Role of guidance, reflection, and interactivity in an agent-based multimedia game

The authors investigated whether guidance and reflection would facilitate science learning in an interactive multimedia game. College students learned how to design plants to survive in different weather conditions. In Experiment 1, they learned with an agent that either guided them with corrective and explanatory feedback or corrective feedback alone. Some students were asked to reflect by giving explanations about their problem-solving answers. Guidance in the form of explanatory feedback produced higher transfer scores, fewer incorrect answers, and greater reduction of misconceptions during problem solving. Reflection in the form of having students give explanations for their answers did not affect learning. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that reflection promotes retention and far transfer in noninteractive environments but not in interactive ones unless students are asked to reflect on correct program solutions rather than on their own solutions. Results support the appropriate use of guidance and reflection for interactive multimedia games.

[1]  M Kalantzis,et al.  The conditions of learning , 2005 .

[2]  R. Moreno.  Decreasing Cognitive Load for Novice Students: Effects of Explanatory versus Corrective Feedback in Discovery-Based Multimedia , 2004 .

[3]  R. Mayer.  Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. , 2004, The American psychologist.

[4]  James C. Lester,et al.  Lifelike Pedagogical Agents for Mixed-initiative Problem Solving in Constructivist Learning Environments , 2004, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[5]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  The promise of educational psychology (vol II): Teaching for meaningful learning , 2003 .

[6]  R. Mayer,et al.  Learning Science in Virtual Reality Multimedia Environments: Role of Methods and Media , 2002 .

[7]  Patricia D. Mautone,et al.  Pictorial aids for learning by doing in a multimedia geology simulation game. , 2002 .

[8]  R. Mayer,et al.  Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening , 2002 .

[9]  R. Mayer,et al.  Aids to computer-based multimedia learning , 2002 .

[10]  James C. Lester,et al.  The Case for Social Agency in Computer-Based Teaching: Do Students Learn More Deeply When They Interact With Animated Pedagogical Agents? , 2001 .

[11]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: The Promise of Multimedia Learning , 2001 .

[12]  Alfred Bork,et al.  Multimedia in Learning , 2001 .

[13]  M. Pope.  The Art of Discovery. , 2000 .

[14]  J. Tuovinen,et al.  A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples , 1999 .

[15]  R. Bruning.  Cognitive Psychology and Instruction , 1998 .

[16]  W. V. van Joolingen,et al.  Scientific Discovery Learning with Computer Simulations of Conceptual Domains , 1998 .

[17]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Handbook of Research for educational Communications and Technology , 1997 .

[18]  Anne McKeough,et al.  Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization in learning. , 1995 .

[19]  Michael Pressley,et al.  Use of elaborative interrogation to help students acquire information consistent with prior knowledge and information inconsistent with prior knowledge , 1994 .

[20]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Guided discovery in a community of learners. , 1994 .

[21]  K. McGilly,et al.  Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice. , 1994 .

[22]  Michelene T. H. Chi,et al.  Eliciting Self-Explanations Improves Understanding , 1994, Cogn. Sci..

[23]  Timothy L. Seifert,et al.  Effects of elaborative interrogation with prose passages. , 1993 .

[24]  Eileen Wood,et al.  The Effect of Prior Knowledge on an Immediate and Delayed Associative Learning Task Following Elaborative Interrogation , 1993 .

[25]  A. King.  Facilitating Elaborative Learning Through Guided Student-Generated Questioning , 1992 .

[26]  Eileen Wood,et al.  Encouraging Mindful Use of Prior Knowledge: Attempting to Construct Explanatory Answers Facilitates Learning , 1992 .

[27]  Michael Pressley,et al.  Elaborative-interrogation effects depend on the nature of the question. , 1991 .

[28]  Philip H. Winne,et al.  Elaborative interrogation effects on children's learning of factual content. , 1990 .

[29]  P. David Pearson.  Handbook of reading research. , 1990 .

[30]  L. Schauble,et al.  Belief revision in children: the role of prior knowledge and strategies for generating evidence. , 1990, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[31]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Transfer of Cognitive Skill , 1989 .

[32]  Mark A. McDaniel,et al.  Elaborative Interrogation Facilitates Acquisition of Confusing Facts. , 1988 .

[33]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Generation and precision of elaboration: Effects on intentional and incidental learning. , 1987 .

[34]  A. Pollatsek,et al.  Learning to Understand the Balance Beam , 1986 .

[35]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  A Schema-Theoretic View of Basic Processes in Reading Comprehension. Technical Report No. 306. , 1988 .

[36]  M. C. Wittrock,et al.  Generative processes in reading comprehension. , 1978 .

[37]  E. Keislar,et al.  Learning by discovery : a critical appraisal , 1969 .

[38]  J. Bruner.  The act of discovery. , 1961 .