Raymond W. Kulhavy

Feedback in Written Instruction

When students respond to an instructional communication, telling them whether or not their answer is correct increases the amount of material remembered on a later test (Anderson, Kulhavy, & Andre, 1971; Gilman, 1969; Meyer, 1960). Unfortunately, the mechanisms responsible for such facilitation are frequently misunderstood, and one can find numerous examples in both research and instructional development where feedback is used inappropriately, neutralizing any positive effects it might have on student performance. The main purpose of this paper is to provide an integration of the work done on feedback processes, especially as these results apply to written lessons and the design of instructional materials. Finally, this discussion makes no attempt to cover the more task specific literature dealing with motor learning, simple concept acquisition, or paired-associates, since excellent reviews already exist in these areas (Adams, 1968; Ammons, 1956; Bilodeau, 1966; Bourne, 1966; Renner, 1964).

Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude

This paper reviews written feedback from an information-processing perspective. The first section discusses the question of feedback as a reinforcer, and describes the feedback paradigm used as a conceptual guide for the following sections. In the second section we evaluate research on the form and content of feedback. In the last section, a model is developed that applies concepts from servocontrol theory to the feedback sequence. Finally, we report three experiments which support the major predictions of the control model.

Conjoint Retention of Maps and Related Discourse.

Abstract Two experiments used fifth-grade students to test the hypothesis that conjointly presented verbal/spatial information facilitates retrieval from either stimulus format. In Experiment 1, subjects wrote either a geographical description or sensible narrative about a simple reference map. As predicted by conjoint retention, the narrative writers remembered significantly more of the map than their geographic counterparts. In Experiment 2, subjects either wrote or drew a rendition of the map or of a normed geographic description of its content. Subjects then listened to a short story about events occurring in the map space while they studied their rendition. Regardless of whether they wrote or drew, learners who viewed the map itself recalled significantly more discourse events, and event recall was dependent on whether the subject reported remembering associated geographic features and was able to produce the features on the test. These results support the notion of conjoint retention which assumes that related verbal/spatial arrays are stored in a fashion which allows separate use of both formats during retrieval.

Notetaking and depth of processing

Abstract Four levels of notetaking (summary, paraphrase, verbatim, and letter search) were used to control depth of processing of a prose passage with 180 high school students, who then either reviewed their notes or read an interpolated text. A separate control group took no notes. On immediate and delayed post-tests, post hoc analyses with the depth (notetaking) condition showed the following ranking: summary = paraphrase > control = verbatim > letter search. A paraphrase notes × review × test-position interaction was significant, indicating that less forgetting occurred on a delayed post-test when students reviewed their paraphrase notes than when they read an interpolated text. Analysis of reading times showed that the additional time required for notetaking was only worthwhile when meaningful notes were taken.

Feedback complexity and corrective efficiency

Abstract College undergraduates read a 2400-word passage, responded to 16 multiple-choice questions, and received one of four types of feedback following their responses. Complexity of feedback was inversely related to both error correctability and criterion efficiency taken as a ratio of feedback study time to post-test corrects. The results were discussed in terms of depth of processing and instructional comprehension.

How geographic maps increase recall of instructional text

This article reviews research on how geographic maps influence the recall of associated text. Drawing on literature from cartography and educational, experimental, and cognitive psychology, the authors describe a model of map-text learning based on dual-coding theory and focused on activities that take place during working memory operations. The instructional implications of the model are explored, and recommendations for instructional applications are given.

Learning With Maps and Texts: An Overview

This paper serves as an overview of the research done on learning with geographic maps that are presented in conjunction with a related text. First, the review looks at a model of map and text learning and the factors such as prior knowledge and individual differences that affect the model. Second, the review examines how the location of features on a map has a significant effect on what is learned from the map; namely, that features located on the edge of a map are learned and remembered more often and at higher rates than those features located in the interior of the map. Next, the review looks at several ways maps can be used effectively in classrooms. The order of presentation, situated cognition, and the use of technology to improve map learning in classrooms are all discussed. Finally, the review looks at the future of learning from maps and texts.

Map features and the recall of discourse

Abstract College undergraduates heard a 1760-word narrative which described events occurring on an imaginary island. As they listened, learners studied either a map of the island with features located spatially, a map—outline with features listed next to it, or just an outline without feature information. People who saw the map recalled more idea units and feature-related information on both free- and cued-recall tests. There was also a significant relation between correct recall and the ability of a subject to reconstruct the spatial relations on the map. The data were interpreted in terms of a feature-location model of map—discourse memory.

The effects of notetaking and test expectancy on the learning of text material.

AbstractHigh school students completed both multiple-choice and constructed response exams over an 845-word narrative passage on which they either took notes or underlined critical information. A control group merely read the text In addition, half of the learners in each condition were told to expect either a multiple-choice or constructed response test following reading. Overall, note takers showed superior posttest recall, and notetaking without test instructions yielded the best group performance. Notetaking also required significantly more time than the other conditions. Underlining for a multiple-choice test led to better recall than underlining for a constructed response test. Although more multiple-choice than constructed response items were remembered. Test Mode failed to interact with the other factors.

Maps, Mode of Text Presentation, and Children’s Prose Learning:

This study examined the effects of reference maps on what children remember from written and aurally presented discourse. Subjects were presented one of three maps that varied in feature configuration and spatial distribution, and were asked to study these maps before reading or listening to a related story. Results of tests across both prose and maps conflicted with previous research in which learners appeared unable to maintain visual images while reading. We found essentially no differences in recall due to mode of text presentation, but the type of map that was presented profoundly influenced recall from both the text and the map. Maps that had pictorial features logically organized according to passage content greatly increased the learning of text that was related directly to map content. This indicates that maps serve a mnemonic-like function for remembering prose.