Eliciting Self-Explanations Improves Understanding

Learning involves the integration of new information into existing knowledge. Generoting explanations to oneself (self-explaining) facilitates that integration process. Previously, self-explanation has been shown to improve the acquisition of problem-solving skills when studying worked-out examples. This study extends that finding, showing that self-explanation can also be facilitative when it is explicitly promoted, in the context of learning declarative knowledge from an expository text. Without any extensive training, 14 eighth-grade students were merely asked to self-explain after reading each line of a possage on the human circulatory system. Ten students in the control group read the same text twice, but were not prompted to self-explain. All of the students were tested for their circulatory system knowledge before and after reading the text. The prompted group had a greater gain from the pretest to the posttest. Moreover, prompted students who generated o large number of self-explanations (the high explainers) learned with greater understanding than low explainers. Understanding was assessed by answering very complex questions and inducing the function of a component when it was only implicitly stated. Understanding was further captured by a mental model onolysis of the self-explanation protocols. High explainers all achieved the correct mental model of the circulatory system, whereas many of the unprompted students as well as the low explainers did not. Three processing characteristics of self-explaining are considered as reasons for the gains in deeper understanding.

[1]  W. Doise,et al.  Social interaction and the development of cognitive operations , 1975 .

[2]  Daniel M. Russell,et al.  Using IDE in Instructional Design: Encouraging Reflective Instruction Design Through Automated Design Tools. , 1991 .

[3]  Mitchell J. Nathan Learning through Self-Explanation of Mathematics Examples: Effects of Cognitive Load. , 1994 .

[4]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  Mechanisms of Change in the Development of Cognitive Structures. , 1972 .

[5]  Michelene T. H. Chi,et al.  Conceptual Change within and across Ontological Categories: Examples from Learning and Discovery in Science , 1992 .

[6]  Margaret G. McKeown,et al.  Revising Social Studies Text from a Text-Processing Perspective: Evidence of Improved Comprehensibility. , 1991 .

[7]  R. Zajonc The process of cognitive tuning in communication. , 1960, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[8]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  Intentional Learning as a Goal of Instruction , 2018, Knowing, Learning, and Instruction.

[9]  N. J. Slamecka,et al.  The Generation Effect: Delineation of a Phenomenon , 1978 .

[10]  B Commoner,et al.  A Modern Biology , 1961, Nature.

[11]  Matthew W. Lewis,et al.  Self-Explonations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems , 1989, Cogn. Sci..

[12]  M. Ferguson-Hessler,et al.  Studying Physics Texts: Differences in Study Processes Between Good and Poor Performers , 1990 .

[13]  John Haugeland The nature and plausibility of Cognitivism , 1978, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[14]  N. Webb Peer interaction and learning in small groups , 1989 .

[15]  M. Chi,et al.  The Content of Physics Self-Explanations , 1991 .

[16]  F. Marton,et al.  On qualitative differences in learning , 2013 .

[17]  James L. Wardrop,et al.  Effects of Two Types of Prereading Instruction on the Comprehension of Narrative and Expository Text. , 1991 .

[18]  David Klahr,et al.  Dual Space Search During Scientific Reasoning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[19]  M. Chi,et al.  From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts , 1994 .

[20]  Susan R. Goldman,et al.  Answering questions from oceanography texts: Learner, task, and text characteristics , 1988 .

[21]  James D. Slotta,et al.  The Ontological Coherence of Intuitive Physics , 1993 .

[22]  R. Pea,et al.  TOOLS FOR BRIDGING THE CULTURES OF EVERYDAY AND SCIENTIFIC THINKING , 1987 .

[23]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data , 1984 .

[24]  A. King Guiding Knowledge Construction in the Classroom: Effects of Teaching Children How to Question and How to Explain , 1994 .

[25]  L. Resnick,et al.  Knowing, Learning, and Instruction , 2018 .

[26]  Kurt VanLehn,et al.  A model of the self-explanation effect. , 1992 .

[27]  Stellan Ohlsson,et al.  The cognitive skill of theory articulation: A neglected aspect of science education? , 1992 .

[28]  C. Bereiter,et al.  Three Levels of Goal Orientation in Learning , 1991 .

[29]  Margaret M. Recker,et al.  Learning Strategies and Transfer in the Domain of Programming , 1994 .

[30]  J. Lemke Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values , 1990 .

[31]  Michelene T. H. Chi,et al.  Barriers to Conceptual Change in Learning Science Concepts: A Theoretical Conjecture , 1993 .

[32]  Randolph M. Jones,et al.  What Mediates the Self-explanation Eeect? Knowledge Gaps, Schemas or Analogies? , 1993 .