Combining shared control with variability over surface features: Effects on transfer test performance and task involvement

Positive effects of learner control decrease when learners do not perceive the control given to them, make suboptimal choices, or are cognitively overloaded by the amount of choice. This study proposes shared control (i.e., learners choose from a pre-selection of suitable tasks) over highly variable tasks to tackle these problems. Ninety-four students participated in a 2x2 factorial experiment with the factors control (system, shared) and variability of surface features (low, high). Results show superior effects on training performance, transfer test performance, and task involvement of shared control when learners can choose from pre-selected tasks with surface features that are different from the surface features of previous tasks.

[1]  A. Assor,et al.  When Choice Motivates and When It Does Not , 2007 .

[2]  L. Mo,et al.  Schema induction in problem solving: a multidimensional analysis. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[3]  R. Snow.  Aptitude, learner control, and adaptive instruction , 1980 .

[4]  D. Dellarosa.  Role of analogical reasoning in the induction of problem categories. , 1992 .

[5]  H. Cooper,et al.  The desirability of control , 1979 .

[6]  E. Skinner.  A guide to constructs of control. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  Keith J. Holyoak,et al.  The cognitive basis of knowledge transfer. , 1987 .

[8]  Jill L. Quilici,et al.  Teaching students to recognize structural similarities between statistics word problems , 2002 .

[9]  Mable B. Kinzie,et al.  Continuing motivation, learner control, and CAI , 1989 .

[10]  Binshan Lin,et al.  Web-based teaching and learner control: a research review , 2001, Comput. Educ..

[11]  Charles M. Reigeluth,et al.  Instructional Design Theories and Models : An Overview of Their Current Status , 1983 .

[12]  G. Salomon.  The differential investment of mental effort in learning from different sources , 1983 .

[13]  P. R. Smith,et al.  Microcomputers in Education , 1983 .

[14]  H. Sullivan,et al.  Matching learner preference to amount of instruction: An alternative form of learner control , 1995 .

[15]  J. Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and Complex Learning: Recent Developments and Future Directions , 2005 .

[16]  Gary R. Morrison,et al.  Uses and effects of learner control of context and instructional support in computer-based instruction , 1989 .

[17]  F. Paas,et al.  Teaching complex rather than simple tasks: balancing intrinsic and germane load to enhance transfer of learning , 2006 .

[18]  M. Lepper,et al.  Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. , 1996 .

[19]  J. Michael Spector,et al.  Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 3rd Edition , 2012 .

[20]  M. Lepper,et al.  The Construction of Preference: When Choice Is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? , 2006 .

[21]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[22]  F. Paas,et al.  A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction , 2005 .

[23]  J. C. Hewson.  Efficiency in Learning , 1942 .

[24]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Illusion and well-being: a social psychological perspective on mental health. , 1988, Psychological bulletin.

[25]  Jill L. Quilici,et al.  Role of examples in how students learn to categorize statistics word problems. , 1996 .

[26]  S. Cormier,et al.  Transfer of learning: Contemporary research and applications. , 1987 .

[27]  T. Gog,et al.  Optimising worked example instruction: Different ways to increase germane cognitive load. , 2006 .

[28]  Michael J. Hannafin,et al.  Guidelines for using locus of instructional control in the design of computer-assisted instruction , 1984 .

[29]  J. Keller.  Motivational Design of Instruction , 1983 .

[30]  W. Hippel.  A Social Psychological Perspective , 1994 .

[31]  Béatrice S. Hasler,et al.  Learner Control, Cognitive Load and Instructional Animation , 2007 .

[32]  K. Scheiter,et al.  Learner Control in Hypermedia Environments , 2007 .

[33]  Heidi L. Schnackenberg,et al.  Learner control over full and lean computer-based instruction under differing ability levels , 2000 .

[34]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  Advisement and management strategies as design variables in computer-assisted instruction , 1980 .

[35]  B. Schwartz.  The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less , 2004 .

[36]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[37]  J. Averill.  Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress. , 1973 .

[38]  D. Cummins.  Role of analogical reasoning in the induction of problem categories. , 1992 .

[39]  B. Zimmerman,et al.  Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. , 1994 .

[40]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory , 2003 .

[41]  E. Deci,et al.  Motivation and Education: The Self-Determination Perspective , 2008 .

[42]  M. David Merrill,et al.  Instructional Design Theory , 1971 .

[43]  J. Fry.  Interactive Relationship between Inquisitiveness and Student Control of Instruction. , 1972 .

[44]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  Adaptive Guidance: Enhancing Self-Regulation, Knowledge, and Performance in Technology-Based Training , 2002 .

[45]  E. Deci,et al.  Facilitating internalization: the self-determination theory perspective. , 1994, Journal of personality.

[46]  Gavriel Salomon,et al.  Information Technologies: What You See Is Not (Always) What You Get. Revised. , 1985 .

[47]  J. G. Schuurman,et al.  Redirecting learners' attention during training: Effects on cognitive load, transfer test performance and training efficiency. , 2002 .

[48]  F. Paas,et al.  Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks , 1994 .

[49]  Teresa Garcia,et al.  Regulating motivation and cognition in the classroom: The role of self-schemas and self-regulatory strategies. , 1994 .

[50]  Simone Volet,et al.  Cognitive and affective variables in academic learning: The significance of direction and effort in students' goals , 1997 .

[51]  F. Paas.  Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. , 1992 .

[52]  S. Ross,et al.  Adapting the Thematic Context of Mathematical Problems to Student Interests: Individualized versus Group-Based Strategies. , 1986 .

[53]  M. Lepper.  Microcomputers in education: Motivational and social issues. , 1985 .

[54]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design , 1998 .

[55]  Gary R. Morrison,et al.  In search of a happy medium in instructional technology research: Issues concerning external validity, media replications, and learner control , 1989 .

[56]  Mable B. Kinzie,et al.  Requirements and benefits of effective interactive instruction: Learner control, self-regulation, and continuing motivation , 1990 .

[57]  Liesbeth Kester,et al.  Towards a personalized task selection model with shared instructional control , 2006 .

[58]  Richard A. Monty,et al.  Choice and perceived control , 1979 .

[59]  J. Burger.  Negative reactions to increases in perceived personal control. , 1989 .

[60]  Sandra L. Fisher,et al.  DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF LEARNER EFFORT AND GOAL ORIENTATION ON TWO LEARNING OUTCOMES , 1998 .