Lasting Learning in Physics by Constructive Retrieval

在物理教学中，学生要理解内容，运用所学知识解决新问题(迁移)。此外，他们应该在更长的时间内记住这一知识(保持)。理想情况下，教师应该同时培养这两个目标的实现(迁移和保持)，为将来的学习做准备(例如，使直线运动中力和运动之间的联系的概念性知识可用于以后学习旋转运动)。尽管同时实现这两个目标是相关的，但它们的实现通常是在不同的研究领域进行调查。例如，在检索实践研究中研究了知识巩固(保持)，在生成性学习研究中分析了理解学习和迁移。在这个项目中，我们将提取练习和生成性学习(这里：关注自我解释和示例比较)结合在物理教学中，以测试我们是否能够在事实保持、迁移和为未来学习做准备方面培养持久的学习结果(即延迟八周)。更具体地说，我们测试了这样一种假设，即仅仅是提取需求和促进生成性学习活动(也称为建构性提取)的组合就会导致持久的学习结果。我们解决了以下主要研究问题：(A)能否通过结合提取需求和自我解释提示来培养持久的学习结果？这种效应是否同时受到心理努力和自我解释品质的影响？(实验1)。(B)当学生被告知这些学习任务的基本原理(知情培训原则)时，学生是否更好地利用了需要提取的学习任务(即投入心力)和促使自我解释(即提供良好的自我解释)的学习任务？这样做能更好地促进持久的学习效果吗？(实验2)。(C)结合提取和生成性学习活动对持久学习结果的影响是否受到提示生成性学习活动的复杂性的影响(提示自我解释与提示示例比较；后者对学生来说更复杂)？(实验3)。(D)我们的教学程序(即提取要求、自我解释提示、示例比较提示和知情培训)的效果是否受学习者动机目标定向的影响？(实验1-3)。此外，我们在本研究单位内复制了一个伙伴项目的实验(实验。4)。我们在“体育馆”(11年级)进行力学教学的现场实验，教授与学校相关的重要知识。总体而言，我们的目标是通过结合不同研究领域的教学程序(即检索实践和生成性学习)来获得关于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).