While the benefits of academic testing and feedback have been well documented in the literature for more than a century; the optimal timing for providing feedback has yet to be determined. The number of studies that focus on when to deliver feedback following an assessment is limited. According to Brosvic and colleagues (2005), it is the length of time that the learner should retain the test material that best determines when feedback should be delivered. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of immediate versus delayed informative feedback on subsequent test performance of registered nursing (RN) students. The participants of this study included 300 RN students from ten different nursing programs in the United States. The study included two test administrations. Following each test administration, informative feedback was provided according to a pre-determined delivery schedule. The immediate feedback was displayed on screen when the examinee clicked to submit the exam for scoring. There were two groups of delayed feedback. One group received an informative feedback report via email 24 hours post the submission of their exams. The second group received the same feedback 72 hours post exam submission. The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS, version 24.0) was used to perform a one-way Analyses of Variance (ANOVA), comparing the mean of the test scores with the three independent groups. No statistically significant differences were found for Mean Scores [F(2, 297) = 1.771, p = .172] at the 95% confidence level. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. A retrospective power analysis showed 618 participants would be needed to achieve a statistically significant difference. Although the two tests were developed from the same test blueprint, the tests did assess differing learning objectives. Test 1 (Comprehensive Nursing Practice Test) assessed nursing concepts with questions that were more theoretical. Test 2 (EPE) assessed application of skills and abilities and the questions were more clinical in nature. Generally speaking, the participants performed higher on the theoretical Test 1 (Comprehensive Nursing Practice Test). Most RN students do not have clinical experience until the end of their academic program which coincided with the timing for this study. It is plausible that differences in curricula and faculty at each of the independent programs contributed to the differences in the test scores. Especially since the students had limited clinical exposure prior to Test 2.

Optimal delivery of instruction is both critical and challenging in dynamic, scenario-based training (SBT) computer simulations such as those used by the military. Tasks that human instructors must perform during these sorts of simulated training exercises can impose a heavy burden on them. Partially due to advances in the state-of-the-art in training technology and partially due to the military's desire to reduce the number of personnel required, it may be possible to support functions that overburdened instructors perform by automating much of the SBT process in a computer simulation. Unfortunately though, after more than 50 years of literature documenting research conducted in the area of training interventions, few empirically-supported guidelines have emerged to direct the choice and implementation of effective, automated training interventions. The current study sought to provide empirical guidance for the optimal timing of feedback delivery (i.e., immediate vs. delayed) in a dynamic, SBT computer simulation. The premise of the investigation was that the demand for overall cognitive resources during the training exercise would prescribe the proper timing of feedback delivery. To test the hypotheses, 120 volunteers were randomly assigned to 10 experimental conditions. After familiarization on the experimental testbed, participants completed a total of seven, 10-minute scenarios, which were divided across two training phases. During each training phase participants would receive either immediate or delayed feedback and would perform either high or low cognitive load scenarios. Four subtask measures were recorded during test scenarios as well as subjective reports of mental demand, temporal demand and frustration. Instructional efficiency ratios were computed using both objective performance data and subjective reports of mental demand. A series of planned comparisons were conducted to investigate the training effectiveness of differing scenario cognitive loads (low vs. high), timing of feedback delivery (immediate vs. delayed), and sequencing the timing of feedback delivery and the cognitive load of the scenario. In fact, the data did not support the hypotheses. Therefore, post hoc, exploratory data analyses were performed to determine if there were trends in the data that would inform future investigations. The results for these analyses are discussed with suggested directions for future research.

The purpose of this experiment was to investigate Tosti's proposal about the timing of feedback. The study examined whether it is better to correct immediately after the error occurs or whether it is better to wait until immediately before the next opportunity to respond. In addition, it aimed to determine whether corrections delivered at different times produced different learner affects. Four children with autism were taught to label two sets of pictures under the two different conditions. Results showed that the timing of the feedback yields similar results in regards to number of correct responses and total trial count. However, in regards to time spent in teaching and learner affect, correcting errors before the next opportunity to respond showed to be the more efficient procedure and produced more favorable affect.