Abstract
Although instructional explanations are commonly provided when learners are introduced to new content, they often fail because they are not integrated into effective learning activities. The recently introduced active-constructive-interactive framework posits an effectiveness hierarchy in which interactive learning activities are at the top; these are then followed by constructive and active learning activities, respectively. Against this background, we combined instructional explanations with different types of prompts that were designed to elicit these learning activities and tested the central predictions of the active-constructive-interactive framework. In Experiment 1, N = 83 students were randomly assigned to one of four combinations of instructional explanations and prompts. To test the active < constructive learning hypothesis, the learners received either (1) complete explanations and engaging prompts designed to elicit active activities or (2) explanations that were reduced by inferences and inference prompts designed to engage learners in constructing the withheld information. Furthermore, in order to explore how interactive learning activities can be elicited, we gave the learners who had difficulties in constructing the prompted inferences adapted remedial explanations with either (3) unspecific engaging prompts or (4) revision prompts. In support of the active < constructive learning hypothesis, we found that the learners who received reduced explanations and inference prompts outperformed the learners who received complete explanations and engaging prompts. Moreover, revision prompts were more effective in eliciting interactive learning activities than engaging prompts. In Experiment 2, N = 40 students were randomly assigned to either (1) a reduced explanations and inference prompts or (2) a reduced explanations and inference prompts plus adapted remedial explanations and revision prompts condition. In support of the constructive < interactive learning hypothesis, the learners who received adapted remedial explanations and revision prompts as add-ons to reduced explanations and inference prompts acquired more conceptual knowledge.
Highlights
Written introductory instructional explanations are a common means of introducing learners to new learning content in several media including, for instance, textbooks or computer-based learning environments [1,2]; they include explicit basic information on the new content that is supposed to be learned
The main findings from Experiment 1 were: (a) In support of the active < constructive learning hypothesis, inference prompts were more beneficial for the acquisition of conceptual knowledge than engaging prompts even though the latter were combined with complete explanations that explicitly included the inferences that were addressed by the inference prompts
In line with the active < constructive via generation hypothesis, the process of learners generating information on their own mediated the superiority of reduced explanations and inference prompts over complete explanations and engaging prompts. (b) In support of the inconsistent mediation via errors hypothesis, providing reduced explanations and inference prompts rather than complete explanations and engaging prompts yielded inconsistent mediational effects on the acquisition of conceptual knowledge because it led to an increase in the number of beneficial self-generated inferences, and in the number of detrimental errors. (c) Revision prompts were better at fostering the elicitation of interactive learning activities while processing adapted remedial explanations than engaging prompts
Summary
Written introductory instructional explanations are a common means of introducing learners to new learning content in several media including, for instance, textbooks or computer-based learning environments [1,2]; they include explicit basic information on the new content (e.g., new concepts and principles) that is supposed to be learned. Berthold and Renkl [1] argued that mental passivity on part of the learners is an important underlying reason for the frequent failure of instructional explanations On this basis, they suggested that integrating instructional components designed to elicit learning activities—such as prompts [4,5]—could be a viable approach to overcome this problem. They suggested that integrating instructional components designed to elicit learning activities—such as prompts [4,5]—could be a viable approach to overcome this problem These works highlight the importance of integrating instructional explanations into meaningful learning activities, they do not provide any differentiated suggestions regarding the type of learning activities in which learners should be required to engage
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
