Ezataleh Ghadampour; mohmad Abbase; Mehdi Yoosfvadn; Banafsheh Hassanvand; Hossein Hosseini
Abstract
Introduction The system of education, like other systems, has its own principles and characteristics. One of the essential features of this evaluation is the provision of useful feedback, through which one can identify important educational goals and, among other things, examine the important needs for ...
Read More
Introduction The system of education, like other systems, has its own principles and characteristics. One of the essential features of this evaluation is the provision of useful feedback, through which one can identify important educational goals and, among other things, examine the important needs for language learning. Unless appropriate feedback is given, students are reluctant, and desperate to overcome academic barriers. Understanding the factors that facilitate academic achievement can have implications for learning and education. On the other hand, the failure and weakness of students in learning English will reduce the resiliency of education and the meaning of education, so students do not learn English or try and retry to improve their performance in learning this language. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of corrective feedback (written and verbal) of teachers in formative evaluation on educational resiliency and meaning of education of ninth grade male students in Khorramabad city. Method This is a quasi-experimental study in which the pretest-posttest and control group was used. The statistical population of this study included all male high school students in Khorramabad city in the academic year of 2016-17. A multistage cluster sampling method was used to select the sample members. The sample consisted of 40 subjects selected by multistage cluster sampling method and were randomly assigned to experimental group and control group. The data were collected from questionnaires, namely, Meaning of Education of Henderson-King and Smith and Academic Resilience Scale of Samuels. Results Data were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis of covariance. Covariance analysis showed significant differences between the two groups. The results showed that there is a difference between the two groups at least in terms of one of the dependent variables. To find out this difference, a one way analysis of covariance analysis was performed. The results showed that the effect was equal to %59. Fifty-nine percent of the individual differences in the scores was from components of academic vibration and the meaning of education. The results of single-variable covariance showed that the effects of experimental intervention on increasing academic survival and the meaning of education were %61 and %59, respectively, meaning that %61 of the total variance of academic and %59 of the variance of the meaning of education were related to the effect of the experimental intervention. Discussion The proper corrective feedback function emphasizes improving student performance and enhances students' self-esteem in achieving goals and improving performance by utilizing a self-serving and empowering one, which increases productivity, effort and self-confidence. Effective written feedback to students, in addition to informing them about their weaknesses and strengths, also influences personality and motivation, in the way that the students come to believe that they are important. Thus it can be concluded that written and verbal feedback, suggested by Butler and Wine model, can be effective. If the teachers, in their formative assessment can provide feedback to the students, they can increase the level of their resiliency and meaning of education significantly.
