{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/68894"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/68894","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"Feedback Procedures in Computer-Assisted Instruction: Knowledge-of-Results, Knowledge -of- Correct-Response, Process Explanations, and Second Attempts After Errors","abstract":"The relative effectiveness of six different feedback conditions in computer-assisted instruction was investigated. Ninety high school freshmen and sophomore algebra students were randomly blocked into six groups according to a mathematics achievement test. Each group completed a CAI program designed to teach an algorithm for solving algebraic equations of one variable, with each group receiving one of the following feedback conditions after errors: (1) knowledge-of-correct-response (KCR), immediate question review (IQR); (2) KCR, next question (NQ); (3) KCR, process explanation (PsE), IQR; (4) KCR, PsE, NQ; (5) knowledge-of-results (KR), IQR; or, (6) KR, PsE, IQR. The findings replicated earlier research in showing the benefit of KCR over KR, but KR with PsE was as effective as KCR in correcting errors. KR, IQR ("Wrong. Try Again.") was the least effective feedback procedure. Combining PsE with KCR did not produce an additive effect. Implications for educational research and practice are discussed.","abstract_html":"The relative effectiveness of six different feedback conditions in computer-assisted instruction was investigated. Ninety high school freshmen and sophomore algebra students were randomly blocked into six groups according to a mathematics achievement test. Each group completed a CAI program designed to teach an algorithm for solving algebraic equations of one variable, with each group receiving one of the following feedback conditions after errors: (1) knowledge-of-correct-response (KCR), immediate question review (IQR); (2) KCR, next question (NQ); (3) KCR, process explanation (PsE), IQR; (4) KCR, PsE, NQ; (5) knowledge-of-results (KR), IQR; or, (6) KR, PsE, IQR. The findings replicated earlier research in showing the benefit of KCR over KR, but KR with PsE was as effective as KCR in correcting errors. KR, IQR ("Wrong. Try Again.") was the least effective feedback procedure. Combining PsE with KCR did not produce an additive effect. Implications for educational research and practice are discussed.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Noonan, John Vincent"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Education","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2014,"date_issued":"2014-12-15T18:49:44Z","date_published":"2014-12-15T18:49:44Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:59Z","subjects":["Education, Educational Psychology"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["(UMI)AAI8409820"],"render_values":[{"text":"(UMI)AAI8409820","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/68894","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Noonan, John Vincent"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2014-12-15T18:49:44Z","10000-01-01","1984"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Education"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Education, Educational Psychology"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/68894","(UMI)AAI8409820"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["The relative effectiveness of six different feedback conditions in computer-assisted instruction was investigated. Ninety high school freshmen and sophomore algebra students were randomly blocked into six groups according to a mathematics achievement test. Each group completed a CAI program designed to teach an algorithm for solving algebraic equations of one variable, with each group receiving one of the following feedback conditions after errors: (1) knowledge-of-correct-response (KCR), immediate question review (IQR); (2) KCR, next question (NQ); (3) KCR, process explanation (PsE), IQR; (4) KCR, PsE, NQ; (5) knowledge-of-results (KR), IQR; or, (6) KR, PsE, IQR. The findings replicated earlier research in showing the benefit of KCR over KR, but KR with PsE was as effective as KCR in correcting errors. KR, IQR ("Wrong. Try Again.") was the least effective feedback procedure. Combining PsE with KCR did not produce an additive effect. Implications for educational research and practice are discussed.","Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-15T18:49:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 8409820.pdf: 1539292 bytes, checksum: ad5824a0079d1d1125eadf10dd1a7403 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1984","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 69060 Lift date: Forever Reason: Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","U of I Only","52 p.","Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1984."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Feedback Procedures in Computer-Assisted Instruction: Knowledge-of-Results, Knowledge -of- Correct-Response, Process Explanations, and Second Attempts After Errors"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Noonan, John Vincent"],"dc:date":["2014-12-15T18:49:44Z","10000-01-01","1984"],"dc:description":["The relative effectiveness of six different feedback conditions in computer-assisted instruction was investigated. Ninety high school freshmen and sophomore algebra students were randomly blocked into six groups according to a mathematics achievement test. Each group completed a CAI program designed to teach an algorithm for solving algebraic equations of one variable, with each group receiving one of the following feedback conditions after errors: (1) knowledge-of-correct-response (KCR), immediate question review (IQR); (2) KCR, next question (NQ); (3) KCR, process explanation (PsE), IQR; (4) KCR, PsE, NQ; (5) knowledge-of-results (KR), IQR; or, (6) KR, PsE, IQR. The findings replicated earlier research in showing the benefit of KCR over KR, but KR with PsE was as effective as KCR in correcting errors. KR, IQR ("Wrong. Try Again.") was the least effective feedback procedure. Combining PsE with KCR did not produce an additive effect. Implications for educational research and practice are discussed.","Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-15T18:49:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 8409820.pdf: 1539292 bytes, checksum: ad5824a0079d1d1125eadf10dd1a7403 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1984","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 69060 Lift date: Forever Reason: Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","U of I Only","52 p.","Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1984."],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/68894","(UMI)AAI8409820"],"dc:subject":["Education, Educational Psychology"],"dc:title":["Feedback Procedures in Computer-Assisted Instruction: Knowledge-of-Results, Knowledge -of- Correct-Response, Process Explanations, and Second Attempts After Errors"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Education"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:59Z"}