Do worked examples boost the spacing effect on lasting learning?

IF 4.7 1区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Learning and Instruction Pub Date : 2025-03-04 DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102103

Julia Krauspe , Mirjam Ebersbach , Anne Ludwig, Florian Scharf

{"title":"Do worked examples boost the spacing effect on lasting learning?","authors":"Julia Krauspe , Mirjam Ebersbach , Anne Ludwig, Florian Scharf","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The acquisition of lasting knowledge that is accessible for a long time is an important educational goal. Spacing the learning or practice phase across multiple sessions fosters lasting learning, but the effect is less robust for complex material.</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>We examined whether the meaningful elaboration of the learning material, evoked by means of self-explaining worked examples, contributes to a more robust spacing effect concerning the lasting learning in mathematics.</div></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><div>Participants were fourth graders (<em>N</em> = 213).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Children received a formal instruction to long multiplication in school. Thereafter, they practiced the procedure either in a <em>massed</em> or a <em>spaced</em> manner, and either by <em>pure problem solving</em> or by additionally self-explaining <em>worked examples</em> in their regular math lessons. Time on task was held constant in all conditions. In a delayed test after eight weeks, children's procedural and conceptual knowledge was assessed. Their general math ability and their specific prior knowledge served as control variables.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Contrary to our expectations, there was neither a main effect of worked examples nor of spacing, and no interaction emerged between the two variables. Exploratory analyses revealed the same results concerning the forgetting rate between the last practice set and the test. These null effects were confirmed by Bayesian analyses. Only children's general math ability and their prior knowledge predicted their test performance.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The results suggest that the spacing effect in mathematics does not emerge reliably, even not when stimulated by worked examples. Further research on potential boundary conditions is required.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 102103"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475225000271","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The acquisition of lasting knowledge that is accessible for a long time is an important educational goal. Spacing the learning or practice phase across multiple sessions fosters lasting learning, but the effect is less robust for complex material.

Aims

We examined whether the meaningful elaboration of the learning material, evoked by means of self-explaining worked examples, contributes to a more robust spacing effect concerning the lasting learning in mathematics.

Sample

Participants were fourth graders (N = 213).

Methods

Children received a formal instruction to long multiplication in school. Thereafter, they practiced the procedure either in a massed or a spaced manner, and either by pure problem solving or by additionally self-explaining worked examples in their regular math lessons. Time on task was held constant in all conditions. In a delayed test after eight weeks, children's procedural and conceptual knowledge was assessed. Their general math ability and their specific prior knowledge served as control variables.

Results

Contrary to our expectations, there was neither a main effect of worked examples nor of spacing, and no interaction emerged between the two variables. Exploratory analyses revealed the same results concerning the forgetting rate between the last practice set and the test. These null effects were confirmed by Bayesian analyses. Only children's general math ability and their prior knowledge predicted their test performance.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the spacing effect in mathematics does not emerge reliably, even not when stimulated by worked examples. Further research on potential boundary conditions is required.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Learning and Instruction Multiple-

CiteScore

11.30

自引率

4.80%

发文量

109

期刊介绍： As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.