Strategy orientations, learner activity, and learning outcomes: Implications for instructional support of learning

Investigated were the differential effects of strategy orientations (memory strategy, organization strategy, application strategy, and read-and-study control) orthogonally crossed with learner activity (guided versus active) and outcomes (memory, organization, and application). Subjects were 136 undergraduates, randomly assigned to 1 of 8 treatments. One day after they studied a passage on the topic of radar, outcome measures were completed. Guided activities were found to be superior to the learner-active counterparts on a composite achievement score. The hypothesized interaction of strategy orientation and kind of measure was supported. Performance was highest, in every comparison, on the outcome measure that paralleled the strategy-orientation treatment. The main effect of strategy orientation on the total achievement score was not significant. These findings were discussed in terms of the transfer-appropriate processing theory, the encoding specificity principle, and generative learning theory, with implications for further research and instructional design.

[1]  M. Wittrock.  Generative Processes of Comprehension , 1989 .

[2]  F. J. Vesta,et al.  Learner-Generated Organizational Aids: Effects on Learning from Text. , 1980 .

[3]  Linda K. Cook,et al.  Effects of shadowing on prose comprehension and problem solving , 1981, Memory & cognition.

[4]  Paul R. Pintrich,et al.  Teaching Learning Strategies , 1985 .

[5]  B. Davey,et al.  How Do Headings Affect Text-Processing?. , 1991 .

[6]  J. Glover,et al.  Memory for Sentences and Prose: Levels-of-Processing or Transfer-Appropriate-Processing? , 1985 .

[7]  Donald A. Stepich,et al.  Instructional analogies and the learning of concepts , 1995 .

[8]  Dorothy L. Gabel,et al.  Effect of using analogies on chemistry achievement according to piagetian level , 1980 .

[9]  R. Mayer.  Aids to text comprehension , 1984 .

[10]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities , 1984 .

[11]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Learning to Learn: On Training Students to Learn from Texts , 1981 .

[12]  Jay Blanchard,et al.  Underlining Performance Outcomes in Expository Text. , 1987 .

[13]  R. F. Lorch,et al.  Text-signaling devices and their effects on reading and memory processes , 1989 .

[14]  Steven W. Gilbert,et al.  An evaluation of the use of analogy, simile, and metaphor in science texts , 1989 .

[15]  Paul Macaruso,et al.  Representing and using numerical information. , 1995, The American psychologist.

[16]  Alexander James Wearing.  Memory for Sentences. , 1969 .

[17]  David M. Riefer,et al.  Analogies as an aid to understanding and memory , 1990 .

[18]  K. Zook,et al.  Systematic Analysis of Variables That Contribute to the Formation of Analogical Misconceptions. , 1994 .

[19]  Lyn Corno.  Comments on Winne: Analytic and systemic research are both needed , 1995 .

[20]  Robert F. Lorch,et al.  Effects of organizational signals on text-processing strategies. , 1995 .

[21]  D. A. T. Southgate,et al.  ‘Directions to Contributors’ , 1992, British Journal of Nutrition.

[22]  F. J. Vesta,et al.  What Is Learned in Note Taking , 1981 .

[23]  L. Postman,et al.  Incidental learning and generality of set. , 1946, Journal of experimental psychology.

[24]  John D. Bransford,et al.  Differences in the precision of self-generated elaborations. , 1982 .

[25]  Michael Pressley,et al.  More about the development of self-regulation: Complex, long-term, and thoroughly social , 1995 .

[26]  Stephen C. Wilhite.  Headings as memory facilitators: The importance of prior knowledge. , 1989 .

[27]  Bruce K. Britton,et al.  Executive Control Processes in Reading , 1987 .

[28]  R. F. Lorch,et al.  Effects of signaling topic structure on text recall , 1993 .

[29]  R. Mayer,et al.  A generative theory of textbook design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of science text , 1995 .

[30]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Things that make us smart , 1979 .

[31]  Shawn M. Glynn,et al.  Learning Science in the Schools : Research Reforming Practice , 1995 .

[32]  Gerald J. August,et al.  Generative underlining strategies in prose recall. , 1975 .

[33]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes In The Age Of The Machine , 1993 .

[34]  Philip H. Winne,et al.  Inherent details in self-regulated learning , 1995 .

[35]  M. Wittrock.  Generative Learning Processes of the Brain , 1992 .

[36]  Donald F. Dansereau,et al.  Effects of headings on text processing. , 1983 .

[37]  Karen K. Wixson,et al.  Becoming a strategic reader , 1983 .

[38]  Sarah E. Peterson,et al.  The cognitive functions of underlining as a study technique , 1991 .

[39]  John D. Bransford,et al.  Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing , 1977 .

[40]  James Hartley,et al.  A research strategy for text desigbers: The role of headings , 1985 .

[41]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Can you repeat that? Qualitative effects of repetition and advance organizers on learning from science prose. , 1983 .