越多越好?对科学、技术、工程和数学教育中两种以上外部表征的益处进行系统回顾和元分析

IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Educational Psychology Review Pub Date : 2024-10-25 DOI:10.1007/s10648-024-09958-y
Eva Rexigel, Jochen Kuhn, Sebastian Becker, Sarah Malone
{"title":"越多越好?对科学、技术、工程和数学教育中两种以上外部表征的益处进行系统回顾和元分析","authors":"Eva Rexigel, Jochen Kuhn, Sebastian Becker, Sarah Malone","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09958-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over the last decades, a multitude of results in educational and psychological research have shown that the implementation of multiple external representations (MERs) in educational contexts represents a valuable tool for fostering learning and problem-solving skills. The context of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education has received great attention because it necessitates using various symbolic (e.g., text and formula) and graphical representations (e.g., pictures and graphs) to convey subject content. Research has mainly explored effects of combining two representations, but the potential benefits of integrating more than two representations on students’ learning remain underexplored. This gap limits our understanding of promising educational practices and restricts the development of effective teaching strategies catering to students’ cognitive needs. To close this gap, we conducted a systematic review of 46 studies and a meta-analysis that included 132 effect sizes to evaluate the effectiveness of using more than two representations in STEM education and to identify moderating factors influencing learning and problem-solving. A network diagram analysis revealed that the advantages of learning and problem-solving with MERs are also applicable to more than two representations. A subsequent meta-analysis revealed that the learning with more than two representations in STEM can have advantageous effects on students cognitive load (<span>\\({\\text{Hedges}}{^\\prime}g =0.324,~p&lt;.001,~95\\%~\\text{CI}~[0.164, 0.484]\\)</span>) and performance (<span>\\({\\text{Hedges}}{^\\prime}g =0.118,~p&lt;.001,~95\\%~\\text{CI}~[0.050, 0.185]\\)</span>) compared to learning with two representations without notable differences in learning time. The analysis of moderating factors revealed that benefits of learning with more than two representations primarily depend on the provision of appropriate support.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"96 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The More the Better? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Benefits of More than Two External Representations in STEM Education\",\"authors\":\"Eva Rexigel, Jochen Kuhn, Sebastian Becker, Sarah Malone\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10648-024-09958-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Over the last decades, a multitude of results in educational and psychological research have shown that the implementation of multiple external representations (MERs) in educational contexts represents a valuable tool for fostering learning and problem-solving skills. The context of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education has received great attention because it necessitates using various symbolic (e.g., text and formula) and graphical representations (e.g., pictures and graphs) to convey subject content. Research has mainly explored effects of combining two representations, but the potential benefits of integrating more than two representations on students’ learning remain underexplored. This gap limits our understanding of promising educational practices and restricts the development of effective teaching strategies catering to students’ cognitive needs. To close this gap, we conducted a systematic review of 46 studies and a meta-analysis that included 132 effect sizes to evaluate the effectiveness of using more than two representations in STEM education and to identify moderating factors influencing learning and problem-solving. A network diagram analysis revealed that the advantages of learning and problem-solving with MERs are also applicable to more than two representations. A subsequent meta-analysis revealed that the learning with more than two representations in STEM can have advantageous effects on students cognitive load (<span>\\\\({\\\\text{Hedges}}{^\\\\prime}g =0.324,~p&lt;.001,~95\\\\%~\\\\text{CI}~[0.164, 0.484]\\\\)</span>) and performance (<span>\\\\({\\\\text{Hedges}}{^\\\\prime}g =0.118,~p&lt;.001,~95\\\\%~\\\\text{CI}~[0.050, 0.185]\\\\)</span>) compared to learning with two representations without notable differences in learning time. The analysis of moderating factors revealed that benefits of learning with more than two representations primarily depend on the provision of appropriate support.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48344,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"96 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09958-y\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09958-y","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

过去几十年来,教育学和心理学研究的大量成果表明,在教育环境中实施多重外部表征(MERs)是培养学习和解决问题能力的重要工具。科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)教育因需要使用各种符号(如文字和公式)和图形(如图片和图表)来传达学科内容而备受关注。研究主要探讨了两种表征相结合的效果,但整合两种以上表征对学生学习的潜在益处仍未得到充分探讨。这一空白限制了我们对有前途的教育实践的理解,也制约了针对学生认知需求的有效教学策略的发展。为了缩小这一差距,我们对 46 项研究进行了系统回顾,并对 132 个效应大小进行了荟萃分析,以评估在 STEM 教育中使用两种以上表征的有效性,并确定影响学习和问题解决的调节因素。网络图分析表明,使用 MERs 学习和解决问题的优势也适用于两个以上的表征。随后的荟萃分析表明,在STEM中使用两个以上表征进行学习会对学生的认知负荷产生有利影响({text{Hedges}}{^\prime}g =0.324,~p<.001,~95\%~text{CI}~[0.164, 0.484])和表现({text{Hedges}}{^\prime}g =0.118,~p<.001,~95\%~text{CI}~[0.050, 0.185])与使用两种表征学习相比,在学习时间上没有明显差异。对调节因素的分析表明,使用两种以上表征进行学习的益处主要取决于是否提供了适当的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
The More the Better? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Benefits of More than Two External Representations in STEM Education

Over the last decades, a multitude of results in educational and psychological research have shown that the implementation of multiple external representations (MERs) in educational contexts represents a valuable tool for fostering learning and problem-solving skills. The context of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education has received great attention because it necessitates using various symbolic (e.g., text and formula) and graphical representations (e.g., pictures and graphs) to convey subject content. Research has mainly explored effects of combining two representations, but the potential benefits of integrating more than two representations on students’ learning remain underexplored. This gap limits our understanding of promising educational practices and restricts the development of effective teaching strategies catering to students’ cognitive needs. To close this gap, we conducted a systematic review of 46 studies and a meta-analysis that included 132 effect sizes to evaluate the effectiveness of using more than two representations in STEM education and to identify moderating factors influencing learning and problem-solving. A network diagram analysis revealed that the advantages of learning and problem-solving with MERs are also applicable to more than two representations. A subsequent meta-analysis revealed that the learning with more than two representations in STEM can have advantageous effects on students cognitive load (\({\text{Hedges}}{^\prime}g =0.324,~p<.001,~95\%~\text{CI}~[0.164, 0.484]\)) and performance (\({\text{Hedges}}{^\prime}g =0.118,~p<.001,~95\%~\text{CI}~[0.050, 0.185]\)) compared to learning with two representations without notable differences in learning time. The analysis of moderating factors revealed that benefits of learning with more than two representations primarily depend on the provision of appropriate support.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Psychology Review
Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.
期刊最新文献
On Being Accepted: Interrogating How University Cultural Scripts Shape Personal and Political Facets of Belonging Linking Disparate Strands: A Critical Review of the Relationship Between Creativity and Education Exploring the Nature-Creativity Connection Across Different Settings: A Scoping Review Bold, Humble, Collaborative, and Virtuous: The Future of Theory Development in Educational Psychology Effects of School-led Greenspace Interventions on Mental, Physical and Social Wellbeing in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review
×
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