Generative Learning versus Retrieval Practice in Learning from Text: The Cohesion and Elaboration of the Text Matters

Autor/inn/en	Roelle, Julian; Nückles, Matthias
Titel	Generative Learning versus Retrieval Practice in Learning from Text: The Cohesion and Elaboration of the Text Matters
Quelle	In: Journal of Educational Psychology, 111 (2019) 8, S.1341-1361 (21 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Roelle, Julian)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0022-0663
DOI	10.1037/edu0000345
Schlagwörter	Prior Learning; Recall (Psychology); College Students; Learning Activities; Expository Writing; Learner Engagement; Instructional Effectiveness; Outcomes of Education; Reader Text Relationship; Foreign Countries; Learning Processes; Germany + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Vorkenntnisse; Abberufung; Collegestudent; Lernaktivität; Unterrichtserfolg; Lernleistung; Schulerfolg; Ausland; Learning process; Lernprozess; Deutschland
Abstract	Both generative learning tasks and retrieval practice tasks can serve as a beneficial follow-up to an initial study phase in which learners have studied new learning material. However, research that compares the effects of these 2 types of learning tasks is scarce. Therefore, it is widely unknown whether, and if so under which conditions, the one or the other type of task is better suited to optimizing learning outcomes. We hypothesized that in learning from text, the effects between generative learning and retrieval practice tasks depend on the cohesion and elaboration of the text. To test this prediction, in two 2 × 2-factorial experiments we varied whether university students were prompted to engage in retrieval practice (with vs. without) and generative learning activities (with vs. without) after an initial study phase in which learners read an expository text that was either of high cohesion and elaboration (Experiment 1) or of low cohesion and elaboration (Experiment 2). When the expository text was of high cohesion and elaboration, engaging learners in retrieval practice was beneficial, whereas engaging learners in generative activities was not. By contrast, when the learning material was of low cohesion and elaboration, only engaging learners in generative learning activities was beneficial. Furthermore, in these circumstances engaging learners in generative activities lost its effectiveness when learners were also engaged in retrieval practice. We conclude that generative learning tasks and retrieval practice tasks serve different functions and, thus, differ in the state of learners' mental representations in which they are most beneficial. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01