A little light reading in the season of final grading: Moreover, even in learning situations where performance seems to benefit from FIs [feedback interventions], learning through FIs may be inferior to learning through discovery (learning based on feedback from the task, rather than on feedback from an external agent). Task feedback may force the participant to learn task rules and recognize errors (e.g., Frese & Zapf, 1994), whereas FI may lead the participant to learn how to use the FI as a crutch, while shortcutting the need for task learning (cf. J. R. Anderson, 1987). Indeed, in one CAI experiment, it was found that FI was detrimental to the performance of transfer tasks (Carroll & Kay, 1988). This finding suggests that FIs may reduce the cognitive effort involved in task performance [germane cognitive load] and therefore is detrimental in the long run. In FIT language, an FI may lead to the generation of a hypothesis designed to attain a goal of obtaining positive feedback, whereas no FI may lead to the generation of a hypothesis designed to attain a goal of performance improvement. In summary, FIs affect the learning process by directing attention to discrepancies between the hypotheses (standards) regarding the details of task performance and the outcomes of acting on these hypotheses. If the FI is not accompanied with cues helping to reject erroneous hypotheses, it may cause the recipient to generate a multitude of hypotheses that can reduce consistency and hence decrease performance. Even when the FI is accompanied by useful cues, they may serve as crutches, preventing learning from errors (natural feedback) which may be a superior learning mode.
Posted on: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:08:57 +0000