首页> 外文会议>International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction >Productive Failure and Subgoal Scaffolding in Novel Domains
【24h】

Productive Failure and Subgoal Scaffolding in Novel Domains

机译:新型域中的生产失败和子脚轮脚手架

获取原文

摘要

The assistance dilemma asks how learning environments should "balance information or assistance giving and withholding" (Koedinger and Aleven 2007, p. 239). Minimal guidance (MG) methods posit that students learn best when exploring problems freely, while direct instruction (DI) methods provide canonical solutions early on to streamline students' efforts (problems later). Each method type provides unique benefits, but both are important (Schwartz and Martin 2004) and not easily delivered together. A relatively new MG-based method called "productive failure" (PF) is hypothesized to capture both sets of benefits by requiring students to struggle through problems early on and revealing canonical solutions afterward (Kapur 2008). Students using PF are hypothesized to more effectively transfer and retain information because balancing heuristics and formal knowledge produces diverse solution attempts (diSessa and Sherin 2000) and struggling during exploration pushes students to fill knowledge gaps (Kulhavy and Stock 1989). In the present studies, participants learned to perform tasks in two domains, cryptarithmetic (more traditional) and Rubik's Cube (psychomotor, less traditional) while using either PF or DI. Analyses revealed that (A) PF participants did not outperform DI participants on either immediate post-tests or retention tests, although they did report being more exploration-oriented and trying more unique strategies, (B) subgoal labels increased learning, but only for the relatively novel Rubik's Cube domain (and they sometimes increased workload in cryptarithmetic, surprisingly), and (C) effects of subgoal labels did not change with instruction type. Future research should determine how PF methods can be scaffolded to foster exploration mindsets and diverse solutions.
机译:援助困境询问学习环境应该如何“平衡信息或援助和扣留”(Koedinger和Aleven 2007,第239页)。最小的指导(MG)方法在自由探索问题时,学生在自由探索问题时学到最佳方法,而直接指令(DI)方法会提前为简化学生的努力提供规范解决方案(后来问题)。每种方法类型都提供了独特的好处,但两者都很重要(Schwartz和Martin 2004),而且不易交付在一起。一种称为“生产失败”(PF)的相对较新的基于MG的方法,假设通过要求学生通过早期和揭示经过典型的规范解决方案(Kapur 2008)来捕捉两组福利。使用PF的学生被假设,以更有效地转移和保留信息,因为平衡启发式和正式知识产生不同的解决方案尝试(Disessa和Sherin 2000)并在勘探期间挣扎推动学生填补知识空缺(Kulhavy和1989年)。在目前的研究中,参与者学会了在使用PF或DI的同时在两个域名,密码(更传统)和Rubik的立方体(精神母素,较少的传统)中执行任务。分析透露:(a)PF参与者没有胜过DI参与者的直接测试后或保留测试,尽管他们确实报告了更加探索的和更加独特的策略,(b)子纳巴尔标签增加了学习,但仅限于相对小说Rubik的立方体域(并且它们有时增加了加密竞争,令人惊讶地增加了工作量),并且(c)子级标签的影响与指令类型没有改变。未来的研究应确定PF方法如何脚手架,以促进勘探心态和多样化的解决方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号