Effects of learner-generated outlining and instructor-provided outlining on learning from text: A meta-analysis

IF 9.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Héctor R. Ponce , Richard E. Mayer , Ester E. Méndez
{"title":"Effects of learner-generated outlining and instructor-provided outlining on learning from text: A meta-analysis","authors":"Héctor R. Ponce ,&nbsp;Richard E. Mayer ,&nbsp;Ester E. Méndez","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Learning from printed text is a central academic task that may be challenging for students. Two ways to improve learning from text are to encourage learners to engage in generative learning strategies while reading, such as constructing an outline, or for instructors to include effective instructional design features, such as providing an outline with the text. A meta-analysis of studies comparing a group that was asked to generate an outline while reading a text to a control group that was not asked to outline found an average effect size of <em>g+</em> = 0.59 on memory tests, <em>g+</em> = 0.59 on comprehension tests, and <em>g+</em> = 0.52 on writing assignments favoring learner-generated outlining. A meta-analysis of studies comparing a group that read a text containing an outline with a control group that read the same text without an outline found an effect size of <em>g+</em> = 0.61 for memory tests and <em>g+</em> = 0.34 for comprehension tests favoring instructor-provided outlining. Overall, there is encouraging evidence for the effectiveness of outlining as a generative learning strategy and for the effectiveness of outlining as an instructional design feature based on signaling, consistent with generative learning theory.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000313","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

Learning from printed text is a central academic task that may be challenging for students. Two ways to improve learning from text are to encourage learners to engage in generative learning strategies while reading, such as constructing an outline, or for instructors to include effective instructional design features, such as providing an outline with the text. A meta-analysis of studies comparing a group that was asked to generate an outline while reading a text to a control group that was not asked to outline found an average effect size of g+ = 0.59 on memory tests, g+ = 0.59 on comprehension tests, and g+ = 0.52 on writing assignments favoring learner-generated outlining. A meta-analysis of studies comparing a group that read a text containing an outline with a control group that read the same text without an outline found an effect size of g+ = 0.61 for memory tests and g+ = 0.34 for comprehension tests favoring instructor-provided outlining. Overall, there is encouraging evidence for the effectiveness of outlining as a generative learning strategy and for the effectiveness of outlining as an instructional design feature based on signaling, consistent with generative learning theory.

学习者生成的大纲和教师提供的大纲对文本学习的影响:一项荟萃分析
从印刷文本中学习是一项核心的学术任务,对学生来说可能具有挑战性。提高从文本中学习的两种方法是鼓励学习者在阅读时参与生成性学习策略,例如构建大纲,或者让教师包括有效的教学设计功能,例如为文本提供大纲。一项荟萃分析研究将一组被要求在阅读文本时生成提纲的组与一组未被要求生成提纲的对照组进行了比较,结果发现,在记忆测试中,平均效应大小为g+=0.59,在理解测试中,g+=0.49,在写作作业中,g++=0.52有利于学习者生成提纲。一项荟萃分析研究将阅读包含大纲的文本的组与阅读不包含大纲的同一文本的对照组进行了比较,发现记忆测试的效果大小为g+=0.61,理解测试的效果尺寸为g+=0.034,有利于教师提供的大纲。总体而言,有令人鼓舞的证据表明,大纲作为一种生成性学习策略是有效的,大纲作为基于信号的教学设计特征也是有效的,符合生成性学习理论。
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 Research Review
Educational Research Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
19.40
自引率
0.90%
发文量
53
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Educational Research Review is an international journal catering to researchers and diverse agencies keen on reviewing studies and theoretical papers in education at any level. The journal welcomes high-quality articles that address educational research problems through a review approach, encompassing thematic or methodological reviews and meta-analyses. With an inclusive scope, the journal does not limit itself to any specific age range and invites articles across various settings where learning and education take place, such as schools, corporate training, and both formal and informal educational environments.
×
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