Cargando…

Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests

INTRODUCTION: The role of feedback in test-enhanced learning is an understudied area that has the potential to improve student learning. This study investigates the influence of different forms of post-test feedback on retention and transfer of biomedical knowledge within a test-enhanced learning fr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ryan, Anna, Judd, Terry, Swanson, David, Larsen, Douglas P., Elliott, Simone, Tzanetos, Katina, Kulasegaram, Kulamakan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7550480/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32789664
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00606-z
_version_ 1783592981856518144
author Ryan, Anna
Judd, Terry
Swanson, David
Larsen, Douglas P.
Elliott, Simone
Tzanetos, Katina
Kulasegaram, Kulamakan
author_facet Ryan, Anna
Judd, Terry
Swanson, David
Larsen, Douglas P.
Elliott, Simone
Tzanetos, Katina
Kulasegaram, Kulamakan
author_sort Ryan, Anna
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The role of feedback in test-enhanced learning is an understudied area that has the potential to improve student learning. This study investigates the influence of different forms of post-test feedback on retention and transfer of biomedical knowledge within a test-enhanced learning framework. METHODS: 64 participants from a Canadian and an Australian medical school sat two single-best-answer formative multiple choice tests one week apart. We compared the effects of conceptually focused, response-oriented, and simple right/wrong feedback on a learner’s ability to correctly answer new (transfer) questions. On the first test occasion, participants received parent items with feedback, and then attempted items closely related (near transfer) to and more distant (far transfer) from parent items. In a repeat test at 1 week, participants were given different near and far transfer versions of parent items. Feedback type, and near and far transfer items were randomized within and across participants. RESULTS: Analysis demonstrated that response-oriented and conceptually focused feedback were superior to traditional right/wrong feedback for both types of transfer tasks and in both immediate and final retention test performance. However, there was no statistically significant difference between response-orientated and conceptually focused groups on near or far transfer problems, nor any differences in performance between our initial test occasion and the retention test 1 week later. As with most studies of transfer, participants’ far transfer scores were lower than for near transfer. DISCUSSION: Right/wrong feedback appears to have limited potential to augment test-enhanced learning. Our work suggests that item-level feedback and feedback that identifies and elaborates on key conceptual knowledge are two important areas for future research on learning, retention and transfer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7550480
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75504802020-10-19 Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests Ryan, Anna Judd, Terry Swanson, David Larsen, Douglas P. Elliott, Simone Tzanetos, Katina Kulasegaram, Kulamakan Perspect Med Educ Original Article INTRODUCTION: The role of feedback in test-enhanced learning is an understudied area that has the potential to improve student learning. This study investigates the influence of different forms of post-test feedback on retention and transfer of biomedical knowledge within a test-enhanced learning framework. METHODS: 64 participants from a Canadian and an Australian medical school sat two single-best-answer formative multiple choice tests one week apart. We compared the effects of conceptually focused, response-oriented, and simple right/wrong feedback on a learner’s ability to correctly answer new (transfer) questions. On the first test occasion, participants received parent items with feedback, and then attempted items closely related (near transfer) to and more distant (far transfer) from parent items. In a repeat test at 1 week, participants were given different near and far transfer versions of parent items. Feedback type, and near and far transfer items were randomized within and across participants. RESULTS: Analysis demonstrated that response-oriented and conceptually focused feedback were superior to traditional right/wrong feedback for both types of transfer tasks and in both immediate and final retention test performance. However, there was no statistically significant difference between response-orientated and conceptually focused groups on near or far transfer problems, nor any differences in performance between our initial test occasion and the retention test 1 week later. As with most studies of transfer, participants’ far transfer scores were lower than for near transfer. DISCUSSION: Right/wrong feedback appears to have limited potential to augment test-enhanced learning. Our work suggests that item-level feedback and feedback that identifies and elaborates on key conceptual knowledge are two important areas for future research on learning, retention and transfer. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2020-08-12 2020-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7550480/ /pubmed/32789664 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00606-z Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ryan, Anna
Judd, Terry
Swanson, David
Larsen, Douglas P.
Elliott, Simone
Tzanetos, Katina
Kulasegaram, Kulamakan
Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests
title Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests
title_full Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests
title_fullStr Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests
title_full_unstemmed Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests
title_short Beyond right or wrong: More effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests
title_sort beyond right or wrong: more effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7550480/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32789664
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00606-z
work_keys_str_mv AT ryananna beyondrightorwrongmoreeffectivefeedbackforformativemultiplechoicetests
AT juddterry beyondrightorwrongmoreeffectivefeedbackforformativemultiplechoicetests
AT swansondavid beyondrightorwrongmoreeffectivefeedbackforformativemultiplechoicetests
AT larsendouglasp beyondrightorwrongmoreeffectivefeedbackforformativemultiplechoicetests
AT elliottsimone beyondrightorwrongmoreeffectivefeedbackforformativemultiplechoicetests
AT tzanetoskatina beyondrightorwrongmoreeffectivefeedbackforformativemultiplechoicetests
AT kulasegaramkulamakan beyondrightorwrongmoreeffectivefeedbackforformativemultiplechoicetests