Thomas D. Griffin, Allison J. Jaeger, M. Anne Britt, Jennifer Wiley
{"title":"通过科学中的多因果解释课程提高多文档理解能力","authors":"Thomas D. Griffin, Allison J. Jaeger, M. Anne Britt, Jennifer Wiley","doi":"10.1007/s11251-023-09657-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Relying on multiple documents to answer questions is becoming common for both academic and personal inquiry tasks. These tasks often require students to explain phenomena by taking various causal factors that are mentioned separately in different documents and integrating them into a coherent multi-causal explanation of some phenomena. However, inquiry questions may not make this requirement explicit and may instead simply ask students to explain why the phenomenon occurs. This paper explores an <i>Activity Model Hypothesis</i> that posits students lack knowledge that their explanation should be multi-causal and how to engage in the kind of thinking needed to construct such an explanation. This experiment, conducted on a sample of eigth grade students, manipulated whether students received a short 10-min lesson on the nature of scientific explanations and multi-causal reasoning. Students who received this causal chain lesson wrote essays that were more causally complex and integrated, and subsequently performed better on an inference verification test, than students who did not receive the lesson. These results point to relatively simple changes to instructions that can provide the support students need for successful multiple-document comprehension.</p>","PeriodicalId":47990,"journal":{"name":"Instructional Science","volume":"75 2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving multiple document comprehension with a lesson about multi-causal explanations in science\",\"authors\":\"Thomas D. Griffin, Allison J. Jaeger, M. Anne Britt, Jennifer Wiley\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11251-023-09657-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Relying on multiple documents to answer questions is becoming common for both academic and personal inquiry tasks. These tasks often require students to explain phenomena by taking various causal factors that are mentioned separately in different documents and integrating them into a coherent multi-causal explanation of some phenomena. However, inquiry questions may not make this requirement explicit and may instead simply ask students to explain why the phenomenon occurs. This paper explores an <i>Activity Model Hypothesis</i> that posits students lack knowledge that their explanation should be multi-causal and how to engage in the kind of thinking needed to construct such an explanation. This experiment, conducted on a sample of eigth grade students, manipulated whether students received a short 10-min lesson on the nature of scientific explanations and multi-causal reasoning. Students who received this causal chain lesson wrote essays that were more causally complex and integrated, and subsequently performed better on an inference verification test, than students who did not receive the lesson. These results point to relatively simple changes to instructions that can provide the support students need for successful multiple-document comprehension.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47990,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Instructional Science\",\"volume\":\"75 2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Instructional Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09657-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Instructional Science","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09657-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Improving multiple document comprehension with a lesson about multi-causal explanations in science
Relying on multiple documents to answer questions is becoming common for both academic and personal inquiry tasks. These tasks often require students to explain phenomena by taking various causal factors that are mentioned separately in different documents and integrating them into a coherent multi-causal explanation of some phenomena. However, inquiry questions may not make this requirement explicit and may instead simply ask students to explain why the phenomenon occurs. This paper explores an Activity Model Hypothesis that posits students lack knowledge that their explanation should be multi-causal and how to engage in the kind of thinking needed to construct such an explanation. This experiment, conducted on a sample of eigth grade students, manipulated whether students received a short 10-min lesson on the nature of scientific explanations and multi-causal reasoning. Students who received this causal chain lesson wrote essays that were more causally complex and integrated, and subsequently performed better on an inference verification test, than students who did not receive the lesson. These results point to relatively simple changes to instructions that can provide the support students need for successful multiple-document comprehension.
期刊介绍:
Instructional Science, An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, promotes a deeper understanding of the nature, theory, and practice of learning and of environments in which learning occurs. The journal’s conception of learning, as well as of instruction, is broad, recognizing that there are many ways to stimulate and support learning. The journal encourages submission of research papers, covering a variety of perspectives from the learning sciences and learning, by people of all ages, in all areas of the curriculum, in technologically rich or lean environments, and in informal and formal learning contexts. Emphasizing reports of original empirical research, the journal provides space for full and detailed reporting of major studies. Regardless of the topic, papers published in the journal all make an explicit contribution to the science of learning and instruction by drawing out the implications for the design and implementation of learning environments. We particularly encourage the submission of papers that highlight the interaction between learning processes and learning environments, focus on meaningful learning, and recognize the role of context. Papers are characterized by methodological variety that ranges, for example, from experimental studies in laboratory settings, to qualitative studies, to design-based research in authentic learning settings. The Editors will occasionally invite experts to write a review article on an important topic in the field. When review articles are considered for publication, they must deal with central issues in the domain of learning and learning environments. The journal accepts replication studies. Such a study should replicate an important and seminal finding in the field, from a study which was originally conducted by a different research group. Most years, Instructional Science publishes a guest-edited thematic special issue on a topic central to the journal''s scope. Proposals for special issues can be sent to the Editor-in-Chief. Proposals will be discussed in Spring and Fall of each year, and the proposers will be notified afterwards. To be considered for the Spring and Fall discussion, proposals should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief by March 1 and October 1, respectively. Please note that articles that are submitted for a special issue will follow the same review process as regular articles.