from our laboratory, these results highlight the robustness of immediate feedback and IR to facilitate learning in a manner that is comparable between laboratory and classroom settings, although the size of the immediate feedback effect observed in the laboratory is less robust than that observed in the classroom.

Adjunctive Role for Immediate Feedback in the Acquisition and Retention of Mathematical Fact Series by Elementary School Students Classified with Mild Mental Retardation.

The effects of feedback on the acquisition and retention of mathematical fact series by elementary school students classified with mild mental retardation was examined in 4 studies. Immediate feedback was provided by either an educator or the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF AT), at the end of a test series by a review of correct solutions (delayed feedback), or for control purposes, with a Scantron form. Reductions in errors and inaccurate perseverative responding during intervention periods were higher, and the repetition of errors during maintenance test was lower, when feedback was provided by an educator in Study 1. These results were replicated and extended in Study 2 to the operation of subtraction. In Study 3, the concurrent presentation of both forms of immediate feedback was more effective than the presentation of either form separately. In Study 4, the adjunctive value of the IIF AT to facilitate the teaching-learning process was established, with higher levels of independent learning and retention demonstrated when the I F AT was available. The IF AT, as a simple paper and pencil tool, can assist the educator through the provision of individualized performance feedback and the encouraging of students to continue responding while simultaneously promoting independent learning.