The role of feedback and working memory for goal-related monitoring and goal revision

IF 4.7 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Learning and Instruction Pub Date : 2025-02-26 DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102108
Maria Theobald , Garvin Brod
{"title":"The role of feedback and working memory for goal-related monitoring and goal revision","authors":"Maria Theobald ,&nbsp;Garvin Brod","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Goal revision in response to performance feedback is a highly important self-regulatory process. A central requirement for goal revision is the ability of learners to accurately judge their performance relative to their goals, i.e., goal-related monitoring. However, the determinants of accurate goal-related monitoring and goal revision remain poorly understood. School children may have particular difficulties in accurately monitoring their goals and performance and revising their goals accordingly.</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>The study (1) examined the determinants of accurate goal-related monitoring and adaptive goal revision and (2) tested feedback as a means of promoting accurate goal-related monitoring and adaptive goal revision in elementary and early secondary school children.</div></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><div>Eight-to eleven-year-old children (<em>n</em> = 106) participated in the study.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Children participated in a series of quizzes. They set performance goals before each task and then rated their performance. Children either received feedback on their goals and task performance (feedback condition), or they received no feedback (no feedback condition).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Children generally overestimated their performance, especially those with lower working memory. Children in the feedback (vs. no feedback) condition (1) became more accurate in their goal-related monitoring and (2) revised their goals more adaptively over the course of the experiment.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The results highlight the role of interindividual differences in working memory for goal-related monitoring and goal revision, and underscore the effectiveness of feedback in promoting these metacognitive skills.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 102108"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475225000325","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Goal revision in response to performance feedback is a highly important self-regulatory process. A central requirement for goal revision is the ability of learners to accurately judge their performance relative to their goals, i.e., goal-related monitoring. However, the determinants of accurate goal-related monitoring and goal revision remain poorly understood. School children may have particular difficulties in accurately monitoring their goals and performance and revising their goals accordingly.

Aims

The study (1) examined the determinants of accurate goal-related monitoring and adaptive goal revision and (2) tested feedback as a means of promoting accurate goal-related monitoring and adaptive goal revision in elementary and early secondary school children.

Sample

Eight-to eleven-year-old children (n = 106) participated in the study.

Methods

Children participated in a series of quizzes. They set performance goals before each task and then rated their performance. Children either received feedback on their goals and task performance (feedback condition), or they received no feedback (no feedback condition).

Results

Children generally overestimated their performance, especially those with lower working memory. Children in the feedback (vs. no feedback) condition (1) became more accurate in their goal-related monitoring and (2) revised their goals more adaptively over the course of the experiment.

Conclusions

The results highlight the role of interindividual differences in working memory for goal-related monitoring and goal revision, and underscore the effectiveness of feedback in promoting these metacognitive skills.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.
期刊最新文献
The growth trajectories of oral and silent word reading fluency before and after COVID-19 Parents’ spatial talk predicts toddlers’ spatial language gains Do worked examples boost the spacing effect on lasting learning? Resilience research in learning disabilities: Guiding principles from developmental psychopathology How do teachers process technology-based formative assessment results in their daily practice? Results from process mining of think-aloud data
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1