Using Subgoal Learning and Self-Explanation to Improve Programming Education
Using Subgoal Learning and Self-Explanation to Improve Programming Education
复制标题
使用子目标学习和自我解释来改进编程教育
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Catrambone
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lauren E. Margulieux;R. Catrambone
本研究将子目标学习与自我解释框架相结合，以提高问题解决绩效。子目标学习已被用于促进程序领域的保留和迁移，如编程。然而，学习子目标的主要方法是通过被动学习方法，而被动学习方法通常不如建设性学习方法有效。为了促进学习子目标的建设性方法，使用子目标学习框架来指导自我解释。自我解释是一种有效的方法，让学习者在已有知识和逻辑推理的基础上理解新信息。当学习者接受一些指导时，自我解释通常更有效，特别是如果他们是新手，因为它有助于他们将注意力集中在相关信息上。在本研究中，只有部分建构性学习方法比被动学习方法产生更好的问题解决绩效。当学习者进行建设性学习并收到有关程序子目标的提示或收到对他们构建的自我解释的反馈时，他们的表现最好，但当他们同时收到提示和反馈时，情况就不是这样了。当学生接受两种类型的指导时，他们的表现并不比那些通过被动学习方法学习子目标的学生好。这些研究结果表明，建设性学习的子目标，可以进一步提高学习子目标的好处，但有一个最佳水平的指导学生从事建设性学习。提供太多的指导和提供太少的指导一样有害。这种细微差别对于那些让学生参与建设性学习和自我解释的教育工作者来说非常重要，以认识和促进最佳结果。
The present study combined subgoal learning and self-explanation frameworks to improve problem solving performance. Subgoal learning has been used to promote retention and transfer in procedural domains, such as programming. The primary method for learning subgoals, however, has been through passive learning methods, and passive learning methods are typically less effective than constructive learning methods. To promote constructive methods of learning subgoals, a subgoal learning framework was used to guide self-explanation. Self-explanation is an effective method for engaging learners to make sense of new information based on prior knowledge and logical reasoning. Self-explanation is typically more effective when learners receive some guidance, especially if they are novices, because it helps them to focus their attention on relevant information. In the present study, only some of the constructive learning methods produced better problem solving performance than passive learning methods. Learners performed best when they learned constructively and either received hints about the subgoals of the procedure or received feedback on the self-explanations that they constructed, but not when they received both hints and feedback. When students received both types of guidance, they did not perform better than those who learned subgoals through passive learning methods. These findings suggest that constructive learning of subgoals can further improve the benefits of learning subgoals, but there is an optimal level of guidance for students engaging in constructive learning. Providing too much guidance can be as detrimental as providing too little. This nuance is important for educators who engage their students in constructive learning and self-explanation to recognize and promote the best results.