How to foster active processing of explanations in instructional communication

Educational Psychology Review

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 25-40

  Berthold, Kirsten ^a   Renkl, Alexander ^b  

^a BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Active processing; Asynchronous computer mediated instructional communication; Focused processing; Written instructional explanations

Indexed keywords

EID: 77949540830     PISSN: 1040726X     EISSN: 1573336X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10648-010-9124-9     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. Bandura, A. (2001). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales (Monograph). Stanford: Stanford University.
2. Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2008). Wie kann eine aktive Verarbeitung von instruktionalen Erklärungen zu multiplen Repräsentationen gefördert werden? [How can an active processing of instructional explanations on multiple representations be fostered?]. In E.-M. Lankes (Ed.), Pädagogische Professionalität als Gegenstand empirischer Forschung (pp. 177-188). Münster: Waxmann.
3. Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2009). Instructional aids to support a conceptual understanding of multiple representations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 70-87.
4. Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Training in self-explanation and self-regulation strategies: Investigating the effects of knowledge acquisition activities on problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 221-252.
5. Biswas, G., Leelawong, K., Schwartz, D., Vye, N., & The Teachable Agents Group of Vanderbilt. (2005). Learning by teaching: A new agent paradigm for educational software. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19, 363-392.
6. Bodemer, D., Plötzner, R., Feuerlein, I., & Spada, H. (2004). The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualisations. Learning and Instruction, 14, 325-341.
7. Boekaerts, M. (2007). What we have learned about the link between motivation and learning/performance. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 21(3/4), 263-269.
8. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 141-178.
9. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471-533.
10. Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83-87.
11. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.
12. Friedrich, H. F., & Mandl, H. (1997). Analyse und Förderung selbstgesteuerten Lernens [Analysis and advancements of self-regulated learning]. In F. E. Weinert & H. Mandl (Eds.), Psychologie der Erwachsenenbildung, D/I/4, Enzyklopädie der Psychologie (pp. 237-293). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
13. Fries, S., Schmid, S., Dietz, F., & Hofer, M. (2005). Conflicting values and their impact on learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 259-274.
14. Fries, S., Dietz, F., & Schmid, S. (2008). Motivational interference in learning: The impact of leisure alternatives on subsequent self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 119-133.
15. Große, C., & Renkl, A. (2006). Effects of multiple solution methods in mathematics learning. Learning and Instruction, 16, 122-138.
16. Harris, K., Alexander, P., & Graham, S. (2008). Michael Pressley's contributions to the history and future of strategies research. Educational Psychologist, 43, 86-96.
17. Hofer, M., Schmid, S., Fries, S., Dietz, F., Clausen, M., & Reinders, H. (2007). Individual values, motivational conflicts, and learning for school. Learning and Instruction, 17, 17-28.
18. Jucks, R., Bromme, R., & Runde, A. (2007). Explaining with unshared illustrations: How they constrain explanations. Learning and Instruction, 17, 204-218.
19. Jucks, R., Becker, B.-M., & Bromme, R. (2008). Lexical entrainment in written discourse: Is experts' word use adapted to the addressee? Discourse Processes, 45, 497-518.
20. Kalyuga, S. (2010). Schema acquisition and sources of cognitive load. In J. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory and research in educational psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press (in press).
21. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351-371.
22. Koedinger, K. R., & Aleven, V. (2007). Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 239-264.
23. Koedinger, K. R., Pavlik, P., McLaren, B., & Aleven, V. (2008). Is it better to give than to receive? The assistance dilemma as a fundamental unsolved problem in the cognitive science of learning and instruction. In C. Schunn (Ed.), Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2008. New York: Earlbaum.
24. Kuhn, D. (2007). Is direct instruction an answer to the right question? Educational Psychologist, 42, 109-113.
25. Leinhardt, G., & Steele, M. D. (2005). Seeing the complexity of standing to the side: Instructional dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 87-163.
26. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48). New York: Cambridge University Press.
27. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43-52.
28. Neber, H. (1995). Explanations in problem-oriented cooperative learning. In R. Olechowski & G. Khan-Svik (Eds.), Experimental research on teaching and learning (pp. 158-166). Frankfurt/M: Lang.
29. Nückles, M., Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2005). Information about a layperson's knowledge supports experts in giving effective and efficient online advice to laypersons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 219-236.
30. Nückles, M., Hübner, S., Dümer, S., & Renkl, A. (2010). Expertise-reversal effects in writing-to-learn. Instructional Science. doi: 10. 1007/s11251-009-9106-9.
31. Renkl, A. (2002). Worked-out examples: Instructional explanations support learning by self-explanations. Learning and Instruction, 12, 529-556.
32. Renkl, A. (2005). The worked-out-example principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 229-246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Interactive learning environments: Contemporary issues and trends. An introduction to the special issue. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 235-238.
34. Rheinberg, F., & Fries, S. (1998). Förderung der Lernmotivation: Ansatzpunkte, Strategien und Effekte. [Fostering learning motivation: Starting points, strategies, and effects.]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 44, 168-184.
35. Robins, S., & Mayer, R. E. (1993). Schema formation in analogical reasoning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 529-538.
36. Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B., & Koedinger, K. (2006). Designing for metacognition-Applying cognitive tutor principles to the tutoring of help seeking. Metacognition and Learning, 2, 125-140.
37. Sánchez, E., García-Rodicio, H., & Acuña, S. R. (2009). Are instructional explanations more effective in the context of an impasse? Instructional Science, 37, 537-563.
38. Schiefele, U., & Heinen, S. (2001). Wissenserwerb und Motivation. [Knowledge acquisition and motivation.]. In D. H. Rost (Ed.), Handwörterbuch Pädagogische Psychologie (pp. 795-799). Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union.
39. Schmid, S., Hofer, M., Dietz, F., Reinders, H., & Fries, S. (2005). Value orientations and action conflicts in students' everyday life: An interview study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 3, 243-257.
40. Schmid, S., Fries, S., Hofer, M., Dietz, F., Reinders, H., & Clausen, M. (2007). The theory of motivational action conflicts: Empirical studies and practical consequences. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of schools. The final report on the DFG Priority Programme (pp. 317-331). Münster: Waxmann.
41. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Self-regulated learning. From teaching to self-reflective practice. New York: Guildford.
42. Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2006). Computer-supported example-based learning: When instructional explanations reduce self-explanations. Computers and Education, 46, 426-445.
43. Seufert, T., & Brünken, R. (2006). Cognitive load and the format of instructional aids for coherence formation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 321-331.
44. Spörer, N., & Brunstein, J. C. (2006). Erfassung selbstregulierten Lernens mit Selbstberichtsverfahren. Ein Überblick zum Stand der Forschung. [Assessment of self-regulated learning with self-report methods. An overview of the status of research.] Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 20(3), 147-160.
45. Sweller, J. (2006). The worked example effect and human cognition. Learning and Instruction, 16, 165-169.
46. VanLehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C., Yamauchi, T., & Baggett, W. B. (2003). Why do only some events cause learning during human tutoring? Cognition and Instruction, 2, 209-249.
47. Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21-39.
48. Webb, N. M., & Farivar, S. (1999). Developing productive group interaction in middle school. In A. M. O'Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 117-149). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
49. Webb, N. M., Ing, M., Kersting, N., & Nemer, K. M. (2006). Help seeking in cooperative learning groups. In S. A. Karabenick & R. S. Newman (Eds.), Help seeking in academic settings: Goals, groups, and contexts (pp. 45-88). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
50. Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychologist, 43, 49-64.