Lasting Learning in Physics by Constructive Retrieval

在物理教学中，学生应该理解内容，以便他们能够利用他们的知识解决新问题（转移）。此外，他们应该长时间记住这些知识（保留）。理想情况下，教师应该同时促进两个目标（转移和保留）的实现，为将来的学习做准备（例如，使关于线性运动中力和运动之间联系的概念性知识对以后学习旋转运动有用）。尽管同时解决这两个目标具有相关性，但它们的实现通常是在不同的研究领域进行调查的。例如，在检索实践研究中研究了知识巩固（保留），在生成学习研究中分析了理解和迁移的学习。在这个项目中，我们在物理教学中结合检索练习和生成学习（这里：注重自我解释和例子比较）来测试我们是否可以因此在事实保留、迁移和为未来学习做准备方面培养持久的学习成果（即八周的延迟）。更具体地说，我们测试了这样一个假设，即仅仅是检索需求和促进生成式学习活动（也称为建设性检索）的结合，就能产生持久的学习结果。我们研究了以下主要问题：(A)结合检索要求和自我解释提示是否可以促进持久的学习成果？这种效应是否同时受到心理努力和自我解释的影响？（实验1）(B)当学习者被告知这些学习任务的基本原理（知情训练原则）时，学生是否能更好地利用需要检索的学习任务（即投入精神努力）和需要自我解释的学习任务（即提供良好的自我解释）？这种更好的使用是否会带来更好的持久学习效果？(C)提示生成性学习活动的复杂性（提示自我解释vs提示例子比较，后者对学生来说更复杂）是否会调节检索和生成性学习活动结合对持久学习结果的影响？（实验3）(D)我们的教学程序（即检索要求、自我解释提示、例子比较提示和知情训练）的效果是否受到学习者动机目标取向的调节？(实验1 - 3)。此外，我们在目前的研究单位（实验4）内复制了一个合作伙伴项目的实验。我们在“体育馆”（11年级）的力学教学中进行实地实验，教授学校重要的相关知识。总的来说，我们的目标是通过结合不同研究领域（即检索实践和生成学习）的教学过程来获得如何优化学习的见解。

In physics instruction, students should understand the content so that they can use their knowledge to solve new problems (transfer). In addition, they should remember this knowledge for longer periods (retention). Ideally, teachers should foster the attainment of both goals (transfer and retention) simultaneously to prepare for future learning (e.g., to make conceptual knowledge about the connection between force and motion in linear motion usable for later learning about rotational motion). Despite the relevance of addressing the two goals simultaneously, their attainment is usually investiga¬ted in separate research fields. For example, knowledge consolidation (retention) is studied in research on retrieval practice and learning for understanding and transfer is analyzed in research on generative learning. In this project, we combine retrieval practice and generative learning (here: focus on self-explanation and on example comparison) in physics instruction to test whether we can thereby foster lasting learning outcomes (i.e., delay of eight weeks) with respect to factual retention, transfer, and preparation for future learning. More specifically, we test the assumption that just the combination of both retrieval demands and prompting generative learning activities—also called constructive retrieval—leads to lasting learning outcomes. We address the following main research questions: (A) Can lasting learning outcomes be fostered by combining retrieval demands and self-explanation prompting? Is this effect mediated by both mental effort and self-explanation quality? (Exp. 1). (B) Do students make better use of learning tasks that demand retrieval (i.e., investing mental effort) and of learning tasks that prompt self-explanations (i.e., providing good self-explanations) when learners are informed about the rationale of these learning tasks (principle of informed training)? Does this better use mediate better lasting learning outcomes? (Exp. 2). (C) Are the effects of combining retrieval and generative learning activities on lasting learning outcomes moderated by the complexity of the prompted generative learning activity (prompting self-explanation vs. prompting example comparison; the latter being more complex for students)? (Exp. 3). (D) Are the effects of our instructional procedures (i.e., retrieval demands, self-explanation prompting, example comparison prompting, and informed training) moderated by learners’ motivational goal orientations? (Exp. 1-3). In addition, we replicate an experiment of a partner project within the present Research Unit (Exp. 4). We conduct our field experiments in mechanics instruction at "Gymnasiums" (11th grade), teaching important school-relevant knowledge. Overall, we aim to gain insights about how to optimize learning by combining instructional procedures from different research fields (i.e., retrieval practice and generative learning).