How much is too much? Learning and motivation effects of adding instructional explanations to worked examples

Learning and Instruction

Volumn 25, Issue , 2013, Pages 104-124

  Richey, J Elizabeth ^a   Nokes Malach, Timothy J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Achievement goals; Assistance; Instructional explanations; Learning; Motivation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84872448257     PISSN: 09594752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.11.006     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Aleven V.A.W.M.M., Koedinger K.R. The need for tutorial dialog to support self-explanation. Building dialogue systems for tutorial applications, papers of the 2000 AAAI Fall Symposium 2000, 65-73. AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA. C.P. Rose, R. Freedman (Eds.).
2. Aleven V.A.W.M.M., Popescu O., Koedinger K. Pilot-testing a tutorial dialogue system that supports self-explanation. Proceedings of the sixth international conference on intelligent tutoring systems, ITS 2002 2002, 344-354. Springer Verlag, Berlin. S.A. Cerri, G. Gouardères, F. Paraguaçu (Eds.).
3. Alfieri, L., Nokes-Malach, T. J., & Schunn, C. D. Learning through case comparisons: a meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist. Poster session presented at the Fall 2011 conference for the Society for Research in Educational Effectiveness, Washington, D.C., in press.
4. Ames C. Classrooms: goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology 1992, 84(3):261-271. 10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261.
5. Ames C., Archer J. Achievement goals in the classroom: students' learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology 1988, 80(3):260-267. 10.1037/0022-0663.80.3.260.
6. Barnett S.M., Ceci S.J. When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin 2002, 128(4):612-637. 10.1037//0033-2909.128.4.612.
7. Belenky D.M., Nokes T.J. Optimizing learning environments: an individual difference approach to learning and transfer. Proceedings of the thirty-second annual conference of the cognitive science society 2010, 459-464. Cognitive Science Society, Portland, OR. S. Ohlsson, R. Catrambone (Eds.).
8. Belenky D.M., Nokes-Malach T.J. Motivation and transfer: the role of mastery-approach goals in preparation for future learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences 2012, 21(3):399-432. 10.1080/10508406.2011.651232.
9. Bjork R.A. Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. Metacognition: Knowing about knowing 1994, 185-205. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. J. Metcalfe, A. Shimamura (Eds.).
10. Bransford J.D., Schwartz D.L. Rethinking transfer: a simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of research in education 1999, Vol. 24:61-100. American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C.
11. Chi M.T.H. Self-explaining expository texts: the dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. Advances in instructional psychology 2000, Vol. 5:161-238. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Chi M.T.H. Three types of conceptual change: belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. International handbook of research on conceptual change 2008, 61-82. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N. J. S. Vosniadou (Ed.).
13. Chi M.T.H. Active-constructive-interactive: a conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science 2009, 1:73-105. 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x.
14. Chi M.T.H. Theoretical perspectives, methodological approaches, and trends in the study of expertise. Expertise in mathematics instruction: Advancing research and practice from an international perspective 2011, 17-39. Springer, New York. 10.1007/978-1-4419-7707-6_2. Y. Li, G. Kaiser (Eds.).
15. Chi M.T.H., de Leeuw N., Chiu M.-H., LaVancher C. Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science 1994, 18(3):439-477. 10.1207/s15516709cog1803_3.
16. Chi M.T.H., Slotta J.D., de Leeuw N. From things to processes: a theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Science 1994, 4:27-43.
17. Chouinard R., Roy N. Changes in high-school students' competence beliefs, utility value and achievement goals in mathematics. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2008, 78:31-50. 10.1348/000709907X197993.
18. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, doi:10.1234/12345678. 2nd ed.
19. Conati C., Vanlehn K. Toward computer-based support of meta-cognitive skills: a computational framework to coach self-explanation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 2000, 11:389-415.
20. Dweck C.S. Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist 1986, 41(10):1040-1048. American Psychological Association. 10.1037//0003-066X.41.10.1040.
21. Elliot A.J., Harackiewicz J.M. Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: a mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1996, 70(3):461-475. American Psychological Association. 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.461.
22. Elliot A.J., McGregor H.A. A 2 X 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2001, 80(3):501-519. 10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.501.
23. Elliot A.J., McGregor H.A., Gable S. Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: a mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 1999, 91(3):549-563.
24. Elliot A.J., Murayama K. On the measurement of achievement goals: critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology 2008, 100(3):613-628. 10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.613.
25. Engle R.A. The resurgence of research into transfer: an introduction to the final articles of the transfer strand. Journal of the Learning Sciences 2012, 21(3):347-352. 10.1080/10508406.2012.707994.
26. Ezrailson C., Zike D., Zorn M.K. Electricity and magnetism 2005, p. 138, Glencoe/McGraw-Hill. 2nd ed.
27. Gentner D., Loewenstein J., Thompson L. Learning and transfer: a general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology 2003, 95(2):393-405. 10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.393.
28. Gick M.L., Holyoak K.J. Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology 1983, 15(1):1-38. 10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6.
29. van Gog T., Paas F., van Merriënboer J.J.G. Effects of studying sequences of process-oriented and product-oriented worked examples on troubleshooting transfer efficiency. Learning and Instruction 2008, 18(3):211-222. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.003.
30. Grant H., Dweck C.S. Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003, 85(3):541-553.
31. Hake R.R. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics 1998, 66(1):64-74. 10.1119/1.18809.
32. Harackiewicz J.M., Barron K.E., Pintrich P.R., Elliot A.J., Thrash T.M. Revision of achievement goal theory: necessary and illuminating. Journal of Educational Psychology 2002, 94(3):638-645. 10.1037//0022-0663.94.3.638.
33. Harris A., Bonnett V., Luckin R., Yuill N., Avramides K. Scaffolding effective help-seeking behaviour in mastery and performance oriented learners. Proceedings of the 14th international conference on artificial intelligence in education 2009, 425-432. IOS Press, Brighton, UK. V. Dimitrova, R. Mizoguchi, B. du Boulay, A.C. Graesser (Eds.).
34. Hausmann R.G.M., VanLehn K. Explaining self-explaining: a contrast between content and generation. 13th international conference on artificial intelligence in education 2007, Vol. 158:417-424. IOS Press, Amsterdam.
35. Hestenes D., Wells M., Swackhamer G. Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher 1992, 30(March):141-158.
36. Hsu T. Foundations of physical science 2005, CPO Science. 2nd ed.
37. Hulleman C.S., Durik A.M., Schweigert S.B., Harackiewicz J.M. Task values, achievement goals, and interest: an integrative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 2008, 100(2):398-416. American Psychological Association. 10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.398.
38. Keppel G., Wickens T.D. Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook 2004, Pearson Education International, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 4th ed.
39. Koedinger K.R., Aleven V. Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educational Psychology Review 2007, 19(3):239-264. 10.1007/s10648-007-9049-0.
40. Kurtz K.J., Miao C.-H., Gentner D. Learning by analogical bootstrapping. The Journal of Learning Sciences 2001, 10(4):417-446.
41. Leinhardt G. Instructional explanations: a commonplace for teaching and location for contrast. Handbook of research on teaching 2001, 333-357. American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C. 4th ed. V. Richardson (Ed.).
42. Leinhardt G. Introduction: explaining instructional explanations. Instructional explanations in the disciplines 2010, 1-5. Springer US, Boston, MA. 10.1007/978-1-4419-0594-9. M.K. Stein, L. Kucan (Eds.).
43. Linnenbrink-Garcia L., Tyson D.F., Patall E.A. When are achievement goal orientations beneficial for academic achievement? A closer look at main effects and moderating factors. International Review of Social Psychology 2008, 21(1-2):19-70. Presses univ. de Grenoble.
44. Lovett M.C. Learning by problem solving versus by examples: the benefits of generating and receiving information. Proceedings of the 14th annual conference of the cognitive science society 1992, 956-961. Erlbaum, Bloomington, IN.
45. Mclaren B.M., Lim S.-J., Koedinger K.R. When and how often should worked examples be given to students? New results and a summary of the current state of research. Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the cognitive science society 2008, 2176-2181. Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX. B.C. Love, K. McRae, V.M. Sloutsky (Eds.).
46. Nokes-Malach, T. J., & Mestre, J. Towards a model of transfer as sense-making. Educational Psychologist, in press.
47. Nokes-Malach, T. J., VanLehn, K. A., Belenky, D. M., Lichtenstein, M., & Cox, G. Coordinating principles and examples through analogy and explanation. European Journal of Psychology of Education, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0164-z.
48. Nokes T.J., Belenky D.M. Incorporating motivation into a theoretical framework for knowledge transfer. The psychology of learning and motivation: Cognition and education 2011, Vol. 55:109-135. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. 10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00004-1.
49. Nokes T.J., Hausmann R.G.M., VanLehn K., Gershman S. Testing the instructional fit hypothesis: the case of self-explanation prompts. Instructional Science 2011, 39(5):645-666. 10.1007/s11251-010-9151-4.
50. Nokes T.J., Ross B.H. Facilitating conceptual learning through analogy and explanation. Physics education research conference 2007, 7-10. American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY. 10.1063/1.2820952. L. Hsu, C. Henderson, L. McCullough (Eds.).
51. Olejnik S., Algina J. Measures of effect size for comparative studies: applications, interpretations, and limitations. Contemporary Educational Psychology 2000, 25(3):241-286. 10.1006/ceps.2000.1040.
52. Paas F.G.W.C., Van Merriënboer J.J.G. Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: a cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology 1994, 86(1):122-133. 10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.122.
53. Perkins D.N., Salomon G. Knowledge to go: a motivational and dispositional view of transfer. Educational Psychologist 2012, 47(3):248-258. 10.1080/00461520.2012.693354.
54. Pugh K.J., Bergin D.A. Motivational influences on transfer. Educational Psychologist 2006, 41(3):147-160. 10.1207/s15326985ep4103_2.
55. Renkl A. Learning from worked-out examples: a study on individual differences. Cognitive Science 1997, 21(1):1-29. 10.1207/s15516709cog2101_1.
56. Renkl A. Worked-out examples: instructional explanations support learning by self-explanations. Learning and Instruction 2002, 12(5):529-556. 10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00030-5.
57. Renkl A., Atkinson R.K., Maier U.H. From studying examples to solving problems: fading worked-out solution steps helps learning. Proceedings of the 22nd annual conference of the cognitive science society 2000, 393-398. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, http://dx.doi.org/10.1.1.23.6816. L. Gleitman, A.K. Joshi (Eds.).
58. Renkl A., Atkinson R.K., Maier U.H., Staley R. From example study to problem solving: smooth transitions help learning. The Journal of Experimental Education 2002, 70(4):293-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220970209599510.
59. Rittle-Johnson B. Promoting transfer: effects of self-explanation and direct instruction. Child Development 2006, 77(1):1-15. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00852.x.
60. Rittle-Johnson B., Star J.R. Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of Educational Psychology 2007, 99(3):561-574. 10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.561.
61. Schmidt R.A., Bjork R.A. New conceptualizations of practice: common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science 1992, 3(4):207-217. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00029.x.
62. Schmitt N. Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment 1996, 8(4):350-353. 10.1037//1040-3590.8.4.350.
63. Schwartz D.L., Bransford J.D., Sears D. Efficiency and innovation in transfer. Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective 2005, 1-51. Information Age Publishing, CT. J. Mestre (Ed.).
64. Schworm S., Renkl A. Computer-supported example-based learning: when instructional explanations reduce self-explanations. Computers & Education 2006, 46(4):426-445. 10.1016/j.compedu.2004.08.011.
65. Slotta J.D., Chi M.T.H. Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training. Cognition and Instruction 2006, 24(2):261-289. 10.1207/s1532690xci2402_3.
66. Ward M., Sweller J. Structuring effective worked examples. Cognition and Instruction 1990, 7(1):1-39. 10.1207/s1532690xci0701_1.
67. Wilson J.W., Carry L.R. Homogeneity of regression, its rationale, computation and use. American Educational Research Journal 1969, 6:80-90.
68. Wittwer J., Renkl A. Why instructional explanations often do not work: a framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychologist 2008, 43(1):49-64. 10.1080/00461520701756420.
69. Wittwer J., Renkl A. How effective are instructional explanations in example-based learning? A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review 2010, 22(4):393-409. 10.1007/s10648-010-9136-5.