Effect of retrieval practice and drawing on high school students’ conceptual understanding of the carbon cycle

Mengyu Wang, Ming Yang, William C. Kyle
{"title":"Effect of retrieval practice and drawing on high school students’ conceptual understanding of the carbon cycle","authors":"Mengyu Wang, Ming Yang, William C. Kyle","doi":"10.1186/s43031-023-00083-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Both learner-generated drawing and retrieval practice methods are effective to enhance science learning. To compare the impact of combining different drawing methods (representational drawing vs. abstract drawing) with retrieval practice on the carbon cycle learning, 136 Chinese high school students enrolled in a geography course were assigned randomly to six learning conditions: students built their mental models of the carbon cycle by either generating sketches with or without access to the text learning material introducing the carbon cycle (i.e., generative sketching vs. retrieval sketching), or by creating concept maps with or without access to the learning material (i.e., generative concept mapping vs. retrieval concept mapping), or students just freely recalled on what they have learned from the learning material by paragraphing (i.e., retrieval practice), or restudied the learning material with note-taking (i.e., restudy). Students’ learning outcomes were assessed by immediate and one-week delayed tests. Results revealed that no difference was found between the six conditions on the immediate test, whereas students in the retrieval practice condition with paragraphing significantly outperformed those who did not practice retrieval on the one-week delayed test. However, there was no difference between the two drawing conditions regardless of whether they were adopted with or without retrieval practice. Furthermore, the same pattern was found on the factual knowledge questions in both tests, but no main effect of condition was found on both the immediate and the delayed tests for the application questions. We conclude that retrieval-based drawing could be adopted for climate change education at the high school level.","PeriodicalId":72822,"journal":{"name":"Disciplinary and interdisciplinary science education research","volume":"2020 7","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Disciplinary and interdisciplinary science education research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-023-00083-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Both learner-generated drawing and retrieval practice methods are effective to enhance science learning. To compare the impact of combining different drawing methods (representational drawing vs. abstract drawing) with retrieval practice on the carbon cycle learning, 136 Chinese high school students enrolled in a geography course were assigned randomly to six learning conditions: students built their mental models of the carbon cycle by either generating sketches with or without access to the text learning material introducing the carbon cycle (i.e., generative sketching vs. retrieval sketching), or by creating concept maps with or without access to the learning material (i.e., generative concept mapping vs. retrieval concept mapping), or students just freely recalled on what they have learned from the learning material by paragraphing (i.e., retrieval practice), or restudied the learning material with note-taking (i.e., restudy). Students’ learning outcomes were assessed by immediate and one-week delayed tests. Results revealed that no difference was found between the six conditions on the immediate test, whereas students in the retrieval practice condition with paragraphing significantly outperformed those who did not practice retrieval on the one-week delayed test. However, there was no difference between the two drawing conditions regardless of whether they were adopted with or without retrieval practice. Furthermore, the same pattern was found on the factual knowledge questions in both tests, but no main effect of condition was found on both the immediate and the delayed tests for the application questions. We conclude that retrieval-based drawing could be adopted for climate change education at the high school level.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
检索练习和绘图对高中生碳循环概念理解的影响
摘要:学习者生成的绘图和检索练习方法都是促进科学学习的有效方法。为了比较不同绘画方法(具象绘画与抽象绘画)结合检索练习对碳循环学习的影响,我们将136名中国高中地理学生随机分配到六种学习条件下:学生建立碳循环心智模型的方式,可以是在有或没有接触介绍碳循环的文本学习材料的情况下生成草图(即生成草图vs.检索草图),也可以是在有或没有接触学习材料的情况下创建概念图(即生成概念图vs.检索概念图),或者学生只是通过分段的方式自由回忆他们从学习材料中学到的东西(即检索练习)。或者通过记笔记来重新学习学习材料(即重新学习)。学生的学习成果通过即时测试和一周后测试进行评估。结果显示,在即时测试中,六种条件之间没有发现差异,而在一周延迟测试中,在分段检索练习条件下的学生表现明显优于没有进行检索练习的学生。然而,无论是否采用检索练习,两种绘制条件都没有差异。此外,在两种测试的事实性知识题上均发现了相同的模式,但在应用题的即时和延迟测试中都没有发现条件的主要影响。结果表明,在高中阶段的气候变化教育中,可采用基于检索的绘图方法。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
35 weeks
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Transforming standards into classrooms for knowledge-in-use: an effective and coherent project-based learning system Alternative grading practices in undergraduate STEM education: a scoping review Characterization of physics and astronomy assistant professors’ reflections on their teaching: can they promote engagement in instructional change? Correction: Moving from surviving to thriving: a taxonomy of beginning science teacher challenges Are science competitions meeting their intentions? a case study on affective and cognitive predictors of success in the Physics Olympiad
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1