Example-based learning: should learners receive closed-book or open-book self-explanation prompts?
- PDF / 1,136,803 Bytes
- 27 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 49 Downloads / 179 Views
Example‑based learning: should learners receive closed‑book or open‑book self‑explanation prompts? Sara Hiller1,3 · Stefan Rumann2 · Kirsten Berthold3 · Julian Roelle1 Received: 23 April 2019 / Accepted: 11 August 2020 © The Author(s) 2020
Abstract In learning from examples, students are often first provided with basic instructional explanations of new principles and concepts and second with examples thereof. In this sequence, it is important that learners self-explain by generating links between the basic instructional explanations’ content and the examples. Therefore, it is well established that learners receive self-explanation prompts. However, there is hardly any research on whether these prompts should be provided in a closed-book format—in which learners cannot access the basic instructional explanations during self-explaining and thus have to retrieve the main content of the instructional explanations that is needed to explain the examples from memory (i.e., retrieval practice)—or in an open-book format in which learners can access the instructional explanations during self-explaining. In two experiments, we varied whether learners received closed- or open-book self-explanation prompts. We also varied whether learners were prompted to actively process the main content of the basic instructional explanations before they proceeded to the self-explanation prompts. When the learners were not prompted to actively process the basic instructional explanations, closed-book prompts yielded detrimental effects on immediate and delayed (1 week) posttest performance. When the learners were prompted to actively process the basic instructional explanations beforehand, closed-book self-explanation prompts were not less beneficial than open-book prompts regarding performance on a delayed posttest. We conclude that at least when the retention interval does not exceed 1 week, closed-book self-explanation prompts do not entail an added value and can even be harmful in comparison to open-book ones. Keywords Example-based learning · Self-explanations · Generative learning activities · Retrieval practice · Prompts
* Julian Roelle julian.roelle@ruhr‑uni‑bochum.de 1
Faculty of Philosophy and Educational Research, Ruhr University Bochum, Universitätsstraße 150, 44801 Bochum, Germany
2
Department of Chemistry Education, University of Duisburg-Essen, Schützenbahn 70, 45127 Essen, Germany
3
Department of Psychology, Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
S. Hiller et al.
Example-based learning is a common and powerful instructional means to introduce learners to new content (e.g., Hoogerheide and Roelle 2020; Van Gog et al. 2019). One highly effective sequence of learning from examples works as follows (see Renkl 2014; Wittwer and Renkl 2010). Firstly, learners are provided instructional explanations that communicate basic knowledge concerning new principles and concepts. Secondly, learners are given examples that illuminate these principles and concepts (e.g., Atk
Data Loading...
