Estrategias de retroalimentación docente y autorregulación del aprendizaje en estudiantes del segundo ciclo de educación básica

Juan Carlos Cárdenas Valverde; Irina Giovanna Flores-Poma; Susan Fabiola Cárdenas Valverde; Kimberly Johana Cárdenas-Flores; Jean Edward Cárdenas-Flores; Wilfredo César Salazar Mucha

doi:10.61286/e-rms.v4i.531

Authors

Juan Carlos Cárdenas Valverde Universidad Nacional Autónoma Altoandina de Tarma (UNAAT), Tarma, Perú. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1744-5746
Irina Giovanna Flores-Poma Universidad para el Desarrollo Andino (UDEA), Lircay-Huancavelica, Perú https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8563-6758
Susan Fabiola Cárdenas Valverde Dirección Regional de Salud Junín, Perú https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1222-6747
Kimberly Johana Cárdenas-Flores Universidad Tecnológica Baden Powell (UTBP), México https://orcid.org/0009-0005-1850-528X
Jean Edward Cárdenas-Flores Universidad Tecnológica Baden Powell (UTBP), México https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2888-5660
Wilfredo César Salazar Mucha Instituto de Educación Superior Pedagógico Público José Crespo y Castillo, Aucayacu, Leoncio Prado, Huánuco, Perú https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2961-5303

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61286/e-rms.v4i.531

Keywords:

feedback, student evaluation, academic performance, teaching methods, autonomous learning

Abstract

Teacher feedback may be limited to pointing out correct and incorrect answers without guiding improvement, thereby restricting its contribution to self-regulated learning. The objective was to determine the relationship between perceived feedback strategies (incorrect, elemental, descriptive, discovery, and formative), self-regulated learning, and academic performance among second-cycle basic education students during the 2025 academic year. A quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional, and correlational-explanatory study was conducted with a population of 349 students and a stratified probabilistic sample of 184, calculated using the formula for finite populations. Data collection instruments included a 25-item questionnaire (CER-5), validated through expert judgment, exploratory factor analysis, and reliability coefficients, alongside a self-regulation scale and annual grade point averages. The analysis involved descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations with 95% confidence intervals, grade-level comparisons (ANOVA), and multiple linear regression, using a significance level of 0.05 and effect sizes. The results showed that formative and descriptive feedback were positively associated with self-regulation (r = 0.68, p < 0.001 and r = 0.45, p < 0.001, respectively), whereas incorrect feedback showed a negative association (r = -0.26, p < 0.001); the multiple linear regression model explained 48.7% of the adjusted variance (adjusted R² = 0.487). The discussion indicates that the quality and usefulness of guidance, rather than its mere presence, are linked to student autonomy. It is concluded that it is necessary to strengthen teachers' methodological competencies to provide specific, timely, and actionable feedback, acknowledging that the cross-sectional design allows for claims of association rather than causality.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Brummer, L., de Boer, H., Mouw, J. M., & Strijbos, J. W. (2024). A meta-analysis of the effects of context, content, and task factors of digitally delivered instructional feedback on learning performance. Learning Environments Research, 27, 453–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-024-09501-4

Butler, R. (1988). Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation: The effects of task-involving and ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1988.tb00874.x

Cai, Z., Gui, Y., Mao, P., Wang, Z., Hao, X., Fan, X., & Tai, R. H. (2023). The effect of feedback on academic achievement in technology-rich learning environments (TREs): A meta-analytic review. Educational Research Review, 39, 100521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100521

Chua, H. L., Lee, S. H., & Fulmer, G. W. (2017). Action research on the effect of descriptive and evaluative feedback order on student learning in a specialized mathematics and science secondary school. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 3, 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-017-0015-y

Eskreis-Winkler, L., & Fishbach, A. (2019). Not learning from failure—the greatest failure of all. Psychological Science, 30(12), 1733–1744. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619881133

Granberg, C., Palm, T., & Palmberg, B. (2021). A case study of a formative assessment practice and the effects on students' self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, Article 100955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100955

Grundmann, F., Scheibe, S., & Epstude, K. (2021). When ignoring negative feedback is functional: Presenting a model of motivated feedback disengagement. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420969386

He, J., Liu, Y., Zhao, W., Xie, K., & Zhang, D. (2026). The impact of social-affective support feedback on students' science inquiry learning. Learning and Motivation, 94, 102270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2026.102270

He, J., Liu, Y., Zhao, W., Xie, K., & Zhang, D. (2026). The impact of social-affective support feedback on students’ science inquiry learning. Learning And Motivation, 94, 102270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2026.102270

Hernández Rivero, V. M., Santana Bonilla, P. J., & Sosa Alonso, J. J. (2021). Feedback y autorregulación del aprendizaje en educación superior. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 39(1), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.423341

Huang, CQ., Lu, LN., Huang, QH. et al. Effects of Artificial Intelligence Feedback on Students’ Self-Regulated Learning in Higher Education: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Educ Psychol Rev 38, 64 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10166-z

Irawati, I., Raja, P., & Nainggolan, F. (2020). Teacher's corrective feedback within discovery learning strategy to enhance students' writing accuracy. U-JET, 9(1).

Leung, A., Fine, P., Blizard, R., Tonni, I., & Louca, C. (2021). Teacher feedback and student learning: A quantitative study. European Journal of Dental Education, 25(3), 600–606. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12637

Lindner, C., Grund, A., & Schmid, S. (2015). Assessing self-regulated learning: Validation of the Spanish SRLIS adaptation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 430–442.

Mak, P. (2019). From traditional to alternative feedback: What do L2 elementary students think? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12250

Mercer, M., & Gulseren, D. B. (2024). When negative feedback harms: A systematic review of the unintended consequences of negative feedback on psychological, attitudinal, and behavioral responses. Studies in Higher Education, 49(4), 654–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2248490

Mercer, M., & Gulseren, D. B. (2024). When negative feedback harms: a systematic review of the unintended consequences of negative feedback on psychological, attitudinal, and behavioral responses. Studies in Higher Education, 49(4), 654–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2248490

Merrick, M., & Fyfe, E. R. (2024). Right or wrong? How feedback content and source influence children's mathematics performance and persistence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2024.105865

Merrick, M., & Fyfe, E. R. (2024). Right or wrong? How feedback content and source influence children’s mathematics performance and persistence. Journal Of Experimental Child Psychology, 241, 105865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2024.105865

Mertens, U. and Lindner, M.A. (2025), Computer-Based Answer-Until-Correct and Elaborated Feedback: Effects on Affective-Motivational and Performance Outcomes. J Comput Assist Learn, 41: e13112. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13112

Mertens, U., & Lindner, M. A. (2025). Computer-based answer-until-correct and elaborated feedback: Effects on affective-motivational and performance outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(2), e13112. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13112

Narumi, S., & Kartono, K. (2020). The application of fast feedback in discovery learning on the achievement of critical thinking ability reviewed from adversity quotient. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education, 9(3), 166–175. https://doi.org/10.15294/ujme.v9i3.41862

Rodgers, C. R. (2006). Attending to student voice: The impact of descriptive feedback on learning and teaching. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(2), 209–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2006.00353.x

Tunstall, P., & Gipps, C. (1996). Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: A typology. British Educational Research Journal, 22(4), 389–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192960220402

Wang, Z., Gong, S.-Y., Xu, S., & Hu, X.-E. (2019). Elaborated feedback and learning: Examining cognitive and motivational influences. Computers & Education, 136, 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.003

Xiao, Y., & Yang, M. (2019). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: How formative assessment supports students' self-regulation in English language learning. System, 81, 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.01.004

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 614–628.

Zulfa, A., Kartono, K., & Cahyono, A. N. (2021). Mathematical communication skills in terms of self efficacy through guided discovery learning assisted immediate feedback. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 10(Special Issue A), 75–82.