Abbey M Loehr, Emily R. Fyfe, Bethany Rittle-Johnson
{"title":"等一下……延迟教学提高数学问题解决能力:一项课堂研究","authors":"Abbey M Loehr, Emily R. Fyfe, Bethany Rittle-Johnson","doi":"10.7771/1932-6246.1166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Engaging learners in exploratory problem-solving activities prior to receiving instruction (i.e., explore-instruct approach) has been endorsed as an effective learning approach. However, it remains unclear whether this approach is feasible for elementary-school children in a classroom context. In two experiments, second-graders solved mathematical equivalence problems either before or after receiving brief conceptual instruction. In Experiment 1 (n = 41), the explore-instruct approach was less effective at supporting learning than an instruct-solve approach. However, it did not include a common, but often overlooked feature of an explore-instruct approach, which is provision of a knowledge-application activity after instruction. In Experiment 2 (n = 47), we included a knowledge-application activity by having all children check their answers on previously solved problems. The explore-instruct approach in this experiment led to superior learning than an instruct-solve approach. Findings suggest promise for an explore-instruct approach, provided learners have the opportunity to apply knowledge from instruction. Correspondence: Abbey Marie Loehr, 230 Appleton Place, Peabody #552, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203; Phone: (615) 343-7149. Email: abbey.loehr@vanderbilt.edu","PeriodicalId":90070,"journal":{"name":"The journal of problem solving","volume":"12 4-5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.7771/1932-6246.1166","citationCount":"26","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wait for it . . . Delaying Instruction Improves Mathematics Problem Solving: A Classroom Study\",\"authors\":\"Abbey M Loehr, Emily R. Fyfe, Bethany Rittle-Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.7771/1932-6246.1166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Engaging learners in exploratory problem-solving activities prior to receiving instruction (i.e., explore-instruct approach) has been endorsed as an effective learning approach. However, it remains unclear whether this approach is feasible for elementary-school children in a classroom context. In two experiments, second-graders solved mathematical equivalence problems either before or after receiving brief conceptual instruction. In Experiment 1 (n = 41), the explore-instruct approach was less effective at supporting learning than an instruct-solve approach. However, it did not include a common, but often overlooked feature of an explore-instruct approach, which is provision of a knowledge-application activity after instruction. In Experiment 2 (n = 47), we included a knowledge-application activity by having all children check their answers on previously solved problems. The explore-instruct approach in this experiment led to superior learning than an instruct-solve approach. Findings suggest promise for an explore-instruct approach, provided learners have the opportunity to apply knowledge from instruction. Correspondence: Abbey Marie Loehr, 230 Appleton Place, Peabody #552, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203; Phone: (615) 343-7149. Email: abbey.loehr@vanderbilt.edu\",\"PeriodicalId\":90070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of problem solving\",\"volume\":\"12 4-5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.7771/1932-6246.1166\",\"citationCount\":\"26\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of problem solving\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of problem solving","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Wait for it . . . Delaying Instruction Improves Mathematics Problem Solving: A Classroom Study
Engaging learners in exploratory problem-solving activities prior to receiving instruction (i.e., explore-instruct approach) has been endorsed as an effective learning approach. However, it remains unclear whether this approach is feasible for elementary-school children in a classroom context. In two experiments, second-graders solved mathematical equivalence problems either before or after receiving brief conceptual instruction. In Experiment 1 (n = 41), the explore-instruct approach was less effective at supporting learning than an instruct-solve approach. However, it did not include a common, but often overlooked feature of an explore-instruct approach, which is provision of a knowledge-application activity after instruction. In Experiment 2 (n = 47), we included a knowledge-application activity by having all children check their answers on previously solved problems. The explore-instruct approach in this experiment led to superior learning than an instruct-solve approach. Findings suggest promise for an explore-instruct approach, provided learners have the opportunity to apply knowledge from instruction. Correspondence: Abbey Marie Loehr, 230 Appleton Place, Peabody #552, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203; Phone: (615) 343-7149. Email: abbey.loehr@vanderbilt.edu