Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement

by John Hattie

fading (omitting some of the steps in the example) was d = 0.60; inclusion of subgoals was d = 0.52;

it soon became clear that feedback was among the most powerful influences on achievement.

But, in summary, feedback is information provided by an agent (e.g., teacher, peer, book, parent, or one's own experience) about aspects of one's performance or understanding.

feedback needs to provide information specifically relating to the task or process of learning that fills a gap between what is understood and what is aimed to be understood (Sadler, 1989),

“feedback is information with which a learner can confirm, add to, overwrite, tune, or restructure information in memory, whether that information is domain knowledge, meta-cognitive knowledge, beliefs about self and tasks, or cognitive tactics and strategies” (p. 5740).

The most effective forms of feedback provide cues or reinforcement to the learner, are in the form of video, audio or computer-assisted instruction feedback, or relate feedback to learning goals.

Programmed instruction, praise, punishment, and extrinsic rewards were the least effective forms of feedback for enhancing achievement.

(stickers, awards, and so on) as contingencies to activities rather than feedback

these authors found a negative correlation between extrinsic rewards and task performance (d = –0.34).

Tangible rewards significantly undermined intrinsic motivation, particularly for interesting tasks (d = –0.68) compared to uninteresting tasks (d = 0.18).

extrinsic rewards are typically negative because they “undermine people's taking responsibility for motivating or regulating themselves” (Deci et al., 1999, p. 659). Rather, extrinsic rewards are a controlling strategy that often leads to greater surveillance, evaluation, and competition, all of which have been found to undermine enhanced engagement and regulation (Deci & Ryan, 1985).

Specifically, feedback is more effective when it provides information on correct rather than incorrect responses and when it builds on changes from previous trails.

feedback can be about the task or product, such as the work is correct or incorrect. This level of feedback may include directions to acquire more, different, or correct information, such as “You need to include more about the Treaty of Versailles”.

Second, feedback can be aimed at the process used to create the product or complete the task. This kind of feedback is more directly aimed at the processing of information, or learning processes required for understanding or completing the task. For example, a teacher or peer may say to a learner, “You need to edit this piece of writing by attending to the descriptors you have used, so the reader is able to understand the nuances of your meaning”,

feedback to the student can be focused at the self-regulation level, including greater skill in self-evaluation, or confidence to engage further on the task. For example, “You already know the key features of the opening of an argument. Check to see whether you have incorporated them in your first paragraph.”

Such feedback can have major influences on self-efficacy, self-regulatory proficiencies, and self-beliefs about the student as a learner, such that the student is encouraged or informed how to better and more effortlessly continue on the task.

With inefficient learners or learners at the acquisition (not proficiency) phase, it is better for a teacher to provide elaborations through instruction than to provide feedback on poorly understood concepts.

To be effective, feedback needs to be clear, purposeful, meaningful and compatible with students’ prior knowledge, and to provide logical connections.

These conditions highlight the importance of classroom climates that foster peer and self-assessment, and allow for learning from mistakes. We need classes that develop the courage to err.

under particular circumstances, instruction is more effective than feedback. Feedback can only build on something; it is of little use when there is no initial learning or surface information.

feedback is repeated testing, but this is only effective if there is feedback from the tests to teachers such that they modify their instruction to attend to the strengths and gaps in student performance.

superior performance was obtained from students who answered the questions on a large number of short tests rather than on a small number of long tests.

frequent test taking made the learning intentions and success criteria more specific and transparent.

Clariana and Koul (2006) found that multiple-try feedback was less effective for surface outcomes (d = –0.22) but more effective ...

this was higher when the testing was accompanied by feedback (d = 0.62) compared to no feedback (d = 0.30).

greatest in single length programs designed to influence broader cognitive skills.

As the work of my colleagues and I on the Socratic questioning in the Paideia project has demonstrated, structuring class sessions to entice, teach, and listen to students questioning of students is powerful (Hattie, et al., 1998; Roberts & Billings, 1999).

Nuthall (2005) claimed that students often needed three to four exposures to the learning—usually over several days—before there was a reasonable probability they would learn.

The overall effects of the use of peers as co-teachers (of themselves and of others) in classes is, overall, quite powerful.

If the aim is to teach students self-regulation and control over their own learning then they must move from being students to being teachers of themselves.

Cross-age tutors (d = 0.79) were more effective than same-age peers (d = 0.52) and adult tutors (d = 0.54).

note taking may facilitate better test performance for less skilled learners, but not for highly skilled learners.

Kobayashi (2005) found that note taking effects were higher when students were given instructor's notes to work from (d = 0.82), as these provided exemplars for their own note taking and a rubric to work from when learning from the notes. The effects were higher when notes were provided (d = 0.41, compared to not provided (d = 0.19), and it was the reviewing of the notes (d = 0.45) that was more effective than the taking of the notes.

They argued that there were four principles to embed study regulation support in instruction: 1 guide learners to prepare and structure an effective learning environment; 2 organize instruction and activities to facilitate cognitive and meta-cognitive processes; 3 use instructional goals and feedback to present student monitoring opportunities; 4 provide learners with continuous evaluation information and occasions to self-evaluate.

The effects were higher for pre-lesson questioning (d = 0.94) and post-lesson questioning (d = 0.86), compared to questions interspersed during the lesson (d = 0.52); when the questionings were delayed (d = 0.72) compared to immediate (d = 0.54); and where there was teacher modeling (d = 0.69) compared to none (d = 0.47).

Use Webb’s question table as a daily-tick Make a available at all times complimentary slide

The effect of student choice and control over learning is somewhat higher on motivation outcomes (d = 0.30) than on subsequent student learning (d = 0.04; Niemiec, Sikorski, & Walberg, 1996; Patall, Cooper, & Robinson, 2008).

Oh

too many choices may be overwhelming.

students enrolled in remedial courses had the highest achievement correlations with kinesthetic learning (doing, touching, interaction, r = 0.64), need for consistency in learning strategies and not learning in several ways (r = 0.44),

no sound (r = 0.40),

The claims about need for snacking and sitting up straight defy my powers to make sense of them.

Hiya!

Learning strategies, yes; enjoying learning, yes; learning styles, no.

Aiello and Wolfle's (1980) meta-analysis of individualized instruction in science in high school through college found individualized instruction to be similarly barely more effective than the traditional lecture approach (d = 0.08).

There u have it

The argument defended in this chapter is that successful learning is a function of the worthwhileness and clarity of the learning intentions, the specifications, and the success criteria; the power of using multiple and appropriate teaching strategies with a particular emphasis on the presence of feedback focused at the right level of instruction (acquisition or proficiency); seeing learning and teaching from the students’ perceptive; and placing reliance on teaching study skills and strategies of learning.

Emphasizing learning styles, coaching for tests, mentoring, and individualized instruction are noted for their lack of impact.

The emphasis should be on what students can do, and then on students knowing what they are aiming to do, having multiple strategies for learning t...

challenging learning intentions, clear success criteria, and feedback will be needed.

Failures and false starts often are precursors to success.

I have made an error, great. I have learned something.’)

The most successful were sequencing, drill repetition, and strategy cues, and these were particularly high in reading comprehension (d = 0.82), vocabulary (d = 0.79), and creativity (d = 0.84).

instructional process to teach students cognitive strategies that might lead to improved learning outcomes (initially in reading comprehension). The emphasis is on teachers enabling their students to learn and use cognitive strategies such as summarizing, questioning, clarifying, and predicting, and these are “supported through dialogue between teacher and students as they attempt to gain meaning from text” (Rosenshine & Meister, 1994, p. 479). Each student takes a turn at being the “teacher”, and often the teacher and students take turns leading a dialogue concerning sections of a text. Students check their own understanding