Do Judgments of Learning Directly Enhance Learning of Educational Materials?
Do Judgments of Learning Directly Enhance Learning of Educational Materials?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10648-020-09556-8
复制
发表时间：
2020-07-30
影响因子：
10.1
通讯作者：
Tauber, Sarah K.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ariel, Robert;Karpicke, Jeffrey D.;Tauber, Sarah K.
当人们在研究配对的同伴后做出学习判断（JOL）时，他们参与监测学习的过程可以直接增强对某些类型材料的学习（Soderstrom et al.2015）。目前的实验调查是否JOL直接提高学习教育相关的文本。在5个实验中（N = 703），人们阅读了教育教科书的几个部分，每个部分之间嵌入或不嵌入JOL。我们操纵JOLs是否询问一个人的理解的文本在聚合水平（实验1）或文本中的特定概念（实验2a，2b，3和4）。我们还操纵是否JOL的框架，以提供内隐检索的做法，促使判断与目标信息的存在或不存在（实验3）。在大多数情况下，指导学生做JOL并没有提高理解力，而不仅仅是阅读文本。然而，当人们被指示检索信息之前，使JOL（实验4），大的学习收益发生。这些结果表明，在他们的标准形式的JOL不太可能产生教育的好处，部分是因为学习者不自发地检索标准信息时，作出元压缩判断的文本理解。
When people make judgments of learning (JOLs) after studying paired associates, the process they engage in to monitor their learning can directly enhance learning for some types of material (Soderstrom et al.2015). The current experiments investigated whether JOLs directly enhance learning educationally relevant texts. Across 5 experiments (N = 703), people read several sections of an educational textbook with or without JOLs embedded between each section. We manipulated whether JOLs queried one's understanding of the text at the aggregate level (Experiment 1) or for specific concepts in the text (Experiment 2a, 2b, 3, and 4). We also manipulated whether JOLs were framed to afford covert retrieval practice by prompting judgments with either the target information present or absent (Experiment 3). In most cases, instructing students to make JOLs did not improve comprehension above and beyond just reading the text. However, when people were instructed to retrieve information prior to making JOLs (Experiment 4), large learning gains occurred. These results indicate that JOLs in their standard form are unlikely to produce educational benefits to text comprehension in part because learners do not spontaneously retrieve criterial information when making metacomprehension judgments.