A comparison of elaborated and restricted feedback in LogEx, a tool for teaching rewriting logical formulae

J. Lodder*, B.J. Heeren, J.T. Jeuring

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This article describes an experiment with LogEx, an e‐learning environment that supports students in learning how to prove the equivalence between two logical formulae, using standard equivalences such as DeMorgan. In the experiment, we compare two groups of students. The first group uses the complete learning environment, including hints, next steps, worked solutions, and informative timely feedback. The second group uses a version of the environment without hints or next steps, but with worked solutions, and delayed flag feedback. We use pretest and posttest to measure the performance of both groups with respect to error rate and completion of the exercises. We analyse the loggings of the student activities in the learning environment to compare its use by the different groups. Both groups score significantly better on the posttest than on the pretest. We did not find significant differences between the groups in the posttest, although the group using the full learning environment performed slightly better than the other group. In the examination, which took place 5 weeks after the experiment, the group of students who used the complete learning environment scored significantly better than a control group of students who did not participate in the experiment.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)620-632
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Computer Assisted Learning
Volume35
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2019

Fingerprint

Teaching
Students
Feedback
Group
Experiments
learning environment
experiment
equivalence
student
examination
learning

Cite this

@article{c0edd870f82a44cb95996817e9471a8b,
title = "A comparison of elaborated and restricted feedback in LogEx, a tool for teaching rewriting logical formulae",
abstract = "This article describes an experiment with LogEx, an e‐learning environment that supports students in learning how to prove the equivalence between two logical formulae, using standard equivalences such as DeMorgan. In the experiment, we compare two groups of students. The first group uses the complete learning environment, including hints, next steps, worked solutions, and informative timely feedback. The second group uses a version of the environment without hints or next steps, but with worked solutions, and delayed flag feedback. We use pretest and posttest to measure the performance of both groups with respect to error rate and completion of the exercises. We analyse the loggings of the student activities in the learning environment to compare its use by the different groups. Both groups score significantly better on the posttest than on the pretest. We did not find significant differences between the groups in the posttest, although the group using the full learning environment performed slightly better than the other group. In the examination, which took place 5 weeks after the experiment, the group of students who used the complete learning environment scored significantly better than a control group of students who did not participate in the experiment.",
author = "J. Lodder and B.J. Heeren and J.T. Jeuring",
year = "2019",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1111/jcal.12365",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "620--632",
journal = "Journal of Computer Assisted Learning",
issn = "0266-4909",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "5",

}

A comparison of elaborated and restricted feedback in LogEx, a tool for teaching rewriting logical formulae. / Lodder, J.; Heeren, B.J.; Jeuring, J.T.

In: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 35, No. 5, 10.2019, p. 620-632.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of elaborated and restricted feedback in LogEx, a tool for teaching rewriting logical formulae

AU - Lodder, J.

AU - Heeren, B.J.

AU - Jeuring, J.T.

PY - 2019/10

Y1 - 2019/10

N2 - This article describes an experiment with LogEx, an e‐learning environment that supports students in learning how to prove the equivalence between two logical formulae, using standard equivalences such as DeMorgan. In the experiment, we compare two groups of students. The first group uses the complete learning environment, including hints, next steps, worked solutions, and informative timely feedback. The second group uses a version of the environment without hints or next steps, but with worked solutions, and delayed flag feedback. We use pretest and posttest to measure the performance of both groups with respect to error rate and completion of the exercises. We analyse the loggings of the student activities in the learning environment to compare its use by the different groups. Both groups score significantly better on the posttest than on the pretest. We did not find significant differences between the groups in the posttest, although the group using the full learning environment performed slightly better than the other group. In the examination, which took place 5 weeks after the experiment, the group of students who used the complete learning environment scored significantly better than a control group of students who did not participate in the experiment.

AB - This article describes an experiment with LogEx, an e‐learning environment that supports students in learning how to prove the equivalence between two logical formulae, using standard equivalences such as DeMorgan. In the experiment, we compare two groups of students. The first group uses the complete learning environment, including hints, next steps, worked solutions, and informative timely feedback. The second group uses a version of the environment without hints or next steps, but with worked solutions, and delayed flag feedback. We use pretest and posttest to measure the performance of both groups with respect to error rate and completion of the exercises. We analyse the loggings of the student activities in the learning environment to compare its use by the different groups. Both groups score significantly better on the posttest than on the pretest. We did not find significant differences between the groups in the posttest, although the group using the full learning environment performed slightly better than the other group. In the examination, which took place 5 weeks after the experiment, the group of students who used the complete learning environment scored significantly better than a control group of students who did not participate in the experiment.

U2 - 10.1111/jcal.12365

DO - 10.1111/jcal.12365

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 620

EP - 632

JO - Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

JF - Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

SN - 0266-4909

IS - 5

ER -