Self-study in higher education: Its role in productive discussions and learning outcomes

IF 3.8 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Active Learning in Higher Education Pub Date : 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1177/14697874241270429
Jaeseo Lim, Yongmin Shin, Min Hae Song, Seunghee Lee, Jungjoon Ihm
{"title":"Self-study in higher education: Its role in productive discussions and learning outcomes","authors":"Jaeseo Lim, Yongmin Shin, Min Hae Song, Seunghee Lee, Jungjoon Ihm","doi":"10.1177/14697874241270429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although discussion is widely used as an effective instructional strategy in the classroom, the questions remain about which additional strategies can be combined to discussion. The present study aims to examine the role of self-study as an individual preparation for discussion and the learning effect of the combination of self-study and discussion. We compared a two-sequential design of groups: individual preparation (video lecture vs. self-study) and type of discussion (teacher-facilitated vs. student-led). We compared the test scores for shallow learning and transfer of learning. Conducting two experiments ( n<jats:sub>1</jats:sub> = 91; n<jats:sub>2</jats:sub> = 113, respectively), we found that the self-study group obtained higher scores than those of the video lecture group regardless of discussion type. Specifically, the self-study group obtained higher scores through student-led discussions, while lecture groups improved scores through teacher-facilitated discussion. To interpret the results, we analyzed the content of discussions. The result demonstrated that students in the self-study group conducted more constructive interactions with students than they did with teachers, while the video lecture group interacted more with teachers than they did with students. The findings indicate that self-study as individual preparation improves the learning effect of discussion.","PeriodicalId":47411,"journal":{"name":"Active Learning in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Active Learning in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874241270429","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although discussion is widely used as an effective instructional strategy in the classroom, the questions remain about which additional strategies can be combined to discussion. The present study aims to examine the role of self-study as an individual preparation for discussion and the learning effect of the combination of self-study and discussion. We compared a two-sequential design of groups: individual preparation (video lecture vs. self-study) and type of discussion (teacher-facilitated vs. student-led). We compared the test scores for shallow learning and transfer of learning. Conducting two experiments ( n1 = 91; n2 = 113, respectively), we found that the self-study group obtained higher scores than those of the video lecture group regardless of discussion type. Specifically, the self-study group obtained higher scores through student-led discussions, while lecture groups improved scores through teacher-facilitated discussion. To interpret the results, we analyzed the content of discussions. The result demonstrated that students in the self-study group conducted more constructive interactions with students than they did with teachers, while the video lecture group interacted more with teachers than they did with students. The findings indicate that self-study as individual preparation improves the learning effect of discussion.
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
高等教育中的自学:自学在富有成效的讨论和学习成果中的作用
尽管讨论作为一种有效的教学策略在课堂上被广泛使用,但仍存在哪些其他策略可以与讨论相结合的问题。本研究旨在探讨自学作为讨论前个人准备的作用,以及自学与讨论相结合的学习效果。我们比较了两组序列设计:个人准备(视频讲座 vs. 自学)和讨论类型(教师引导 vs. 学生主导)。我们比较了浅层学习和学习迁移的测试得分。通过两次实验(分别为 n1 = 91;n2 = 113),我们发现无论讨论类型如何,自学组的得分都高于视频讲座组。具体来说,自学组通过学生主导的讨论获得了更高的分数,而讲座组则通过教师主持的讨论提高了分数。为了解释结果,我们分析了讨论的内容。结果表明,自学组学生与学生的建设性互动多于与教师的互动,而视频讲座组学生与教师的互动多于与学生的互动。研究结果表明,作为个人准备的自学能提高讨论的学习效果。
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
Active Learning in Higher Education
Active Learning in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
12.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Active Learning in Higher Education is an international, refereed publication for all those who teach and support learning in higher education (HE) and those who undertake or use research into effective learning, teaching and assessment in universities and colleges. The journal is devoted to publishing accounts of research covering all aspects of learning and teaching concerning adults in higher education. Non-discipline specific and non-context/country specific in nature, it comprises accounts of research across all areas of the curriculum; accounts which are relevant to faculty and others involved in learning and teaching in all disciplines, in all countries.
期刊最新文献
Psychological safety in online interdisciplinary student teams: What teachers can do to promote an effective climate for knowledge sharing, collaboration and problem-solving Self-study in higher education: Its role in productive discussions and learning outcomes Higher education students’ conceptions of learning gain Beyond goal setting and planning: An examination of college students’ self-regulated learning forethought processes How does virtual peer presence relate to learning from video lectures and subsequent explanation generation? The moderated mediating roles of motivation and explanation characteristics
×
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