Individual and group-based learning from complex cognitive tasks: Effects on retention and transfer efficiency

Abstract

The effects of individual versus group learning (in triads) on efficiency of retention and transfer test performance in the domain of biology (heredity) among 70 high-school students were investigated. Applying cognitive load theory, the limitations of the working memory capacity at the individual level were considered an important reason to assign complex learning tasks to groups rather than to individuals. It was hypothesized that groups will have more processing capacity available for relating the information elements to each other and by doing so for constructing higher quality cognitive schemata than individuals if the high cognitive load imposed by complex learning tasks could be shared among group members. In contrast, it was expected that individuals who learn from carrying out the same complex tasks would need all available processing capacity for remembering the interrelated information elements, and, consequently, would not be able to allocate resources to working with them. This interaction hypothesis was confirmed by the data on efficiency of retention and transfer test performance; there was a favorable relationship between mental effort and retention test performance for the individual learners as opposed to a favorable relationship between transfer test performance and mental effort for the students who learned in groups. Collaborative learning models are based on the premise that certain types of learning are best achieved interactively rather than through a one-way transmission process (Johnston, James, Lye, & McDonald, 2000;Littleton & Häkkinen, 1999;Slavin, 1983Slavin, , 1995Veerman & Veldhuis-Diermanse, 2001;Weigel, 2002). Although collaborative learning is emerging as a promising educational approach, research on its effects on learning has been highly inconclusive (Kester & Paas, 2005). We believe that these inconclusive results have, among other things, been caused by a lack of attention to the structures constituting human cognitive architecture (Sweller, 1988;Sweller, Van Merriënboer, & Paas, 1998) when designing collaborative learning environments.Research stressing the potential of collaborative learning shows that collaborative learning environments can stimulate and/or enable learners to engage in activities that are valuable for learning. Activities such as self-directed learning, negotiating meaning (Beers, Boshuizen, & Kirschner, 2007;Kirschner, Beers, Boshuizen, & Gijselaers, 2008), verbalizing explanations, justifications and reflections, giving mutual support (Van Boxtel, Van der Linden, & Kanselaar, 2000), and developing arguments about complex problems or propositions (Munneke, Andriessen, Kanselaar, & Kirschner, 2007) have been found to facilitate the learning process. Collaborative learning has also been shown to help learners retain the learned information longer (Morgan, Whorton, & Gunsalus, 2000) and to foster their higher-order skills more than in more traditional lecture-based learning environments (Sloffer, Dueber, & Duffy, 1999). It is important to note that...

From Cognitive Load Theory to Collaborative Cognitive Load Theory

“…This entails achieving agreement on task-related strategies, dividing tasks between participants, identifying and resolving conflicts, building upon each other's ideas, achieving consensus, and establishing chronological order of activities (Baker 2002;Erkens et al, 2006;Fransen et al 2013;Mayordomo and Onrubia 2015;Popov et al 2017). This communication and coordination brings with it costs to the learners in terms of cognitive load (Ciborra & Olson, 1988;F. Kirschner et al 2009b;Yamane, 1996).…”

The Role of Personal and Shared Displays in Scripted Collaborative Learning

“…Retention tasks have been used to determine how much was learnt in various cases (e.g. by Kirschner et al, 2009). Participants were asked to note down all arguments they remember.…”

The psychological dimension of transformation in teacher learning

“…Successful group task completion permits group members (Janssen et al, 2010) each to increase flexibility and transferability in their own knowledge and skills provided the task requires problem solution rather than unprocessed recall of stored information (F. Kirschner et al, 2009). The extent to which learners give and receive help, share knowledge, justify their ideas and build on peer contributions is mediated through the metacognitions of the participants who elaborate, question, explain, correct and reconcile relevant knowledge proffered by individual group members.…”

“…Importantly in educational settings the teacher's model of how to interact with particular learners (in other words how teachers transforms disciplinary knowledge) derives from teachers' own metacognition (Kramarski & Revach, 2009). At the same time, their management of the learning environment requires teachers to configure particular tasks, particular learners, particular materials and media to enable all learners to actively contribute to the attainment of mutual learning goals, to share effort to reach these goals together, and to learn from this combined effort (Janssen, Kirschner, Erkens, Kirschner, & Paas, 2010;F. Kirschner, Paas, & Kirschner, 2009).…”