Are instructional explanations more effective in the context of an impasse?

Instructional Science

Volumn 37, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 537-563

  Sánchez, Emilio ^a   García Rodicio, Héctor ^a   Acuña, Santiago R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SALAMANCA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DEL ESTADO DE MORELOS   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Impasse triggers; Impasses; Instructional explanations; Mental model repair; Self explanations; Students' mental models

Indexed keywords

EID: 77949542223     PISSN: 00204277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11251-008-9074-5     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Ainsworth, S. E., & Burcham, S. (2007). The impact of text coherence on learning by self-explanation. Learning & Instruction, 17, 286-303. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2007. 02. 004.
2. Ainsworth, S. E., & Loizou, A. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27, 669-681.
3. Aleven, V., & Koedinger, K. R. (2000). Limitations of student control: Do student know when they need help? In G. Gauthier, C. Frasson, & K. VanLehn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, ITS 2000 (pp. 292-303). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
4. Alvermann, D. E., Qian, G., & Hynd, C. E. (1995). Effects of interactive discussion and text type on learning counterintuitive science concepts. The Journal of Educational Research, 88(3), 146-154.
5. Baker, L. (1979). Comprehension monitoring: Identifying and coping with text confusions. Journal of Reading Behaviour, 11, 363-374.
6. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Sinatra, G. M., & Loxterman, J. A. (1991). Revising social studies text from a text-processing perspective: Evidence of improved comprehensibility. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 251-276. doi: 10. 2307/747763.
7. Britton, B. K., & Gulgoz, S. (1991). Using Kintsch's computational model to improve instructional text: Effect of repairing inferences calls on recall and cognitive structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 329-345. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 83. 3. 329.
8. Calin-Jageman, R. J., & Horn Ratner, H. (2005). The role of encoding in the self-explanation effect. Cognition and Instruction, 23(4), 523-543. doi: 10. 1207/s1532690xci2304_4.
9. Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth: Heinemann Educational Books.
10. Chi, M. T. H. (1996). Constructing self-explanations and scaffolded explanations in tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 33-49.
11. Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining expository texts: The dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (pp. 161-238). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
13. Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
14. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., & Jeong, H. (2004). Can tutors monitor students' understanding accurately? Cognition and Instruction, 22(3), 363-387. doi: 10. 1207/s1532690xci2203_4.
15. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471-533.
16. de Leeuw, N., & Chi, M. T. H. (2002). Self-explanation: Enriching a situation model or repairing a domain model? In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 55-78). Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Diakidoy, I. N., & Kendeou, P. (2001). Facilitating conceptual change in astronomy: A comparison of the effectiveness of two instructional approaches. Learning and Instruction, 11, 1-20.
18. Diakidoy, I. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 335-356.
19. Díez, E., & Fernández, A. (1997). Batería multimedia de comprensión (versión abreviada). [Comprehension multimedia inventory (summarized version).] University of Salamanca, Salamanca.
20. Edwards, A. D., & Westgate, D. (1987). Investigating classroom talk. London: The Falmer Press.
21. Gombrich, E. H. (1982). The story of art. Oxford: Phaidon Press.
22. Graesser, A. C. (2007). An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp. 3-26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23. Graesser, A. C., Millis, K. K., & Zwaan, R. A. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 163-189.
24. Graesser, A. C., & Olde, B. A. (2003). How does one know whether a person understands a device? The quality of the questions and the person asks when the device breaks down. Journal of Education Psychology, 95(3), 524-536.
25. Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Huber, J. (1993). Question asking during tutoring and in the design of educational software. In M. Rabinowitz (Ed.), Cognitive science foundations of instruction (pp. 149-172). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
26. Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-to-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 359-387.
27. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371-395.
28. Graesser, A. C., VanLehn, K., Rose, C., Jordan, P., & Harter, D. (2001). Intelligent tutoring systems with conversational dialogue. AI Magazine, 22, 39-51.
29. Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: Meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 116-161.
30. Hausmann, R. G. M., & VanLehn, K. (2007). Self-explaining in the classroom: Learning curve evidence. In D. McNamara & G. Trafton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1067-1072). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2005). The effects of readers' misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 235-245.
32. Kendeou, P., & van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory and Cognition, 35(7), 1567-1577.
33. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension. A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Kintsch, E., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Strategies to promote active learning from text: Individual differences in background knowledge. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 54, 141-151.
35. Leinhardt, G. (1993). Weaving instructional explanations in history. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 46-79.
36. Linderholm, T., Everson, M. G., van den Broek, P., Mischinski, M., Crittenden, A., & Samuels, J. (2001). Effects of causal text revision on more and less-skilled readers' comprehension of easy and difficult texts. Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 525-556.
37. Magliano, J. P., Trabasso, T., & Graesser, A. C. (1999). Strategic processes during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 615-629.
38. Markman, E. M. (1979). Realizing that you don't understand: Elementary school children's awareness of inconsistencies. Child Development, 46, 986-992.
39. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
40. McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38, 1-30.
41. McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Butler-Songer, N., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1-43.
42. Mikkilä-Erdmann, M. (2001). Improving conceptual change concerning photosynthesis through text design. Learning and Instruction, 11, 241-257.
43. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Roles of methods and media. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 598-610.
44. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2005). Role of guidance, reflection, and interactivity in an agent-based multimedia game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 117-128.
45. Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177-213.
46. Neuman, Y., & Schwarz, B. (2000). Substituting one mystery for another: The role of self-explanations in solving algebra word problems. Learning and Instruction, 10, 203-220.
47. 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(4), 219-236.
48. Nückles, M., Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2006). How to make instructional explanations in human tutoring more effective. In R. Sun, N. Miyake, & C. Schunn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 633-638). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
49. Otero, J. (2002). Noticing and fixing difficulties while understanding science texts. In J. Otero, J. A. León & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 281-307). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. Otero, J., & Campanario, J. M. (1990). Comprehension evaluation and regulation in learning from science texts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(5), 447-460.
51. Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21, 1-29.
52. Renkl, A. (2002). Learning from worked-out examples: Instructional explanations supplement self-explanations. Learning and Instruction, 12, 529-556.
53. Renkl, A., Stark, R., Gruber, H., & Mandl, H. (1998). Learning from worked-out examples: The effects of example variability and elicited self-explanations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 90-108.
54. Roy, M., & Chi, M. T. H. (2005). The self-explanation principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 271-286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
55. Sánchez, E. (1996). Los textos divulgativos como una conversación encubierta: análisis de los recursos comunicativos de un texto divulgativo. [Popular science books as open conversations: analysis of the communicative devices in a popular science book.] Infancia & Aprendizaje, 75, 85.
56. Sánchez, E., García, J. R., De Sixte, R., Castellano, N., & Rosales, J. (2008). El análisis de la práctica educativa y las propuestas instruccionales: Integración y enriquecimiento mutuo. [Analysing educational practice and instructional proposals: Integration and mutual enrichment.] Infancia & Aprendizaje, 31, 233-258.
57. Sánchez, E., Rosales, J., & Cañedo, I. (1999). Understanding and communication in expositive discourse: An analysis of the strategies used by expert and pre-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 37-58.
58. Siegler, R. S. (1995). How does change occur: A microgenetic study of number conservation. Cognitive Psychology, 28, 225-273.
59. Siegler, R. S., & Jenkins, E. A. (1989). How children discover new strategies. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
60. Sweller, J., van Merriëboer, J., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.
61. van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
62. VanLehn, K. (1991). Rule acquisition events in the discovery of problem solving strategies. Cognitive Science, 15(1), 1-47.
63. VanLehn, K., et al. (2000). Fading and deepening: The next steps for ANDES and other model-tracing tutors. In G. Gauthier, C. Frassonand, & K. VanLehn (Eds.), Proceedings of ITS 2000 (pp. 474-483). Montreal, Canada: Springer-Verlag.
64. 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, 21(3), 209-249.
65. Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, G., & Gilabert, R. (2000). Two procedures to improve instructional text: Effects on memory and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 1-10.
66. Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychology, 43(1), 49-64.