Enhancing Classroom Learning Outcomes: The Power of Immediate Feedback Strategy

Year 2023, Volume: 6 Issue: 3, 453 - 465, 25.10.2023

Oke James Ajogbeje

https://doi.org/10.33438/ijdshs.1323080

Abstract

The study investigates the effects of using immediate feedback as a teaching strategy. Additionally, the impacts of immediate feedback and gender on students' classroom learning outcomes were examined. The study was designed as a quasi-experimental, pretest-posttest, experimental, and control group. The sample consisted of 225 junior secondary school level 2 (JSS 2) students. Students were chosen from two intact coeducational classes and split into experimental and control groups. All relevant data was collected using a study tool called the Science, Technology, English Language & Mathematics Achievement Test-Questionnaire (STEMAT-Q), which was developed, validated, and used. Data collected were analysed using the mean, standard deviation, Student's t-test, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The study's findings demonstrate that an immediate feedback technique significantly affects the learning outcomes of students. However, for treated male and female students, the interaction effects of the immediate feedback technique and gender on classroom learning outcomes were not significant. Immediate feedback is particularly successful at addressing student confusion, correcting errors, identifying learning gaps, bridging gender differences in student learning outcomes, and inspiring students to learn well. Based on the above findings, the researcher recommends the provision of immediate feedback for students during the learning process or class discussion or activities to enhance their learning skills and help them retain key concepts, ideas, and principles.

Keywords

immediate feedback, treatment, gender, interaction effects, achievement test, learning outcome

References

• Abdu-Raheem, B. O. (2012). Gender differences and students' academic achievement retention in social studies among junior secondary schools in Ekiti State, Nigeria. Eur. J. Educ Study, 4, (1), 155-161.
• Achor, E. E., Imoko, B. I. & Ajai, J. T. (2010). Sex difference in students’ achievement and interest in geometry using games and simulations technique. Pecatibey Faculty of education electronic. Journal of science and mathematics education. 4, (1), 1 – 10.
• Adewale, G. J. (2010). Increasing JSS students’ achievement in science through formative testing, feedback and remediation: A study in school effectiveness. Ibadan. African journal of special education needs. Department of Special Education, University of Education Winneba Ghana, 5, (1), 171-192.
• Ajogbeje, O. J. & Alonge, M. F. (2012). Effect of feedback and remediation on students’ achievement in junior secondary school mathematics. 5(5), 73-103. http://www. ccsenet.org/journal/index. php/ies/article/view/19998.
• Ajogbeje, O. J., Borisade, F. T., Aladesaye, C. A. & Ayodele, O. B. (2013). Effect of gender, mathematics anxiety and achievement motivationoncollege students’ achievement in mathematics. International Journal ofEducation and Literacy Studies. 1(1), 15-22.
• Ajogbeje, O. J.& Aladesaye, C. A. (2020). Gender, feedback withremediation and students’ attitude towards mathematics. British Journalof Education,9(1), 1-16.
• Ajogbeje, O. J. (2012). Effect of formative testing on student’s achievement in secondary school mathematics. European Scientific Journal. 8, (8), 117-153.
• Akin, A. (2008). Self-efficacy, achievement goals and scaling procedures. Sage publications.
• Akkuzu, N. (2014). The role of different types of feedback in the reciprocal interaction of teaching performance and self-efficacy belief. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39, (3), 83-131. http://www. sagepublications.com
• Amongne, A. E. (2013). Gender disparity analysis in academic achievement at higher education preparatory schools: Case of South Wollo, Department of Geography and environmental studies Ethiopia. Academic journal of educational research and reviews, 10, (1), 50-58.
• Aubin, C. (2009). The importance of immediate feedback in learning. https://www. smartick.com/blog/parents-and-teachers/ education/immediate-feedback/
• Babalola, V.O. (2006). Curriculum and instruction at the primary education level. Nigerian Journal of Curriculum Studies, 13, (1), 166-174.
• Breitwieser, J., Neubauer, A. B., Schmiedek, F., & Brod, G. (2022). Self-regulation prompts promote the achievement of learning goals–But only briefly: Uncovering hidden dynamics in the effects of a psychological intervention. Learning and Instruction, 80, 101560.
• Sonnenberg, C., & Bannert, M. (2019). Using process mining to examine the sustainability of instructional support: How stable are the effects of metacognitive prompting on self-regulatory behavior?. Computers in Human Behavior, 96, 259-272.
• Chou, C. Y., & Zou, N. B. (2020). An analysis of internal and external feedback in self-regulated learning activities mediated by self-regulated learning tools and open learner models. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1-27.
• Denzin, G.M. (2008). Social learning theory. In N.J Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia development. Philadelphia: Rontedge Press.
• Dinham, S. (2002). NSW Quality Teaching Awards: Research, rigour and transparency Unicorn. 28 (1); 5-9.
• Dinham, S. (2007a). Leadership for exceptional educational outcomes. Teneriffe, Qld: Post Pressed
• Dinham, S. (2007b). The Secondary Head of Department and the achievement of exceptional students outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration. 45 (1); 62-79
• Duane, C. L. (2005). Delayed versus immediate feedback in an independent study; high school setting. Brigham, young university PhD dissertation.
• Elliot, S. N., Kratochwill, T. R. & Cook, J. L. (2000). Educational Psychology: Effective teaching and learning. Boston: McGraw Hill. Encouragement or discouragement? http:// www/huji.ac.il /unew/main.html.
• Engelmann, K., Bannert, M., & Melzner, N. (2021). Do self-created metacognitive prompts promote short-and long-term effects in computer-based learning environments?. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 16(1), 1-21.
• Eze U.N (2003). Effect of instruction in strategic content learning on university students’ achievement in selected psychological theories. Review of Education, 16, (2), 32-43.
• Geary, D.C. & Stoet, G. (2012). Can stereotype threat explain the gender gap in mathematics performance and achievement? American Psychological Association. Review of General Psychology, 16, (1), 93–102. 1089- 2680/12/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0026617
• Hannover, B. & Kessels, U. (2011). Are boys left behind at school? Reviewing and explaining education-related gender disparities. Z. Pedagogical Psychology, 25, 89–103.
• Hathila, P. B., Baria, D. P., Damor, C. K., & Mahajan, S. (2023). Students’ reflection on immediate feedback during formative assessment. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol 2023;13 (03):644-647.
• Hattie, J. A. (1999, June.). Influences on student learning (Inaugural professorial address, University of Auckland, New Zealand). http://www.arts.auckland.ac.nz/staff/index.cfm?P=8650
• Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. University of Auckland. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.0064 5.x
• Hattie, J. (2012). Visible Learning for Teachers: Maintaining Impact on Learning. New York: Routledge.
• Hornby, A. S. (2000). Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary; current English. New York: Oxford university press.
• Higgins, A. & Nicholl, H. (2003). The experiences of lecturers and students in the use of microteaching as a teaching strategy. Nurse Education in Practice, 3, 220-227. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1471- 5953(02)00106-3
• Jeff, S. (2015). Girls lead boys in academic achievement globally. 33, 573-882. [e-mail], Johnson, Kristin & Schmidt, Anne, (2006)."The Effects of Teaching Problem Solving Strategies to Low Achieving Students" (2006). Action Research Projects. http:// digitalcommons.unl.edu/mathmidactionresearch/62
• Kehrer, P. Kim, K. & Neil Heffernan, N (2013). Does immediate feedback while doing homework improve learning? Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Association for the advancement of artificial intelligence (www.aaai.org).
• Metcalfe, J. Kornell, N. & Finn, B. (2009). Delayed versus immediate feedback in children’s and adults’ vocabulary learning. Columbia University. Journal of Memory & Cognition,37 (8), 1077-1087 doi:10.3758/ MC.37.8.1077
• Mirjam, W. & Heikamp, T. G.(2013).Gender differences in school achievement: The role of self-regulation. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00442PMCID: PMC3713251
• Muthukrishny, N. (2010). Gender differences in mathematics achievement: An Expository study at a primary school in Kwazulu-Natal. http://www.readperiodicals.com/201012/2187713391
• Ndukwu, E. C. & Ndukwu, E. N. (2017). Effect of immediate feedback on the mathematics achievement of low achieving senior secondary school students. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences. Vol.7, No.19, 2017 124 www.iiste.org
• Norris, K. & Schuhl, S. (2016). Engage in the Mathematical Practices: Strategies to Build Numeracy and Literacy with K-5 Learners. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
• Onuigbo, L.N. & Eze, U. N. (2010). Effect of different forms of feedback on mathematics achievement of pupils with mathematics difficulties. Ghana, African journal of special education needs. Department of special education. University of Education Winneba Ghana, 5, (1), 149-170.
• Onuigbo, L.N. & Eze, U. N. (2011). Effect of instruction in self-regulatory learning strategy on interest, task persistence and accomplishment among low achieving students. Review of education institute of universityof Nigeria Nsukka, 22, (1), 224-237.
• Ramírez, M. J. (2004) Understanding the low mathematics achievement of Chilean students. Revista electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia Cambio en Education, 2, (1),1-17. http://www.ice. deusto.es/rinace/reice/vol2n1/Ramirez.pdf
• Rozek, C. (2012). The effects of feedback and attribution style on task persistence. Gustavus Adolphus College. Thukral Mohan Lal Institute of Education. 2 (1), 77-87 77.
• Salvador, A. & Dase, C. (2001). The definition of achievement and the construction of tests for its measurement: A review of the main trends. Universitat de València, Spain. Psicológica 22, 43-66.
• TIMSS (2000). Third international mathematics and science Study. Australia and United States of America. Tobies, R. & Helmut N. (2012). A Life at the crossroads mathematics, science, and industry. Springer, 9. 22-39.
• Uzoma, O. F. (2015). The effect of cooperative learning strategy on achievement motivation of low achieving students in reading comprehension. An unpublished thesis submitted to the department of educational foundations, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, in fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Masters degree in Educational Psychology.
• Vibha, C, & Rayat, B. (2011). Effects of student feedback on teaching competence of student teachers: A microteaching experiment. India College of Education, India Praveen Thukral Mohan Lal Institute of Education. 2 (1), 77-87
• Voerman, L., Meijer, P. C., Korthagen, F.A.J. & Simons, R.J. (2012). Types and frequencies of feedback intervention in the classroom interaction in secondary education. Centre for teaching and learning. Utrecht University, Netherlands. www.elsewer. com/local/tate
• Wang Y, Zhang H, Wang J, Ma X. (2023). The Impact of Prompts and Feedback on the Performance during Multi-Session Self- Regulated Learning in the Hypermedia Environment. Journal of Intellignce 11(7):131.https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11070131
• Wiggins, G. (2012). “Seven Keys to Effective Feedback.” Educational Leadership. September, 2012.
• Woodward, J. & Brown, C. (2006). Meeting the curricular needs of academically low achieving students in middle grade mathematics. University on Puget Sound. Journal of Special Education. 40(3), 151-159.
• Woolfolk, A. (2010). Educational Psychology: Ohio, upper saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.