Generative Learning: Which Strategies for What Age?

被引:79
作者
Brod, Garvin [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Leibniz Inst Res & Informat Educ, DIPF, Frankfurt, Germany
[2] Goethe Univ, Dept Psychol, Frankfurt, Germany
关键词
Generative learning strategies; Active learning; Constructive learning; Developmental differences; Children; Effective learning techniques; PRIOR KNOWLEDGE ACTIVATION; SELF-EXPLANATION; ELABORATIVE INTERROGATION; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; CONCEPT MAPS; RETRIEVAL; SCIENCE; MEMORY; TEXT; QUESTIONS;
D O I
10.1007/s10648-020-09571-9
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
Generative learning strategies are intended to improve students' learning by prompting them to actively make sense of the material to be learned. But are they effective for all students? This review provides an overview of six popular generative learning strategies: concept mapping, explaining, predicting, questioning, testing, and drawing. Its main purpose is to review for what ages the effectiveness of these strategies has been demonstrated and whether there are indications of age-related differences in their effectiveness. The description of each strategy covers (1) how it is supposed to work, (2) the evidence on its effectiveness in different age groups, and (3) if there are age-related differences in its effectiveness. It is found that while all six generative learning strategies reviewed have proven effective for university students, evidence is mixed for younger students. Whereas some strategies (practice testing, predicting) seem to be effective already in lower-elementary-school children, others (drawing, questioning) seem to be largely ineffective until secondary school. The review closes with a call for research on the cognitive and metacognitive prerequisites of generative learning that can explain these differences.
引用
收藏
页码:1295 / 1318
页数:24
相关论文
共 110 条
[21]   CONTENT KNOWLEDGE - ITS ROLE, REPRESENTATION, AND RESTRUCTURING IN MEMORY DEVELOPMENT [J].
CHI, MTH ;
CECI, SJ .
ADVANCES IN CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND BEHAVIOR, 1987, 20 :91-142
[22]   SELF-EXPLANATIONS - HOW STUDENTS STUDY AND USE EXAMPLES IN LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS [J].
CHI, MTH ;
BASSOK, M ;
LEWIS, MW ;
REIMANN, P ;
GLASER, R .
COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 1989, 13 (02) :145-182
[23]  
Chi MTH, 2000, ADV INSTR P, V5, P161
[24]   ELICITING SELF-EXPLANATIONS IMPROVES UNDERSTANDING [J].
CHI, MTH ;
DELEEUW, N ;
CHIU, MH ;
LAVANCHER, C .
COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 1994, 18 (03) :439-477
[25]   Developmental change in feedback processing as reflected by phasic heart rate changes [J].
Crone, EA ;
Jennings, JR ;
Van der Molen, MW .
DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2004, 40 (06) :1228-1238
[26]   Classroom demonstrations: Learning tools or entertainment? [J].
Crouch, CH ;
Fagen, AP ;
Callan, JP ;
Mazur, E .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICS, 2004, 72 (06) :835-838
[27]   Confusion can be beneficial for learning [J].
D'Mello, Sidney ;
Lehman, Blair ;
Pekrun, Reinhard ;
Graesser, Art .
LEARNING AND INSTRUCTION, 2014, 29 :153-170
[28]   A DEVELOPMENTAL COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF PROVIDED AND GENERATED QUESTIONS ON TEXT RECALL [J].
DENNER, PR ;
RICKARDS, JP .
CONTEMPORARY EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1987, 12 (02) :135-146
[29]   Cognitive abilities involved in insight problem solving: An individual differences model [J].
DeYoung, Colin G. ;
Flanders, Joseph L. ;
Peterson, Jordan B. .
CREATIVITY RESEARCH JOURNAL, 2008, 20 (03) :278-290
[30]   Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology [J].
Dunlosky, John ;
Rawson, Katherine A. ;
Marsh, Elizabeth J. ;
Nathan, Mitchell J. ;
Willingham, Daniel T. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, 2013, 14 (01) :4-58