学习反馈量表(FLS)的开发与验证:一项重复研究

IF 2.3 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Educational Research and Evaluation Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI:10.1080/13803611.2021.2022320

D. Foung, Lucas Kohnke

{"title":"学习反馈量表(FLS)的开发与验证:一项重复研究","authors":"D. Foung, Lucas Kohnke","doi":"10.1080/13803611.2021.2022320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Replication studies are uncommon in education, and replications of validation studies are rarer. This study aimed to replicate, reproduce, and expand the study by Jellicoe and Forsythe published in 2019 that validated the Feedback in Learning Scale. We followed the original procedures, conducting a full validation process. We found only an 87% agreement between our model parameters and those of the original study. The differences were derived from the number of factors retained and the fit indices of alternative models. Fuller details of the methods used in the original study would have helped us to better ensure replicability. We also suggest that feedback in higher education (the context for our study) might be more effective if it were less personal and more task-related than workplace feedback (the context from which the Feedback in Learning Scale was derived).","PeriodicalId":47025,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research and Evaluation","volume":"27 1","pages":"164 - 187"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The development and validation of the Feedback in Learning Scale (FLS): a replication study\",\"authors\":\"D. Foung, Lucas Kohnke\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13803611.2021.2022320\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Replication studies are uncommon in education, and replications of validation studies are rarer. This study aimed to replicate, reproduce, and expand the study by Jellicoe and Forsythe published in 2019 that validated the Feedback in Learning Scale. We followed the original procedures, conducting a full validation process. We found only an 87% agreement between our model parameters and those of the original study. The differences were derived from the number of factors retained and the fit indices of alternative models. Fuller details of the methods used in the original study would have helped us to better ensure replicability. We also suggest that feedback in higher education (the context for our study) might be more effective if it were less personal and more task-related than workplace feedback (the context from which the Feedback in Learning Scale was derived).\",\"PeriodicalId\":47025,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Research and Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"164 - 187\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Research and Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.2022320\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research and Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2021.2022320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

摘要

复制研究在教育领域并不常见，验证研究的重复研究也比较少见。这项研究旨在复制、再现和扩展杰利科和福赛斯在2019年发表的研究，该研究验证了学习反馈量表。我们遵循了最初的程序，进行了完整的验证过程。我们发现我们的模型参数与原始研究的参数之间只有87%的一致性。差异来源于保留因子的数量和备选模型的拟合指数。原始研究中使用的方法的更详细的细节将有助于我们更好地确保可重复性。我们还建议，如果高等教育中的反馈(我们研究的背景)比工作场所的反馈(学习反馈量表的来源背景)更少个人化，更多与任务相关，那么反馈可能会更有效。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The development and validation of the Feedback in Learning Scale (FLS): a replication study

ABSTRACT Replication studies are uncommon in education, and replications of validation studies are rarer. This study aimed to replicate, reproduce, and expand the study by Jellicoe and Forsythe published in 2019 that validated the Feedback in Learning Scale. We followed the original procedures, conducting a full validation process. We found only an 87% agreement between our model parameters and those of the original study. The differences were derived from the number of factors retained and the fit indices of alternative models. Fuller details of the methods used in the original study would have helped us to better ensure replicability. We also suggest that feedback in higher education (the context for our study) might be more effective if it were less personal and more task-related than workplace feedback (the context from which the Feedback in Learning Scale was derived).

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Educational Research and Evaluation EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： International, comparative and multidisciplinary in scope, Educational Research and Evaluation (ERE) publishes original, peer-reviewed academic articles dealing with research on issues of worldwide relevance in educational practice. The aim of the journal is to increase understanding of learning in pre-primary, primary, high school, college, university and adult education, and to contribute to the improvement of educational processes and outcomes. The journal seeks to promote cross-national and international comparative educational research by publishing findings relevant to the scholarly community, as well as to practitioners and others interested in education. The scope of the journal is deliberately broad in terms of both topics covered and disciplinary perspective.