共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 406 毫秒
1.
Research has demonstrated that oral explaining to a fictitious student improves learning. Whether these findings replicate, when students are writing explanations, and whether instructional explaining is more effective than other explaining strategies, such as self-explaining, is unclear. In two experiments, we compared written instructional explaining to written self-explaining, and also included written retrieval and a baseline control condition. In Experiment 1 (N = 147, between-participants-design, laboratory experiment), we obtained no effect of explaining. In Experiment 2 (N = 50, within-participants-design, field-experiment), only self-explaining was more effective than our control conditions for attaining transfer. Self-explaining was more effective than instructional explaining. A cumulating meta-analysis on students’ learning revealed a small effect of instructional explaining on conceptual knowledge (g = 0.22), which was moderated by the modality of explaining (oral explaining > written explaining). These findings indicate that students who write explanations are better off self-explaining than explaining to a fictitious student. 相似文献
2.
Timothy J. Nokes-Malach Kurt VanLehn Daniel M. Belenky Max Lichtenstein Gregory Cox 《European Journal of Psychology of Education - EJPE》2013,28(4):1237-1263
Research on expertise suggests that a critical aspect of expert understanding is knowledge of the relations between domain principles and problem features. We investigated two instructional pathways hypothesized to facilitate students’ learning of these relations when studying worked examples. The first path is through self-explaining how worked examples instantiate domain principles and the second is through analogical comparison of worked examples. We compared both of these pathways to a third instructional path where students read worked examples and solved practice problems. Students in an introductory physics class were randomly assigned to one of three worked example conditions (reading, self-explanation, or analogy) when learning about rotational kinematics and then completed a set of problem solving and conceptual tests that measured near, intermediate, and far transfer. Students in the reading and self-explanation groups performed better than the analogy group on near transfer problems solved during the learning activities. However, this problem solving advantage was short lived as all three groups performed similarly on two intermediate transfer problems given at test. On the far transfer test, the self-explanation and analogy groups performed better than the reading group. These results are consistent with the idea that self-explanation and analogical comparison can facilitate conceptual learning without decrements to problem solving skills relative to a more traditional type of instruction in a classroom setting. 相似文献
3.
Subgoal learning, a technique used to break down problem solving into manageable pieces, has been used to promote retention and transfer in procedural domains, such as programming. The primary method of learning subgoals has been passive, and passive learning methods are typically less effective than constructive methods. To promote constructive methods of learning subgoals, we prompted learners to self-explain the subgoals of a problem-solving procedure. Self-explanation asks learners to make sense of new information based on prior knowledge and logical reasoning. Novices’ self-explanation is typically more effective when they receive guidance, because it helps them to focus on relevant information. In the present experimental study, the types of guidance that students received while self-explaining determined whether the constructive learning method was more effective than the passive method. Participants assigned to the constructive learning method performed best when they either received hints about the subgoals or received correct explanations as feedback, but not when they received both. These findings suggest that constructive learning of subgoals can further improve the benefits of subgoal learning when students receive only guidance that complements their construction of knowledge. This nuance is important for educators who engage their students in constructive learning and self-explanation. 相似文献
4.
《Learning and Instruction》2007,17(3):286-303
Previous research has shown that encouraging learners to explain material to themselves as they study can increase their understanding. Furthermore, different types of material (e.g. text or diagrams) influence learners’ self-explanation behaviour. This study explores whether the coherence of text impacts upon the self-explanation effect. Forty-eight low-knowledge learners (university students) learnt about the circulatory system with text that was designed to be either maximally or minimally coherent. Half of these learners also received self-explanation training. Results showed that learners given maximally coherent text learnt more, as did learners who self-explained. However, this was not because coherent text increased self-explaining. Instead minimally coherent text significantly increased the number of self-explanations that learners made. It is suggested that self-explaining in the minimal text condition served to compensate for weaknesses and gaps in the text, whereas self-explaining in the maximal text condition may have led learners to detect flaws in their mental models and repair them. Consequently, rather than providing a minimally coherent text which compels low knowledge learners to self-explain to overcome its deficits, we should instead encourage learners to self-explain from well structured and explicit text. 相似文献
5.
The worked example effect within cognitive load theory is a very well-established finding. The concrete effectiveness of worked
examples in a learning situation, however, heavily depends on further moderating factors. For example, if learners improve
their processing of worked examples by actively explaining the worked examples to themselves, they are usually better able
to solve transfer problems. Another way to enhance example processing is to present learners with instructional explanations
instead of prompting them to produce these explanations on their own. In this article, we review 21 experimental studies to
address the issue whether instructional explanations support example-based learning. Meta-analytic results lead to three important
conclusions: First, the benefits of instructional explanations for example-based learning per se are minimal. Second, instructional
explanations are more helpful for acquiring conceptual knowledge than for acquiring procedural knowledge. Third, instructional
explanations are not necessarily more effective than other methods supporting example processing such as self-explaining. 相似文献
6.
Example-based learning often follows a design in which learners first receive instructional explanations that communicate new principles and concepts and second examples thereof. In this setting, using the knowledge components of the instructional explanations to explain the examples (i.e., generating principle-based self-explanations) is considered to be a highly important learning process. However, a potential suboptimality of this learning process is that it scarcely requires learners to organize the content of the instructional explanations into coherent mental representations. Thus, in two experiments we investigated whether prompting learners to organize the content of the instructional explanations before providing them with the examples (and self-explanation prompts) enhances the effectiveness of example-based learning. We consistently found that organization prompts fostered learning regardless of whether the learners also received self-explanation prompts. Hence, in example-based learning, learners should be prompted to not only generate principle-based self-explanations but also to organize the content of the instructional explanations. 相似文献
7.
8.
Alexander Renkl 《European Journal of Psychology of Education - EJPE》1999,14(4):477-488
Recent research has shown that learning from worked-out examples is of major importance for initial skill acquisition in well-structured domains such as mathematics. However, only those learners who actively process the presented examples profit noticeably from this learning mode. Specifically, the learning outcomes depend on how well the learners explain the solution steps presented in the examples to themselves (‘self-explanation effect”). In a series of studies on learning mathematics from examples, learners’ spontaneous self-explanations and instructional means used to encourage self-explanations were investigated. In this research, the following main findings were obtained. Most learners were rather passive with respect to their spontaneous self-explanations. Among the active and successful learners, two subgroups employing different self-explanation styles could be identified. With regard to the instructional means used to induce effective example processing, it turned out that to employ “learning by teaching” in order to stimulate explanation activities was of very limited use. Attempts to directly train for or elicit certain types of self-explanations were more successful. However, even in the latter case, self-explanations had inherent deficits (e.g., proneness to errors). Thus, we sought to design learning arrangements that try to integrate self-explanations with well-timed and well-adapted instructional explanations (e.g., from tutors) in order to enhance students’ problem-solving skills. 相似文献
9.
The purpose of this qualitative interpretive research study was to examine high school students’ written scientific explanations
during biology laboratory investigations. Specifically, we characterized the types of epistemologies and forms of reasoning
involved in students’ scientific explanations and students’ perceptions of scientific explanations. Sixteen students from
a rural high school in the Southeastern United States were the participants of this research study. The data consisted of
students’ laboratory reports and individual interviews. The results indicated that students’ explanations were primarily based
on first-hand knowledge gained in the science laboratories and mostly representing procedural recounts. Most students did
not give explanations based on a theory or a principle and did not use deductive reasoning in their explanations. The students
had difficulties explaining phenomena that involved intricate cause–effect relationships. Students perceived scientific explanation
as the final step of a scientific inquiry and as an account of what happened in the inquiry process, and held a constructivist–empiricist
view of scientific explanations. Our results imply the need for more explicit guidance to help students construct better scientific
explanations and explicit teaching of the explanatory genre with particular focus on theoretical and causal explanations. 相似文献
10.
11.
Kok-Sing Tang 《International Journal of Science Education》2016,38(9):1415-1440
This paper reports on the design and enactment of an instructional strategy aimed to support students in constructing scientific explanations. Informed by the philosophy of science and linguistic studies of science, a new instructional framework called premise–reasoning–outcome (PRO) was conceptualized, developed, and tested over two years in four upper secondary (9th–10th grade) physics and chemistry classrooms. This strategy was conceptualized based on the understanding of the structure of a scientific explanation, which comprises three primary components: (a) premise – accepted knowledge that provides the basis of the explanation, (b) reasoning – logical sequences that follow from the premise, and (c) outcome – the phenomenon to be explained. A study was carried out to examine how the PRO strategy influenced students’ written explanations using multiple data sources (e.g. students’ writing, lesson observations, focus group discussions). Analysis of students’ writing indicates that explanations with a PRO structure were graded better by the teachers. In addition, students reported that the PRO strategy provided a useful organizational structure for writing scientific explanations, although they had some difficulties in identifying and using the structure. With the PRO as a new instructional tool, comparison with other explanation frameworks as well as implications for educational research and practice are discussed. 相似文献
12.
Teacher practices are essential for supporting students in scientific inquiry practices, such as the construction of scientific explanations. In this study, we examine what instructional practices teachers engage in when they introduce scientific explanation and whether these practices influence students' ability to construct scientific explanations during a middle school chemistry unit. Thirteen teachers enacted a project‐based chemistry unit, How can I make new stuff from old stuff?, with 1197 seventh grade students. We videotaped each teacher's enactment of the focal lesson on scientific explanation and then coded the videotape for four different instructional practices: modeling scientific explanation, making the rationale of scientific explanation explicit, defining scientific explanation, and connecting scientific explanation to everyday explanation. Our results suggest that when teachers introduce scientific explanation, they vary in the practices they engage in as well as the quality of their use of these practices. We also found that teachers' use of instructional practices can influence student learning of scientific explanation and that the effect of these instructional practices depends on the context in terms of what other instructional practices the teacher uses. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 45: 53–78, 2008 相似文献
13.
Explaining natural phenomena is an important goal in science teaching. A logical analysis reveals that causal explanations exhibit formal operational structures in that they consist of implication statements chained together through transitive reasoning. It was hypothesized in the present study that individuals who do not reason formally will have difficulty in learning explanations presented in instruction. To test this hypothesis, the effect of levels of operational thought on the explanations which ninth-grade (n = 26) and college (n = 40) physical science students reconstructed after instruction was investigated. Subjects in the study were classified through Piagetian tests as concrete or formal operational. Both concrete and formal subjects were successful in recalling explanations requiring the chaining of two implication statements. Formal operational subjects performed significantly better than concrete operational subjects in three of the four tests of the reconstruction of complex explanations requiring the chaining of six implication statements. In teaching complex causal explanations to students at the concrete operational level, it is suggested that teachers be prepared to furnish some external structuring which the students can rely on in logically relating the various propositions of the explanation to one another. 相似文献
14.
15.
Issues regarding scientific explanation have been of interest to philosophers from Pre-Socratic times. The notion of scientific explanation is of interest not only to philosophers, but also to science educators as is clearly evident in the emphasis given to K-12 students' construction of explanations in current national science education reform efforts. Nonetheless, there is a dearth of research on conceptualizing explanation in science education. Using a philosophically guided framework—the Nature of Scientific Explanation (NOSE) framework—the study aims to elucidate and compare college freshmen science students', secondary science teachers', and practicing scientists' scientific explanations and their views of scientific explanations. In particular, this study aims to: (1) analyze students', teachers', and scientists' scientific explanations; (2) explore the nuances about how freshman students, science teachers, and practicing scientists construct explanations; and (3) elucidate the criteria that participants use in analyzing scientific explanations. In two separate interviews, participants first constructed explanations of everyday scientific phenomena and then provided feedback on the explanations constructed by other participants. Major findings showed that, when analyzed using NOSE framework, participant scientists did significantly “better” than teachers and students. Our analysis revealed that scientists, teachers, and students share a lot of similarities in how they construct their explanations in science. However, they differ in some key dimensions. The present study highlighted the need articulated by many researchers in science education to understand additional aspects specific to scientific explanation. The present findings provide an initial analytical framework for examining students' and science teachers' scientific explanations. 相似文献
16.
Melissa M. Patchan Christian D. Schunn Wilfried Sieg Dawn McLaughlin 《Technology, Pedagogy and Education》2016,25(3):269-286
While online instructional technologies are becoming more popular in higher education, educators’ opinions about online learning tend to be generally negative. Furthermore, many studies have failed to systematically examine the features that distinguish one instructional mode from another, which weakens possible explanations for why online instructional technology can be beneficial. The current study isolates three benefits of the authors’ particular online instructional technology: (1) providing flexibility in how students learn, (2) offering immediate and targeted feedback and (3) increasing student participation and engagement with instructional material. Maximum benefits were observed when students used the online instructional technology to prepare for their face-to-face class – that is, students with this blended instruction learned twice as much content in the same amount of time in comparison to students with face-to-face instruction alone, without creating an atypically high workload. 相似文献
17.
The Interactive Two Feedback Loops Model (Narciss, 2008, 2013) suggests that not only providing external feedback but also prompting students to generate internal feedback may influence learning and motivation. This study aims at investigating the effects of internal and external feedback on achievement, strategy, and motivation in concept learning. Using a 2 × 3 experimental design with 121 teacher students we investigated the effects of combining internal feedback (i.e. self-explaining why a task solution is correct or incorrect) with three types of external feedback (no feedback; knowledge of result (KR); KR + knowledge about mistakes (KM)). Combining internal and external types of feedback was more beneficial for concept learning achievement, strategy use, as well as students’ intrinsic motivation, and perceived competence, than providing either internal or external feedback. Most notably, if students are asked to generate internal feedback in terms of self-explaining their responses, simple external KR feedback is as beneficial as elaborated KM-feedback. 相似文献
18.
19.
Christoph Kulgemeyer 《Studies in Science Education》2013,49(2):109-139
ABSTRACTInstructional explanations have sometimes been described as an ineffective way to teach science, representing a transmissive view of learning. However, science teachers frequently provide instructional explanations, and students also offer them in cooperative learning. Contrary to the transmissive view regarding explanation, studies suggest that instructional explanations might be successful if they are based on an interaction between explainers and explainees, including the diagnosis of understanding and adaptation to the explainee’s needs. The present article has three goals: (1) It will propose a framework for potentially effective instructional explanations, presenting five core ideas of what constitutes effective instructional explanations and two concerning how they should be implemented into science teaching. (2) To justify the framework, the article will review studies on the effectiveness of instructional explanations. It will identify factors that have been researched for their impact on the effectiveness of instructional explanations and discuss them for their applicability to science teaching. (3) This article will connect the research on instructional explanations with the idea of basic dimensions of instructional quality in science. It will discuss the core ideas as particular expressions of the basic dimensions of instructional quality, specifically ‘cognitive activation’ and ‘constructive support’. 相似文献
20.
Vicente Talanquer 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(18):2393-2412
The central goal of our study was to explore the nature of the explanations generated by science and engineering majors with basic training in chemistry to account for the colligative properties of solutions. The work was motivated by our broader interest in the characterisation of the dominant types of explanations that science college students use to make sense of phenomena under conditions of limited time and limited explicit knowledge about a topic. Explanations were collected in written form using two different quizzes that students completed under time constraints at the end of a two‐semester general chemistry course. Our study revealed that students’ ability to generate causal/mechanical explanations depended on the nature of the task. In general, students were more inclined or able to generate mechanistic explanations to account for boiling‐point elevation and freezing‐point depression than to make sense of osmotic flow. The analysis of the types of causal explanations built by the study participants suggests that students may be biased towards some causal models or explanatory modes characterised as causal‐additive and causal‐static in our work. A large proportion of the students built non‐causal teleological explanations to account for osmotic flow. None of the participants in our study used a dynamic model of matter as the basis for their explanations of any of the relevant phenomena; the idea of an underlying random process that is taking place at all times giving rise to emergent properties and behaviours was completely absent from their intuitive reasoning under conditions of limited time and knowledge. 相似文献