Self-regulated learning of principle-based concepts: Do students prefer worked examples, faded examples, or problem solving?

Foster, Nathaniel L.; Rawson, Katherine A.; Dunlosky, John

doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.10.002

Cited by 39 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Self-regulated learning research suggests that students prefer to start with a problem instead of an example, however. Foster et al (2018) showed that when given the choice, the majority of learners selected a problem as their first task. However, prior to their decision to study a problem instead of an example, participants had received an instructional text, which would have allowed them to acquire some knowledge of the tasks and may have given them the confidence to select a problem instead of an example.…”

Section: Cognitive and Motivational Explanations For Effects Of Exampmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of problem–example and example–problem pairs on gifted and nongifted primary school students’ learning

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Example-based learning (i.e., studying examples to learn a problem-solution procedure, often alternated with solving practice problems) leads to better learning outcomes than solving practice problems only, and video examples are increasingly being used in online and blended learning environments. Recent findings show that the presentation order of examples and problems affects learning: Example-problem pairs have been found to be more effective than problem-example pairs. We investigated a motivational explanation for this difference, which states that starting with a practice problem might be too difficult, causing learners to lose confidence and motivation to study. We investigated this by presenting gifted (n = 61) and nongifted primary school students (n = 65) with two problem-example or example-problem pairs. We hypothesized that gifted students, who generally report higher perceived competence and autonomy and higher need for cognition, would be less affected by the difficulty of starting with a problem. As expected, gifted students indeed reported higher motivation and confidence than nongifted students, and gifted students were more efficient learners. In contrast to our expectations, however, there was no difference between gifted and nongifted students in the effect of the different task sequences on test performance. Studying example-problem pairs was more efficient than studying problem-example pairs, both for gifted and nongifted students.

show abstract

Section: Cognitive and Motivational Explanations For Effects Of Exampmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of problem–example and example–problem pairs on gifted and nongifted primary school students’ learning

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, through a series of three experiments, Foster, Rawson, and Dunlosky (2018) demonstrated that self‐regulated learners were more likely to attempt problem solving before seeking any help, and were more likely to seek partial examples than worked examples after an unsuccessful problem‐solving attempt. Using cluster analyses of 1,138 students' engagement in an Engineering course, Fincham et al (2019) found four clusters of students who differed in terms of their self‐regulation strategies.…”

Section: Theoretical Background: Self‐regulated Learning and Its Scafmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual differences in the preference for worked examples: Lessons from an application of dispositional learning analytics

Tempelaar

Rienties

Nguyen

2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Worked‐examples have been established as an effective instructional format in problem‐solving practices. However, less is known about variations in the use of worked examples across individuals at different stages in their learning process in student‐centred learning contexts. This study investigates different profiles of students' learning behaviours based on clustering learning dispositions, prior knowledge, and the choice of feedback strategies in a naturalistic setting. The study was conducted on 1,072 students over an 8‐week long introductory mathematics course in a blended instructional format. While practising exercises in a digital learning environment, students can opt for tutored problem solving, untutored problem solving, or call worked examples. The results indicated six distinct profiles of learners regarding their feedback preferences in different learning phases. Finally, we investigated antecedents and consequences of these profiles and investigated the adequacy of used feedback strategies concerning ‘help‐abuse’. This research indicates that the use of instructional scaffolds as worked‐examples or hints and the efficiency of that use differs from student to student, making the attempt to find patterns at an overall level a hazardous endeavour.

show abstract

“…In the first step, learners receive instructional explanations explicating the basic declarative knowledge regarding new principles and concepts. In the second step, learners study worked examples, which instantiate the to‐be‐learned principles or concepts in a specific context and which include a solution (e.g., Berthold & Renkl, ; Foster, Rawson, & Dunlosky, ; Roelle, Hiller, Berthold, & Rumann, ; van Gog, Paas, & van Merriënboer, ). For learning from worked examples to be effective (e.g., in comparison to problem solving), it is essential that learners focus on the structural features of the examples and relate them to the previously received instructional explanations.…”

Section: Providing Worked Examples For Learning Multiple Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Providing worked examples for learning multiple principles

Schalk

Roelle

Saalbach

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Worked examples support learning. However, if they introduce easy‐to‐confuse concepts or principles, specific ways of providing worked examples may influence their effectiveness. Multiple worked examples can be introduced blocked (i.e., several for the same principle) or interleaved (i.e., switching between principles), and can be sequentially or simultaneously presented. Crossing these two factors provides four ways of presenting worked examples: blocked/sequential, interleaved/sequential, blocked/simultaneous, and interleaved/simultaneous. In an experiment with university students (N = 174), we investigated how these two factors influence the acquisition of procedural and conceptual knowledge about different, but closely related (thus, easy‐to‐confuse) stochastic principles. Additionally, we assessed the ability of students to discriminate between principles with verification tasks. Simultaneous presentation benefitted procedural knowledge whereas, interleaved presentation benefitted conceptual knowledge. No significant differences were found for verification tasks. The results suggest that it is worthwhile to adapt the presentation of the worked examples to the learning goals.

show abstract

Self-regulated learning of principle-based concepts: Do students prefer worked examples, faded examples, or problem solving?

Cited by 39 publications

References 42 publications

Effects of problem–example and example–problem pairs on gifted and nongifted primary school students’ learning

Effects of problem–example and example–problem pairs on gifted and nongifted primary school students’ learning

Individual differences in the preference for worked examples: Lessons from an application of dispositional learning analytics

Providing worked examples for learning multiple principles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About