External theories of learning stress that learning consists basically of conditioning connections between selected stimuli and desired responses. Reinforcement occupies a central and crucial role in this behavioristic learning strategy. In order for this bond between the stimulus and its response to be formed, the response must be reinforced. With external learning strategies, desired behaviors are reinforced or rewarded. Undesired behaviors are ignored or given negative reinforcement. In no case are the learners' actions examined by the learners for areas in need of improvement. Theorists who hold to a model of learning based on internal mental processes, however, talk in terms of feedback rather than reinforcement. With internal learning strategies, learners are presented a description of the desired learning as they attempt to learn; they are given information delineating what they are doing well and what they are doing poorly. This data supplies the necessary knowledge of performance that enables learners to improve performance. The information received by the learner serves as a guide for altering cognitive structure, which in turn modifies subsequent behavior. Students have less need of feedback during meaningful learning due to the fact that their own comprehension enables them to be more aware of appropriate responses (Mouly, 1973).
External theorists have insisted upon the immediate reinforcement of responses. Recent studies have obtained results indicating that delayed feedback may be just as effective. English and Kinzer (1966, p. 147) found that one-hour and two-hour delays in giving correct responses were superior to immediate reinforcement. They conclude, "It has been assumed for many
years that immediate knowledge of results is superior to feedback delay. Such an assumption, however, was based upon the findings of research on lower animals or human learning of motor skills and nonsense verbal material." Sassenrath and Younge (1969) reported that there was no difference between immediate reinforcement and delayed feedback on immediate retention, but that delayed feedback was better for retention. In an experiment by More (1969), there were four feedback groups: immediate, two-and-one-half-hour, one-day, and four-day. The two-and-one-half-hour and one-day groups scored significantly higher on retention than the other two. The author feels that the results indicate that immediate reinforcement "may actually inhibit retention learning."
Some writers stress the role of cognition, as opposed to conditioning, in the reinforcement process. Lampron (1967, p. 1709-B) suggests that many so-called S-R bonds are actually the result of "varying degrees of awareness or implicit self-instruction" in arriving at the desired behavior. Crum's research (1969, p. 3479-B) also supports the role of cognition in acquiring desired responses. His results indicate that "initial instructional set or elicitation procedure" is an important factor in increasing the probability of any given response. Reinforcement alone was less effective. The importance of reinforcement is apparently greater in the case of rote learning than of meaningful learning (Ausubel, 1968).
In a review of the literature related to knowledge of results, Levie and Dickie (1973) reported that the importance of feedback varies depending upon the learner's situation. Feedback is of little value when the students are correct, of slight value when they are in doubt, and of great value if the students' answers are incorrect. Telling the learner what their mistakes are is superior to telling them that they have made a mistake.
Feedback may be of two types: intrinsic, which refers to the effect of knowing correctly the material being learned; and extrinsic, which has to do with some reward or punishment unrelated to the specific content itself (Glaser & Cooley, 1973). The use of positive reinforcers is a basic component of behavior modification techniques to mold student behavior by external means. The proper use of appropriate reinforcers has long been postulated as a significant factor in student motivation. Studies have been reported in which the use of rewards, such as social approval, has led to gains in achievement. However, the results indicate that different types of reinforcement may be needed with students from different socioeconomic levels. Another study focusing on the effects of delayed and immediate feedback found that delayed feedback produced higher achievement, but that immediate reinforcement was a positive factor in stimulating task perseverance (Della-Piana & Endo, 1973). Although most of the current literature favors the use of rewards rather than punishments, Walker and Buckley (1972) surveyed the literature and
could find no convincing preference for either. They determined that punishment and negative feedback can serve to increase effort and motivation.