Leveraging What Students Know to Make Sense of Texts: What the Research Says About Prior Knowledge Activation

IF 8.3 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Review of Educational Research Pub Date : 2023-02-06 DOI:10.3102/00346543221148478
C. Hattan, P. Alexander, Sarah M. Lupo
{"title":"Leveraging What Students Know to Make Sense of Texts: What the Research Says About Prior Knowledge Activation","authors":"C. Hattan, P. Alexander, Sarah M. Lupo","doi":"10.3102/00346543221148478","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This systematic literature review examined the research on prior knowledge and its activation to ascertain how these terms are defined, what specific techniques have been empirically investigated, and the conditions under which prior knowledge activation facilitated students’ comprehension. Fifty-four articles met the inclusion criteria and revealed that the terms prior knowledge and prior knowledge activation were often vaguely defined. Further, 30 unique techniques for activating readers’ prior knowledge representing eight different categories were identified. Those categories were open-ended prompts, procedural or strategic supports during reading, visual representations, analogical reasoning, text alteration, augmented activation, extratextual activities, and spontaneous activation. Techniques meant to facilitate knowledge activation prior to reading were most common, although the prompting of students’ existing knowledge was beneficial during and after reading as well. Variability in the effectiveness of activation techniques was related, in part, to the amount, accuracy, and specificity of students’ knowledge. Based on the key findings identified in this review, recommendations for future inquiry are forwarded, including suggested definitions of prior knowledge and prior knowledge activation.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221148478","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: 8

Abstract

This systematic literature review examined the research on prior knowledge and its activation to ascertain how these terms are defined, what specific techniques have been empirically investigated, and the conditions under which prior knowledge activation facilitated students’ comprehension. Fifty-four articles met the inclusion criteria and revealed that the terms prior knowledge and prior knowledge activation were often vaguely defined. Further, 30 unique techniques for activating readers’ prior knowledge representing eight different categories were identified. Those categories were open-ended prompts, procedural or strategic supports during reading, visual representations, analogical reasoning, text alteration, augmented activation, extratextual activities, and spontaneous activation. Techniques meant to facilitate knowledge activation prior to reading were most common, although the prompting of students’ existing knowledge was beneficial during and after reading as well. Variability in the effectiveness of activation techniques was related, in part, to the amount, accuracy, and specificity of students’ knowledge. Based on the key findings identified in this review, recommendations for future inquiry are forwarded, including suggested definitions of prior knowledge and prior knowledge activation.
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
利用学生所知理解文本:研究对先验知识激活的看法
这篇系统的文献综述考察了对先验知识及其激活的研究,以确定这些术语是如何定义的,对哪些具体技术进行了实证研究,以及先验知识激活促进学生理解的条件。54篇文章符合纳入标准,并显示先前知识和先前知识激活这两个术语的定义往往模糊不清。此外,还确定了30种独特的激活读者先验知识的技术,代表了八个不同的类别。这些类别包括开放式提示、阅读过程中的程序或策略支持、视觉表征、类比推理、文本转换、增强激活、语篇外活动和自发激活。旨在促进阅读前知识激活的技术是最常见的,尽管在阅读期间和阅读后对学生现有知识的提示也是有益的。激活技术有效性的可变性在一定程度上与学生知识的数量、准确性和特异性有关。根据本综述中确定的关键发现,提出了未来调查的建议,包括对先验知识和先验知识激活的建议定义。
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
Review of Educational Research
Review of Educational Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
24.10
自引率
2.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Review of Educational Research (RER), a quarterly publication initiated in 1931 with approximately 640 pages per volume year, is dedicated to presenting critical, integrative reviews of research literature relevant to education. These reviews encompass conceptualizations, interpretations, and syntheses of scholarly work across fields broadly pertinent to education and educational research. Welcoming submissions from any discipline, RER encourages research reviews in psychology, sociology, history, philosophy, political science, economics, computer science, statistics, anthropology, and biology, provided the review addresses educational issues. While original empirical research is not published independently, RER incorporates it within broader integrative reviews. The journal may occasionally feature solicited, rigorously refereed analytic reviews of special topics, especially from disciplines underrepresented in educational research.
期刊最新文献
Teachers’ Beliefs About Language Diversity and Multilingual Learners: A Systematic Review of the Literature Studying the Effectiveness of Team Teaching: A Systematic Review on the Conceptual and Methodological Credibility of Experimental Studies Leveraging Physical Activities to Support Learning for Young People via Technologies: An Examination of Educational Practices Across the Field Robot-Assisted Language Learning: A Meta-Analysis Does Aid Matter? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Grant Aid on College Student Outcomes
×
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