Elaborative interrogation applied to small and large group contexts

Abstract

The present study examined the application of elaborative interrogation (EI), a questioning strategy, to ecologically valid classroom contexts. Instruction was provided to individuals, small groups of five, and large groups of 20. Recall performance did not differ as a function of group size. For individuals, small and large groups, EI subjects outperformed repetition control subjects.Acquiring facts is an important but often difficult educational requirement, one made easier by a verbal learning strategy called elaborative interrogation [(EI)--e.g., Pressley, McDaniel, Turnure, Wood and Ahmad, 1987; Pressley, Symons, McDaniel, Snyder and Turnure, 19881. This elaboration strategy involves 'why' questions that encourage learners to draw upon available prior knowledge to try to understand to-be-learned facts. In attempting to answer the 'why' questions, the learner generates an elaboration that makes the facts more sensible. Memory improves, probably because attempting to answer 'why' questions orients learners to prior knowledge consistent with the to-be-learned facts, knowledge that the learner would not activate in the absence of the 'why' question (see Martin and Pressley, 1991).In general, the research to date has supported the potency of EI for fact learning for both adult and grade-school populations (Woloshyn, Willoughby, Wood, and Pressley, 1990;Wood, Pressley and Winne, 1990). For example, Pressley et al. (1987) presented undergraduates with sentences describing different types of men engaged in various activities. Two conditions were compared: a base control condition where the type of men and action pairings were arbitrary (e.g. 'The hungry man got into the car') and an EI condition where the base sentences were followed by 'why' questions (e.g. 'Why did that particular man do that?'). Half of the subjects were aware of the upcoming recall task (intentional learning) and half were instructed to rate how easy the sentences were to understand (incidental learning). The effects of providing precise elaborations were moderate and confined to subjects receiving incidental learning instructions. Subjects asked to generate answers to the 'why'

Facilitating Learning From Technology-Enhanced Text: Effects of Prompted Elaborative Interrogation

“…Researchers found greater retention with EI strategies in young learners , adolescents (Wood, Willoughby, Kaspar, & Idel, 1994), and adults (Pressley et al, 1988), regardless of presentation formats such as isolated facts (Pressley et al, 1988), sequential facts (Willoughby et al, 1993), paragraphs versus isolated facts (Woloshyn, Willoughby, Wood, & Pressley, 1990), and paragraphs (Seiffert, 1993). EI is a versatile strategy that has been taught explicitly to learners (Wood, Fler, & Willoughby, 1992) and implemented as a text supplement for learners (e.g., Boudreau, Wood, Willoughby, & Sprecht, 1999;Seiffert, 1993).…”

Considering prior knowledge when using elaborative interrogation

“…Learning gains were obtained with varying presentation formats (paragraph versus isolated facts; Woloshyn et al, 1990;paragraphs;Seifert, 1992; sequential facts, Willoughby, Waller, Wood, and MacKinnon, in press) and in diverse study contexts (e.g. individual versus group instruction; Wood, Fler, and Willoughby, 1992).…”

When can a lack of structure facilitate strategic processing of information?

“…Previous research supports the suggestion that students asked to employ elaborative interrogation may spontaneously use alternative strategies in addition to elaborative interrogation while studying. For example, students' self-reports indicated that elaborative interrogation also led to the use of imagery, mnemonic, and other sophisticated procedures (Wood, Fler, & Willoughby, 1992). Perhaps, as Siegler (1998) suggests, when a complex strategy is first acquired, it is often used in conjunction with other strategies.…”