Inventing Prepares Learning Motivationally, but a Worked-out Solution Enhances Learning Outcomes

Cooperative Minds: Social Interaction and Group Dynamics - Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2013

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 2416-2421

  Glogger, Inga ^a   Kappich, Julian ^a   Schwonke, Rolf ^a   Holzäpfel, Lars ^b   Nückles, Matthias ^a   Renkl, Alexander ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

instruction; invention activities; learning strategy assessment; teacher education; worked examples

Indexed keywords

ENHANCE LEARNING; INSTRUCTION; INVENTION ACTIVITY; KNOWLEDGE GAPS; LEARNING OUTCOME; LEARNING STRATEGY; LEARNING-STRATEGY ASSESSMENT; STRATEGIES ASSESSMENT; TEACHER EDUCATION; WORKED EXAMPLES;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 84971611746     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Belenky, D. M., & Nokes-Malach, T. J. (2012). Motivation and transfer: The role of mastery-approach goals in preparation for future learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 399-432.
2. Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2010). How to foster active processing of explanations in instructional communication. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 25-40.
3. Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO Taxonomy. New York: Academic Press.
4. 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.
5. diSessa, A. A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B. L., & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Meta-representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117-160.
6. Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.
7. Glogger, I., Schwonke, R., Holzäpfel, L., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2012). Learning strategies assessed by journal writing: Prediction of learning outcomes by quantity, quality, and combinations of learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 452-468.
8. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004) Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16, 235-266.
9. Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. (1994). Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1420-1436.
10. Kapur, M. (2010). Productive failure in mathematical problem solving. Instructional Science, 38, 523-550.
11. Kapur, M. (2012). Productive failure in learning the concept of variance. Instructional Science, 40, 651-672.
12. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.
13. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction into statistical mediation analysis. New York: Erlbaum.
14. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. The American Psychologist, 59, 14-19.
15. Norman, G. R., & Schmidt, H. G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67, 557-565.
16. Norton, M. I., Mochon, D., & Ariely, D. (2012). The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22, 453-460.
17. Pintrich, N. E. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
18. Pugh, K. J., & Bergin, D. (2006). Motivational influences on transfer. Educational Psychologist, 41, 147-160.
19. Renkl, A. (2011). Instruction based on examples. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction. New York, NY: Routledge.
20. Roll, I., Holmes, N. G., Day, J., & Bonn, D. (2012). Evaluating metacognitive scaffolding in guided invention activities. Instructional Science, 40, 691-710.
21. 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.
22. Schiefele, U., & Krapp, A. (1996). Topic interest and free recall of expository text. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 141-160.
23. Schmidt, H. G., De Volder, M. L., De Grave, W. S., Moust, J. H. C., & Patel, V. L. (1989). Exploratory models in the processing of science texts: The role of prior knowledge activation through small-group discussion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 610-619
24. Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25, 71-86.
25. Schwartz, D. L., Chase, C. C., Oppezzo, M. A., & Chin, D. B. (2011). Practicing versus inventing with contrasting cases: The effects of telling first on learning and transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103. 759-775.
26. Schwartz, D. L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 129-184.
27. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290-312.
28. Sweller, J. (2006). The worked example effect and human cognition. Learning and Instruction, 16, 165-169.
29. Sweller, J., Kirschner, P., & Clark, R. (2007). Why minimally guided teaching techniques do not work: A reply to commentaries. Educational Psychologist, 42, 115-121.
30. Van Lehn, 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, 209-249.
31. Westermann, K., & Rummel, N. (2012). Delaying instruction: Evidence from a study in a university relearning setting. Instructional Science, 40, 673-689.