Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Apr 8;10(4):e0124115.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124115. eCollection 2015.

Learning from instructional explanations: effects of prompts based on the active-constructive-interactive framework

Affiliations

Learning from instructional explanations: effects of prompts based on the active-constructive-interactive framework

Julian Roelle et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Although instructional explanations are commonly provided when learners are introduced to new content, they often fail because they are not integrated into effective learning activities. The recently introduced active-constructive-interactive framework posits an effectiveness hierarchy in which interactive learning activities are at the top; these are then followed by constructive and active learning activities, respectively. Against this background, we combined instructional explanations with different types of prompts that were designed to elicit these learning activities and tested the central predictions of the active-constructive-interactive framework. In Experiment 1, N = 83 students were randomly assigned to one of four combinations of instructional explanations and prompts. To test the active < constructive learning hypothesis, the learners received either (1) complete explanations and engaging prompts designed to elicit active activities or (2) explanations that were reduced by inferences and inference prompts designed to engage learners in constructing the withheld information. Furthermore, in order to explore how interactive learning activities can be elicited, we gave the learners who had difficulties in constructing the prompted inferences adapted remedial explanations with either (3) unspecific engaging prompts or (4) revision prompts. In support of the active < constructive learning hypothesis, we found that the learners who received reduced explanations and inference prompts outperformed the learners who received complete explanations and engaging prompts. Moreover, revision prompts were more effective in eliciting interactive learning activities than engaging prompts. In Experiment 2, N = 40 students were randomly assigned to either (1) a reduced explanations and inference prompts or (2) a reduced explanations and inference prompts plus adapted remedial explanations and revision prompts condition. In support of the constructive < interactive learning hypothesis, the learners who received adapted remedial explanations and revision prompts as add-ons to reduced explanations and inference prompts acquired more conceptual knowledge.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Screenshot of a reduced introductory instructional explanation with inference prompt (translated from German).
Fig 2
Fig 2. Screenshot of a rapid verification task (translated from German).
Fig 3
Fig 3. Posttest answers that correspond to the six levels of the rating scale (translated from German).
Fig 4
Fig 4. Results of the mediation analyses in Experiment 1.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Berthold K, Renkl A. How to foster active processing of explanations in instructional communication. Educ Psychol Rev. 2010;22: 25–40. 10.1007/s10648-010-9124-9 - DOI
    1. Leinhardt G. Instructional explanations: A commonplace for teaching and location for contrast In Richardson V, editor. Handbook of research on teaching. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association; 2001. pp. 333–357.
    1. Wittwer J, Renkl A. Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educ Psychol. 2008;43: 49–64. 10.1080/00461520701756420 - DOI
    1. Bannert M, Reimann P. Supporting self-regulated hypermedia learning through prompts. Instr Sci. 2012;40: 193–211. 10.1007/s11251-011-9167-4 - DOI
    1. Devolder A, Van Braak J, Tondeur J. Supporting self-regulated learning in computer-based learning environments: Systematic review of effects of scaffolding in the domain of science education. J Comput Assist Lear. 2012;28: 557–573. 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00476.x - DOI

LinkOut - more resources