Advertisement

Feedback in Computer-Based Concept Mapping Tools: A Short Review

  • Francisco J. Álvarez-MonteroEmail author
  • Héctor Jacobo-García
  • Eneyda Rocha-Ruiz
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9192)

Abstract

Feedback is a core aspect of all the known psychological perspectives about cognition and learning and it has been an important aspect in machine-mediated education since the days of Sydney Pressey’s teaching machines. This article reviews four computer-based concept mapping tools, that claim to provide feedback to the learners, w.r.t three research questions: (a) what type of feedback does the software use?; (b) does the feedback provided adheres to a specific model found in the literature and if so which one?; (c) are there any controlled experiments or in-class studies that give account of the efficiency of the feedback provided by the software?

References

  1. 1.
    Novak, J.D., Gowin, D.B.: Learning How To Learn. Cambridge University Press, New York (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Daley, B.J., Torre, D.M.: Concept maps in medical education: an analytical literature review. Med. Educ. 44(5), 440–448 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nesbit, J.C., Adesope, O.: Learning with concept and knowledge maps: a meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 76(3), 413–448 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cimolino, L., Kay, J., Miller, A.: Concept mapping for eliciting verified personal ontologies. Int. J. Continuing Eng. Educ. Life Long Learn. 14(3), 212–228 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harris, K.R., Graham, S.E., Urdan, T.E., McCormick, C.B., Sinatra, G.M., Sweller, J.E.: APA Educational Psychology Handbook. Theories, Constructs, and Critical Issues, vol. 1. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C. (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benjamin, L.T.: A history of teaching machines. Am. Psychol. 43(9), 703 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dihoff, R.E., Brosvic, G.M., Epstein, M.L.: The role of feedback during academic testing: The delay retention effect revisited. Psychol. Rec. 53(4), 2 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hattie, J.: Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge, London (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kirschner, P.A., van Merriënboer, J.J.: Do learners really know best? Urban Legends Educ. Educ. Psychol. 48(3), 169–183 (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hannafin, M.J.: Guidelines for using locus of instructional control in the design of computer-assisted instruction. J. Instr. Dev. 7(3), 6–10 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Williams, M.: Learner control and instructional technologies. In: Jonassen, D. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, pp. 957–983. Simon & Schuster Macmillan, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., van Merriënboer, J.J.: Effects of elicited reflections combined with tutor or peer feedback on self-regulated learning and learning outcomes. Learn. Instr. 17(5), 532–548 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Azevedo, R., Moos, D.C., Greene, J.A., Winters, F.I., Cromley, J.G.: Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 56(1), 45–72 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kostons, D., Van Gog, T., Paas, F.: Training self-assessment and task-selection skills: A cognitive approach to improving self-regulated learning. Learn. Instr. 22(2), 121–132 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., Clark, R.E.: Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Eudc. Psychol. 41(2), 75–86 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sweller, J., Kirschner, P.A., Clark, R.E.: Why minimally guided teaching techniques do not work: a reply to commentaries. Eudc. Psychol. 42(2), 115–121 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosenshine, B.: The empirical support for direct instruction. In: Tobias, S., Duffy, T.M. (eds.) Constructivist Instruction: Success or Failure?, pp. 201–220. Taylor & Francis, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chang, K.E., Sung, Y.T., Chen, S.F.: Learning through computer-based concept mapping with scaffolding aid. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 17(1), 21–33 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gouli, E., Gogoulou, A., Papanikolaou, K., Grigoriadou, M.: Designing an adaptive feedback scheme to support reflection in concept mapping. In: Proceedings of the Adaptive Hypermedia 2004 Workshop (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Anohina-Naumeca, A., Grundspenkis, J., Strautmane, M.: The concept map-based assessment system: functional capabilities, evolution, and experimental results. Int. J. Continuing Eng. Educ. Life Long Learn. 21(4), 308–327 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mason, B. J., Bruning, R.: Providing feedback in computer-based instruction. What the research tells us. Center for Instructional Innovation (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mory, E.H.: Feedback research revisited. In: Jonassen, D.H. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, vol. 2, pp. 745–783. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hattie, J., Timperley, H.: The power of feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 77(1), 81–112 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Narciss, S.: Designing and evaluating tutoring feedback strategies for digital learning environments on the basis of the interactive tutoring feedback model. Digit. Educ. Rev. 23, 7–26 (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shute, V.J.: Focus on formative feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 78(1), 153–189 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vasilyeva, E., Puuronen, S., Pechenizkiy, M., Rasanen, P.: Feedback adaptation in web-based learning systems. Int. J. Continuing Eng. Educ. Life Long Learn. 17(4), 337–357 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Thurlings, M., Vermeulen, M., Bastiaens, T., Stijnen, S.: Understanding feedback: a learning theory perspective. Rev. Educ. Res. 9, 1–15 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Butler, D.L., Winne, P.H.: Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Rev. Educ. Res. 65(3), 245–281 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Anohina, A., Grundspenkis, J.: Learner’s support in the concept map based knowledge assessment system. In: Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on e-Learning, pp. 38–45. Academic Conferences Limited (2008)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lukasenko, R., Anohina-Naumeca, A., Vilkelis, M., Grundspenkis, J.: Feedback in the concept map based intelligent knowledge assessment system. Sci. J. Riga Tech. Univ. Comput. Sci. 41(1), 17–26 (2010)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gouli, E., Gogoulou, A., Papanikolaou, K.A., Grigoriadou, M.: An adaptive feedback framework to support reflection, guiding and tutoring. In: Magoulas, G., Chen, S. (eds.) Advances in Web-Based Education: Personalized Learning Environments, pp. 178–202. Information Science Publishing, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cook, B.G., Smith, G.J., Tankersley, M.: Evidence-based practices in education. In: Harris, K.R., Graham, S., Urdan, T. (eds.) APA Educational Psychology Handbook, vol. 1, pp. 495–528. American Psychological Association, Washigton, D.C. (2012)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tamim, R.M., Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P.C., Schmid, R.F.: What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning a second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Rev. Educ. Res. 81(1), 4–28 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco J. Álvarez-Montero
    • 1
    Email author
  • Héctor Jacobo-García
    • 1
  • Eneyda Rocha-Ruiz
    • 1
  1. 1.Facultad de Ciencias de la EducaciónUniversidad Autónoma de SinaloaCuliacánMexico

Personalised recommendations