the psychology of learning and motivation - Percepts and Concepts ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Power of Comparison in Learning and Instruction 2012. COMPARISON TYPES USED IN PAST RESEARCHWe used the existing literature on how comparison supports learningin problem-solving domains to develop the framework in Table 1.Most past research can be classified as using one of five comparison types,identified in the columns of the table. Four characteristics that distinguishthe comparison types, as well as a sample reflection prompt, are indicatedin the rows of the table. The first distinction is the comparison goal,ranging from when one can use a solution method to what concept theexamples share (row 2). The second distinction is the features ofthe examples being compared (row 3). Often, the examples are workedexamples—a problem statement along with a step by step solution to theproblem. The to-be-compared worked examples can vary in (a) whetherthe problem is the same or different and (b) whether the solution methodis the same or different. Alternatively, rather than using worked examples,the examples can be instances of the same concept. The third distinction isthe focus of the comparison, ranging from a focus on how one problemdiffers from another to why one method works and one does not (row 4).The fourth distinction is the learning outcomes typically supported bythe comparison (row 5). For example, consider problem comparison(column 2). Comparing different problems solved using the same solutionmethod, with a focus on when a particular method can be used, has beenshown to support transfer of the method to new problems (e.g., Gick &Holyoak, 1983). In contrast, comparing different correct methods forsolving the same problem, with a focus on the efficiency of the methods(i.e., correct method comparison, column 4), has been shown to supportprocedural flexibility (e.g., Rittle-Johnson & Star, 2007). Thus, a varietyof things can be compared for a variety of reasons, each supporting adifferent learning outcome. In the final row of the table, we provide asample reflection prompt used in past research to help illustrate each typeof comparison. Note that this framework and review of the literature isnot meant to be exhaustive, but rather is meant to capture key features ofexisting studies on comparison in problem-solving domains. Next, weprovide details on each type of comparison.2.1. Problem ComparisonOne of the earliest studied types of comparison is comparing two differentproblems solved with the same method (i.e., problem comparison—seecolumn 2 in Table 1). The goal is to support learning of a general solutionmethod. This type of comparison has been well studied in the analogicallearning literature. For example, adults were asked to read stories abouttwo problems solved with the same method and to ‘‘list all the important
202 Bethany Rittle-Johnson and Jon R. StarTable 1 Distinctions Between Five Types of Comparisons Used in Past Research.Distinction Comparison typeProblem Problem category Correct method Incorrect method ConceptComparison goal When can you use it? How do theseproblems differ?Features ofexamplesFocus ofcomparisonLearningoutcomesupportedSample reflectionpromptDifferent problems,solved with thesame methodWhen a method canbe used based onsimilarities in themethod acrossproblemsSolve new problemsusing the targetmethod (i.e.,transfer)‘‘List all the importantsimilarities you canthink of in the methodsused to capture thefortress and put outthe fire.’’ (fromCatrambone &Holyoak, 1989)Problems fromdifferent categories,solved withdifferent methodsHow one problemdiffers from anotherDistinguish betweeneasily confusableproblem categories‘‘What is thedistinguishingcharacteristic betweenthe combinations andpermutationsformulas?’’ (based onVanderStoep & Seifert,1993)Which is better? Which is correct? What concept dothey share?Same problem solvedwith two differentcorrect methodsWhen and why onemethod is moreefficient or easierKnow multiplemethods and usemost appropriatemethod(i.e., proceduralflexibility)‘‘__________’s wayis better on thisproblem because:’’(from Rittle-Johnson& Star, 2009)Same problemsolved with acorrect and anincorrect methodWhy one methodworks and onedoes notMakemisconceptionerrors less oftenand use correctmethods moreoften‘‘How do youknow whichway is correct?’’(from Durkin,2009)Differentexamples of thesame conceptWhat key idea theexamples shareKnow keyconcept(s)‘‘How is the equalsign like thegreater than andless thansymbols?’’(based onHattikudur &Alibali, 2010)
Page 3 and 4:
Series EditorBRIAN H. ROSSBeckman I
Page 5 and 6:
Academic Press is an imprint of Els
Page 7 and 8:
viContents3. Science of Multimedia
Page 9 and 10:
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Page 11 and 12:
xContributorsHenry L. Roediger, III
Page 13 and 14:
xiiPrefaceand there has been much e
Page 15 and 16:
xivPrefaceInterventions for improvi
Page 17 and 18:
2 Henry L. Roediger et al.delayed t
Page 19 and 20:
4 Henry L. Roediger et al.an indire
Page 21 and 22:
6 Henry L. Roediger et al.[(Figure_
Page 23 and 24:
8 Henry L. Roediger et al.[(Figure_
Page 25 and 26:
10 Henry L. Roediger et al.seems so
Page 27 and 28:
12 Henry L. Roediger et al.interpre
Page 29 and 30:
14 Henry L. Roediger et al.Table 2
Page 31 and 32:
16 Henry L. Roediger et al.improved
Page 33 and 34:
18 Henry L. Roediger et al.this mat
Page 35 and 36:
20 Henry L. Roediger et al.length o
Page 37 and 38:
22 Henry L. Roediger et al.9. BENEF
Page 39 and 40:
24 Henry L. Roediger et al.subjects
Page 41 and 42:
26 Henry L. Roediger et al.feedback
Page 43 and 44:
28 Henry L. Roediger et al.supporti
Page 45 and 46:
30 Henry L. Roediger et al.of some
Page 47 and 48:
32 Henry L. Roediger et al.Benefit
Page 49 and 50:
34 Henry L. Roediger et al.Hasher,
Page 51 and 52:
36 Henry L. Roediger et al.Son, L.
Page 53 and 54:
38 John Sweller1. INTRODUCTIONCogni
Page 55 and 56:
40 John Sweller‘‘baby-talk.’
Page 57 and 58:
42 John Swellerof cognitive or meta
Page 59 and 60:
44 John SwellerTable 1Natural Infor
Page 61 and 62:
46 John Swellerconfigurations. A ch
Page 63 and 64:
48 John Swellerreproduction results
Page 65 and 66:
50 John Swellerto mutation, without
Page 67 and 68:
52 John Swellerusing a complex or,
Page 69 and 70:
54 John SwellerThe human cognitive
Page 71 and 72:
56 John Swellerepigenetic system ha
Page 73 and 74:
58 John SwellerWe can determine lev
Page 75 and 76:
60 John Swellerthan memorizing the
Page 77 and 78:
62 John SwellerTable 2EffectVariabi
Page 79 and 80:
64 John Swelleroccurs when students
Page 81 and 82:
66 John Sweller3.3.3. The Split-Att
Page 83 and 84:
68 John Swellermerely restates the
Page 85 and 86:
70 John SwellerThe expertise revers
Page 87 and 88:
72 John Swellerobtained a reverse m
Page 89 and 90:
74 John Swelleractivities that othe
Page 91 and 92:
76 John SwellerRenkl, A. (2005). Th
Page 93 and 94:
78 Richard E. Mayercognitive theory
Page 95 and 96:
80 Richard E. Mayerpictures beginni
Page 97 and 98:
82 Richard E. MayerThe dualchannelp
Page 99 and 100:
84 Richard E. Mayerlearner selects
Page 101 and 102:
86 Richard E. MayerRosenthal, Rosno
Page 103 and 104:
88 Richard E. MayerGenerative proce
Page 105 and 106:
90 Richard E. Mayer4.2. Evidence-ba
Page 107 and 108:
92 Richard E. Mayersituation could
Page 109 and 110:
94 Richard E. Mayer(Moreno & Mayer,
Page 111 and 112:
96 Richard E. Mayer4.3.1. Segmentin
Page 113 and 114:
98 Richard E. Mayerpresenting the w
Page 115 and 116:
100 Richard E. MayerThe multimedia
Page 117 and 118:
102 Richard E. Mayergame in industr
Page 119 and 120:
104 Richard E. MayerClark, R. C., &
Page 121 and 122:
106 Richard E. MayerMayer, R. E., &
Page 123 and 124:
108 Richard E. MayerSweller, J. (19
Page 125:
110 Timothy J. Nokes and Daniel M.
Page 128 and 129:
Incorporating Motivation into a The
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
CHAPTERFIVEOn the Interplay of Emot
Page 154 and 155:
Implications for Enhancing Academic
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167: Implications for Enhancing Academic
Page 186 and 187: CHAPTERSIXThere Is Nothing So Pract
Page 188 and 189: There Is Nothing So Practical as a
Page 214 and 215: CHAPTERSEVENThe Power of Comparison
Page 218 and 219: The Power of Comparison in Learning
Page 242 and 243: CHAPTEREIGHTThe Ubiquitous Patterns
Page 244 and 245: The Ubiquitous Patterns of Incorrec
Page 266 and 267:
The Ubiquitous Patterns of Incorrec
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
CHAPTERNINEConceptual Problem Solvi
Page 286 and 287:
Conceptual Problem Solving in Physi
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
IndexAAcademic performancedrive the
Page 316 and 317:
Index 301Correct method comparison,
Page 318 and 319:
Index 303LLabor in vain, 28Language
Page 320 and 321:
Index 305OOntological categories of
Page 322 and 323:
Index 307WWeb-delivered multimedia
Page 324 and 325:
CONTENTS OF RECENT VOLUMESVolume 40
Page 326 and 327:
Contents of Recent Volumes 311Under
Page 328 and 329:
Contents of Recent Volumes 313Volum
show all

the psychology of learning and motivation - Percepts and Concepts ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?