How to Optimize Self-Assessment Accuracy in Cognitive Skill Acquisition When Learning from Worked Examples

IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Julia Waldeyer, Tino Endres, Julian Roelle, Martine Baars, Alexander Renkl
{"title":"How to Optimize Self-Assessment Accuracy in Cognitive Skill Acquisition When Learning from Worked Examples","authors":"Julia Waldeyer, Tino Endres, Julian Roelle, Martine Baars, Alexander Renkl","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09944-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The present study was designed to understand and optimize self-assessment accuracy in cognitive skill acquisition through example-based learning. We focused on the initial problem-solving phase, which follows after studying worked examples. At the end of this phase, it is important that learners are aware whether they have already understood the solution procedure. In Experiment 1, we tested whether self-assessment accuracy depended on whether learners were prompted to infer their self-assessments from explanation-based cues (ability to explain the problems’ solutions) or from performance-based cues (problem-solving performance) and on whether learners were informed about the to-be-monitored cue before or only after the problem-solving phase. We found that performance-based cues resulted in better self-assessment accuracy and that informing learners about the to-be-monitored cue before problem-solving enhanced self-assessment accuracy. In Experiment 2, we again tested whether self-assessment accuracy depended on whether learners were prompted to infer their self-assessments from explanation- or performance-based cues. We furthermore varied whether learners received instruction on criteria for interpreting the cues and whether learners were prompted to self-explain during problem-solving. When learners received no further instructional support, like in Experiment 1, performance-based cues yielded better self-assessment accuracy. Only when learners who were prompted to infer their self-assessments from explanation-based cues received both cue criteria instruction and prompts to engage in self-explaining during problem-solving did they show similar self-assessment accuracy as learners who utilized performance-based cues. Overall, we conclude that it is more efficient to prompt learners to monitor performance-based rather than explanation-based cues in the initial problem-solving phase.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09944-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study was designed to understand and optimize self-assessment accuracy in cognitive skill acquisition through example-based learning. We focused on the initial problem-solving phase, which follows after studying worked examples. At the end of this phase, it is important that learners are aware whether they have already understood the solution procedure. In Experiment 1, we tested whether self-assessment accuracy depended on whether learners were prompted to infer their self-assessments from explanation-based cues (ability to explain the problems’ solutions) or from performance-based cues (problem-solving performance) and on whether learners were informed about the to-be-monitored cue before or only after the problem-solving phase. We found that performance-based cues resulted in better self-assessment accuracy and that informing learners about the to-be-monitored cue before problem-solving enhanced self-assessment accuracy. In Experiment 2, we again tested whether self-assessment accuracy depended on whether learners were prompted to infer their self-assessments from explanation- or performance-based cues. We furthermore varied whether learners received instruction on criteria for interpreting the cues and whether learners were prompted to self-explain during problem-solving. When learners received no further instructional support, like in Experiment 1, performance-based cues yielded better self-assessment accuracy. Only when learners who were prompted to infer their self-assessments from explanation-based cues received both cue criteria instruction and prompts to engage in self-explaining during problem-solving did they show similar self-assessment accuracy as learners who utilized performance-based cues. Overall, we conclude that it is more efficient to prompt learners to monitor performance-based rather than explanation-based cues in the initial problem-solving phase.

Abstract Image

从工作实例中学习认知技能时,如何优化自我评估的准确性
本研究旨在通过基于实例的学习,了解和优化认知技能习得过程中的自我评估准确性。我们关注的重点是最初的问题解决阶段,即在学习了工作示例之后的阶段。在这一阶段结束时,学习者必须知道自己是否已经理解了解题步骤。在实验 1 中,我们测试了自我评估的准确性是否取决于学习者是根据基于解释的线索(解释问题解决方案的能力)还是基于表现的线索(解决问题的表现)来推断自我评估,也取决于学习者是在解决问题阶段之前还是仅在解决问题阶段之后才被告知要监测的线索。我们发现,基于表现的线索能提高自我评估的准确性,而在解决问题之前告知学习者有待监测的线索能提高自我评估的准确性。在实验 2 中,我们再次测试了自我评估的准确性是否取决于学习者是根据解释性线索还是表现性线索来推断自我评估。此外,我们还改变了学习者是否接受了有关解释线索的标准的指导,以及学习者在解决问题的过程中是否被提示进行自我解释。与实验 1 一样,当学习者没有接受进一步的指导支持时,以表现为基础的提示能提高自我评估的准确性。只有当学习者从基于解释的提示中推断出自我评估时,他们才会同时接受提示标准指导和在解决问题过程中进行自我解释的提示,他们的自我评估准确率才与使用基于表现的提示的学习者相似。总之,我们得出的结论是,在解决问题的初始阶段,促使学习者监控基于表现的线索比基于解释的线索更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Educational Psychology Review
Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信