Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T18:07:30.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Self-Explaining

Learning About Principles and Their Application

from Part IV - General Learning Strategies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2019

John Dunlosky
Affiliation:
Kent State University, Ohio
Katherine A. Rawson
Affiliation:
Kent State University, Ohio
Get access

Summary

Learning by self-explaining (e.g., justifying a solution step in a worked solution) is a powerful method when implemented appropriately. In this chapter, we first describe the historical roots of the self-explanation concept and we explain why we focus on principle-based self-explanations (i.e., interrelating domain principles such as mathematical theorems with problem cases). If students engage in this type of self-explanations they are likely to gain an understanding of domain principles (e.g., mathematical theorems) and their application. Such an understanding is a highly beneficial precondition for solving transfer problems in which the principles apply. However, it is necessary to consider several factors when implementing learning by self-explaining; otherwise this learning method’s potential is not fully exploited. Five such factors are discussed: self-explanation prompts that provide varying degrees of structure, self-explanation training interventions, working memory load induced by the basic learning arrangement, self-explaining correct as well as incorrect solutions, and the phase of skill acquisition. We also outline promising lines of further research. Finally, we summarize what practice recommendations can be provided according to the latest state-of-the-art.
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, D. M., McLaren, B. M., Durkin, K., Mayer, R. E., Rittle-Johnson, B., Isotani, S., & van Velsen, M. (2014). Using erroneous examples to improve mathematics learning with a web-based tutoring system. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 401411.Google Scholar
Ainsworth, S. & Loizou, A. T. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27, 669681.Google Scholar
Aleven, V. A. & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26, 147179.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R., Fincham, J. M., & Douglass, S. (1997). The role of examples and rules in the acquisition of a cognitive skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 932945.Google ScholarPubMed
Atkinson, R. K., Renkl, A., & Merrill, M. M. (2003). Transitioning from studying examples to solving problems: Combining fading with prompting fosters learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 774783.Google Scholar
Berthold, K., Eysink, T. H., & Renkl, A. (2009). Assisting self-explanation prompts are more effective than open prompts when learning with multiple representations. Instructional Science, 37, 345363.Google Scholar
Berthold, K. & Renkl, A. (2009). Instructional aids to support a conceptual understanding of multiple representations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 7087.Google Scholar
Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P. L., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Training in self-explanation and self-regulation strategies: Investigating the effects of knowledge acquisition activities on problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 221252.Google Scholar
Booth, J. L., Lange, K. E., Koedinger, K. R., & Newton, K. J. (2013). Using example problems to improve student learning in algebra: Differentiating between correct and incorrect examples. Learning and Instruction, 25, 2434.Google Scholar
Busch, C., Renkl, A., & Schworm, S. (2008). Towards a generic self-explanation training intervention for example-based learning. In Kirschner, P. A., Prins, F., Jonker, V., & Kanselaar, G. (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the Learning Sciences 2008 (CD-ROM version only). Utrecht: International Conference of the Learning Science.Google Scholar
Chi, M. & VanLehn, K. (2010). Meta-cognitive strategy instruction in intelligent tutoring systems: How, when, and why. Educational Technology and Society, 13, 2539.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining expository texts: The dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In Glaser, R. (ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (pp. 161238). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. & Bassok, M. (1989). Learning from examples via self-explanations. In Resnick, L. B. (ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 251282). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145182.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T., deLeeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self‐explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439477.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. & VanLehn, K. A. (2012). Seeing deep structure from the interactions of surface features. Educational Psychologist, 47, 177188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, Y. H. & Lee, S. E. (2013). The role of co-explanation and self-explanation in learning from design examples of PowerPoint presentation slides. Computers and Education, 69, 400407.Google Scholar
Clark, R. C. & Mayer, R. E. (2016). e-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning, 4th edn. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, (2006). Efficiency in learning: Evidence‐based guidelines to manage cognitive load. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Google Scholar
Conati, C. & VanLehn, K. (2000). Further results from the evaluation of an intelligent computer tutor to coach self-explanation. In Gauthier, G., Frasson, C., & VanLehn, K. (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 304313). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Cooper, G. & Sweller, J. (1987). Effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical problem-solving transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 347362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curry, L. A. (2004). The effects of self-explanations of correct and incorrect solutions on algebra problem-solving performance. In Forbus, K., Gentner, D., & Regier, T. (eds.), Proceedings of the 26th conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1548). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
De Caro, M. S. & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2012). Exploring mathematics problems prepares children to learn from instruction. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113, 552568.Google Scholar
De Koning, B. B, Tabbers, H. K, Rikers, R. M. J. P, & Paas, G. W. C. (2011). Improved effectiveness of cueing by self-explanations when learning from a complex animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 183194.Google Scholar
Didierjean, A. & Cauzinille-Marmèche, E. (1998). Reasoning by analogy: Is it schema-mediated or case-based?. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 13, 385398.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 458.Google Scholar
Durkin, K. & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2012). The effectiveness of using incorrect examples to support learning about decimal magnitude. Learning and Instruction, 22, 206214.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L. & Mayer, R. E. (2015). Learning as a generative activity: Eight learning strategies that promote understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gartmeier, M., Bauer, J., Gruber, H., & Heid, H. (2010). Workplace errors and negative knowledge in elder care nursing. Human Resource Development International, 13, 525.Google Scholar
Große, C. S. & Renkl, A. (2006). Effects of multiple solution methods in mathematics learning. Learning and Instruction, 16, 122138.Google Scholar
Große, C. S. & Renkl, A. (2007). Finding and fixing errors in worked examples: Can this foster learning outcomes? Learning and Instruction, 17, 612634.Google Scholar
Hefter, M. H., Berthold, K., Renkl, A., Riess, W., Schmid, S., & Fries, S. (2014). Effects of a training intervention to foster argumentation skills while processing conflicting scientific positions. Instructional Science, 42, 929947.Google Scholar
Hilbert, T. S. & Renkl, A. (2009). Learning how to use a computer-based concept-mapping tool: Self-explaining examples helps. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 267274.Google Scholar
Hilbert, T. S., Renkl, A., Schworm, S., Kessler, S., & Reiss, K. (2008). Learning to teach with worked-out examples: A computer-based learning environment for teachers. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 24, 316332.Google Scholar
Hodds, M., Alcock, L., & Inglis, M. (2014). Self-explanation training improves proof comprehension. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45, 62101.Google Scholar
Hoogerheide, V., Deijkers, L., Loyens, S. M., Heijltjes, A., & van Gog, T. (2016). Gaining from explaining: Learning improves from explaining to fictitious others on video, not from writing to them. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44, 95106.Google Scholar
Johnson, C. I. & Mayer, R. E. (2010). Applying the self-explanation principle to multimedia learning in a computer-based game-like environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 12461252.Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S. & Renkl, A. (2010). Expertise reversal effect and its instructional implications: Introduction to the special issue. Instructional Science, 38, 209215.Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S. & Singh, A. M. (2016). Rethinking the boundaries of cognitive load theory in complex learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 831852.Google Scholar
Keil, F. C. (2006). Explanation and understanding. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 227254.Google Scholar
Kelley, H. H. (1971). Attribution in social interaction. New York: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
Kiel, E. (1999). Erklären als didaktisches Handeln [Explaining as instructional action]. Würzburg: Ergon.Google Scholar
Koedinger, K. R. & Aleven, V. (2007). Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 239264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koedinger, K. R. & Corbett, A. T. (2006). Cognitive tutors: Technology bringing learning sciences to the classroom. In Sawyer, R. K. (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 6178). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lombrozo, T. (2012). Explanation and abductive inference. In Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 260276). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, P. & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2009). In pursuit of knowledge: Comparing self-explanations, concepts, and procedures as pedagogical tools. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104, 121.Google Scholar
McEldoon, K. L., Durkin, K. L., & Rittle‐Johnson, B. (2013). Is self‐explanation worth the time? A comparison to additional practice. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 615632.Google Scholar
McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: Self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38, 130.Google Scholar
Moreno, R. & Valdez, A. (2007). Immediate and delayed effects of using a classroom case exemplar in teacher education: The role of presentation format. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 194206.Google Scholar
Morrison, J. R., Bol, L., Ross, S. M., & Watson, G. S. (2015). Paraphrasing and prediction with self-explanation as generative strategies for learning science principles in a simulation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 861882.Google Scholar
Nokes-Malach, T. J., VanLehn, K., Belenky, D. M., Lichtenstein, M., & Cox, G. (2013). Coordinating principles and examples through analogy and self-explanation. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 12371263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oser, F. & Spychiger, M. (2005). Lernen ist schmerzhaft: Zur Theorie des Negativen Wissens und zur Praxis der Fehlerkultur [Learning is painful: On a theory of negative knowledge and on the practice of error management]. Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
Pashler, H., Bain, P. M., Bottge, B. A., Graesser, A., Koedinger, K., McDaniel, M., & Metcalfe, J. (2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning. IES Practice Guide. NCER 2007–2004. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research.Google Scholar
Pirolli, P. & Recker, M. (1994). Learning strategies and transfer in the domain of programming. Cognition & Instruction, 12, 235275.Google Scholar
Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21, 129.Google Scholar
Renkl, A. (2014a). Theoretische Konzepte und Prinzipien auf den Schulalltag beziehen: Ein wenig Theorie and darauf begründete Vorschläge für die Referendariatsausbildung [Relating theoretical concepts and principles to classroom practice: A bit of theory and delineated recommendations for teacher education]. Seminar, 2(2014), 916.Google Scholar
Renkl, A. (2014b). Towards an instructionally-oriented theory of example-based learning. Cognitive Science, 38, 137.Google Scholar
Renkl, A. (2015). Different roads lead to Rome: The case of principle-based cognitive skills. Learning: Research & Practice, 1, 7990.Google Scholar
Renkl, A. (2017a). Instruction based on examples. In Mayer, R. E. & Alexander, P. A. (eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction, 2nd edn (pp. 325348). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Renkl, A. (2017b). Learning from worked-examples in mathematics: Students relate procedures to principles. ZDM Mathematics Education, 49, 571584.Google Scholar
Renkl, A. & Atkinson, R. K. (2003). Structuring the transition from example study to problem solving in cognitive skills acquisition: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychologist, 38, 1522.Google Scholar
Renkl, A., Hilbert, T., & Schworm, S. (2009). Example-based learning in heuristic domains: A cognitive load theory account. Educational Psychology Review, 21, 6778.Google Scholar
Renkl, A., Solymosi, J., Erdmann, M., & Aleven, V. (2013). Training principle-based self-explanations: Transfer to new learning contents. In Knauff, M., Pauen, M., Sebanz, N., & Wachsmuth, I. (eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 12051210). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Renkl, A., Stark, R., Gruber, H., & Mandl, H. (1998). Learning from worked-out examples: The effects of example variability and elicited self-explanations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 90108.Google Scholar
Rittle-Johnson, B. & Loehr, A. M. (2017). Eliciting explanations: Constraints on when self-explanation aids learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 24, 15011510.Google Scholar
Rittle-Johnson, B., Loehr, A. M., & Durkin, K. (2017). Promoting self-explanation to improve mathematics learning: A meta-analysis and instructional design principles. ZDM Mathematics Education, 49, 599611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, B. H. (1989). Remindings in learning and instruction. In Vosniadou, S. & Ortony, A. (eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 438469). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rummel, N., Spada, H., & Hauser, S. (2009). Learning to collaborate while being scripted or by observing a model. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 6992.Google Scholar
Salden, R., Aleven, V., Renkl, A., & Schwonke, R. (2009). Worked examples and tutored problem solving: Redundant or synergistic forms of support? Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 203213.Google Scholar
Salden, R., Koedinger, K. R., Renkl, A., Aleven, V., & McLaren, B. M. (2010). Accounting for beneficial effects of worked examples in tutored problem solving. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 379392.Google Scholar
Schalk, L., Saalbach, H., & Stern, E. (2016). Approaches to foster transfer of formal principles: Which route to take? PloS One, 11, e0148787.Google Scholar
Schunk, D. H. & Zimmerman, B. J. (2007). Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23, 725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwonke, R., Renkl, A., Krieg, K., Wittwer, J., Aleven, V., & Salden, R. (2009). The worked-example effect: Not an artefact of lousy control conditions. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 258266.Google Scholar
Schworm, S. & Renkl, A. (2006). Computer-supported example-based learning: When instructional explanations reduce self-explanations. Computers and Education, 46, 426445.Google Scholar
Schworm, S. & Renkl, A. (2007). Learning argumentation skills through the use of prompts for self-explaining examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 285296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidel, T., Blomberg, G., & Renkl, A. (2013). Instructional strategies for using video in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 5665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegler, R. S. (2002). Microgenetic studies of self-explanation. In Granott, N. & Parziale, J. (eds.), Microdevelopment: Transition Processes in Development and Learning (pp. 3158). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Siegler, R. S. & Chen, Z. (2008). Differentiation and integration: Guiding principles for analyzing cognitive change. Developmental Science, 11, 433448.Google Scholar
Singer, M. (1994). Discourse inference processes. In Gernsbacher, M. A. (ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 479515). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stark, R., Mandl, H., Gruber, H., & Renkl, A. (2002). Conditions and effects of example elaboration. Learning and Instruction, 12, 3960.Google Scholar
Sweller, J. (2006). The worked example effect and human cognition. Learning and Instruction, 16, 165169.Google Scholar
Sweller, J. & Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 5989.Google Scholar
Van der Meij, J. & de Jong, T. (2011). The effects of directive self‐explanation prompts to support active processing of multiple representations in a simulation‐based learning environment. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 27, 411423.Google Scholar
Van Gog, T. & Rummel, N. (2010). Example-based learning: Integrating cognitive and social-cognitive research perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 155174.Google Scholar
VanLehn, K. (1996). Cognitive skill acquisition. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 513539.Google Scholar
VanLehn, K., Jones, R. M., & Chi, M. T. (1992). A model of the self-explanation effect. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 159.Google Scholar
Weinstein, C. E. & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In Wittrock, M. (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315327). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wong, R. M. F., Lawson, M. J., & Keeves, J. (2002). The effects of self-explanation training on student’s problem solving in high-school mathematics. Learning and Instruction, 12, 233262.Google Scholar
Wylie, R. & Chi, M. T. H. (2014). The self-explanation principle in multimedia learning. In Mayer, R. E. (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 2nd edn (pp. 413432). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wylie, R., Koedinger, K., & Mitamura, T. (2010). Analogies, explanations, and practice: Examining how task types affect second language grammar learning. In Aleven, V., Kay, J., & Mostow, J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 214223). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Wylie, R., Sheng, M., Mitamura, T., & Koedinger, K. R. (2011). Effects of adaptive prompted self-explanation on robust learning of second language grammar. In Biswas, G., Bull, S., Kay, J., & Mitrovic, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 588590). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×