Are instructional explanations more effective in the context of an impasse?
Are instructional explanations more effective in the context of an impasse?
复制标题
在僵局的情况下，指导性解释是否更有效？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. R. Acuña
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
E. Sanchez;H. Garcia;S. R. Acuña
有效的教学解释有助于学生构建连贯的心理表征。要做到这一点，一个条件是它们必须适合学生的需要。据推测，解释是更有帮助的，如果他们也明确地帮助学生发现他们的心理表征的问题，因为这引发了一个僵局，激励学生深入处理的解释。参与者提供了一个基于计算机的材料板块构造，然后与解释性支持的形式，无论是定制的解释之前的impasse-trigger（I + E组）或相同的解释没有impasse-trigger（noI + E组）。在阅读材料后，他们解决了保持和迁移测试;他们有缺陷的想法也被计算在内。I + E组的参与者回忆起更多正确的信息，产生更多的迁移解决方案，并且比noI + E组的参与者表现出更少的错误想法。这表明，量身定制的解释结合impasse-triggers，使文本模型和学生模型之间的明确冲突，确实可以促进深度学习。
Effective instructional explanations help the students to construct coherent mental representations. To do so, one condition is that they must be tailored to students’ needs. It is hypothesized that explanations are more helpful if they also explicitly aid the students to detect problems in their mental representations, as this provokes an impasse that motivates students to process the explanation deeply. Participants were provided with a computer-based material on plate tectonics and then with explanatory support in the form of either a tailored explanation preceded by an impasse-trigger (I + E group) or an identical explanation without the impasse-trigger (noI + E group). After the reading of the materials they solved retention and transfer tests; their flawed ideas were also counted. Participants in the I + E group recalled more correct information, generated more transfer solutions, and showed fewer flawed ideas than those in the noI + E group. This indicates that tailored explanations combined with impasse-triggers that make explicit conflicts between the text model and the students′ models can indeed foster deep learning.