自学提高了讨论的学习效果

IF 3 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of the Learning Sciences Pub Date : 2023-03-23 DOI:10.1080/10508406.2023.2185148
Jaeseo Lim, Jooyong Park
{"title":"自学提高了讨论的学习效果","authors":"Jaeseo Lim, Jooyong Park","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2023.2185148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Academic learning in higher education requires diverse activities such as reading, reviewing, and discussion. However, there are relatively few studies on the effect of the combination of these activities on learning outcomes. In this study, we investigated the combination of self-study and discussions at a selective Korean university. Methods The present study compared the two-part instructional sequence of three groups: watching a video lecture (LD) and self-study (SD) groups, both followed by student-led discussions, and reviewing after watching a video lecture (LR) group. We compared test results using verbatim, paraphrased, and transfer items. We also carried out in-depth analyses of dialogs in the discussions. Findings In three separate experiments, we found that the discussion groups scored significantly higher than the review group. Moreover, the SD group performed better than the LD group of the two discussion groups. Analyses of dialogue suggest that self-study elicited more active and productive content from the students than lectures, leading to superior performance. Contribution Our results indicate that self-study can significantly enhance the learning effect of discussions.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"2 1","pages":"455 - 476"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Self-study enhances the learning effect of discussions\",\"authors\":\"Jaeseo Lim, Jooyong Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10508406.2023.2185148\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Background Academic learning in higher education requires diverse activities such as reading, reviewing, and discussion. However, there are relatively few studies on the effect of the combination of these activities on learning outcomes. In this study, we investigated the combination of self-study and discussions at a selective Korean university. Methods The present study compared the two-part instructional sequence of three groups: watching a video lecture (LD) and self-study (SD) groups, both followed by student-led discussions, and reviewing after watching a video lecture (LR) group. We compared test results using verbatim, paraphrased, and transfer items. We also carried out in-depth analyses of dialogs in the discussions. Findings In three separate experiments, we found that the discussion groups scored significantly higher than the review group. Moreover, the SD group performed better than the LD group of the two discussion groups. Analyses of dialogue suggest that self-study elicited more active and productive content from the students than lectures, leading to superior performance. Contribution Our results indicate that self-study can significantly enhance the learning effect of discussions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Learning Sciences\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"455 - 476\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Learning Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2023.2185148\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2023.2185148","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: 1

摘要

高等教育中的学术学习需要多种多样的活动,如阅读、复习和讨论。然而,关于这些活动结合对学习结果的影响的研究相对较少。在这项研究中,我们调查了韩国一所名牌大学的自学和讨论的结合。方法本研究比较了三个组的两部分教学顺序:观看视频讲座(LD)和自学(SD)组,都是学生主导的讨论,然后在观看视频讲座(LR)组进行复习。我们比较了逐字、意译和转移项目的测试结果。我们还对讨论中的对话进行了深入分析。在三个独立的实验中,我们发现讨论组的得分明显高于复习组。在两个讨论组中,SD组表现优于LD组。对对话的分析表明,自学从学生那里激发出比讲课更积极、更有成效的内容,从而导致更好的表现。我们的研究结果表明,自学可以显著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。
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
Self-study enhances the learning effect of discussions
ABSTRACT Background Academic learning in higher education requires diverse activities such as reading, reviewing, and discussion. However, there are relatively few studies on the effect of the combination of these activities on learning outcomes. In this study, we investigated the combination of self-study and discussions at a selective Korean university. Methods The present study compared the two-part instructional sequence of three groups: watching a video lecture (LD) and self-study (SD) groups, both followed by student-led discussions, and reviewing after watching a video lecture (LR) group. We compared test results using verbatim, paraphrased, and transfer items. We also carried out in-depth analyses of dialogs in the discussions. Findings In three separate experiments, we found that the discussion groups scored significantly higher than the review group. Moreover, the SD group performed better than the LD group of the two discussion groups. Analyses of dialogue suggest that self-study elicited more active and productive content from the students than lectures, leading to superior performance. Contribution Our results indicate that self-study can significantly enhance the learning effect of discussions.
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
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Journal of the Learning Sciences (JLS) is one of the two official journals of the International Society of the Learning Sciences ( www.isls.org). JLS provides a multidisciplinary forum for research on education and learning that informs theories of how people learn and the design of learning environments. It publishes research that elucidates processes of learning, and the ways in which technologies, instructional practices, and learning environments can be designed to support learning in different contexts. JLS articles draw on theoretical frameworks from such diverse fields as cognitive science, sociocultural theory, educational psychology, computer science, and anthropology. Submissions are not limited to any particular research method, but must be based on rigorous analyses that present new insights into how people learn and/or how learning can be supported and enhanced. Successful submissions should position their argument within extant literature in the learning sciences. They should reflect the core practices and foci that have defined the learning sciences as a field: privileging design in methodology and pedagogy; emphasizing interdisciplinarity and methodological innovation; grounding research in real-world contexts; answering questions about learning process and mechanism, alongside outcomes; pursuing technological and pedagogical innovation; and maintaining a strong connection between research and practice.
期刊最新文献
Reframing design in education: Proposing a framework to support pre-service teachers in adopting designerly stances The role of individual preparation before collaboration: An exploratory study on students’ computer-supported collaborative argumentation in a primary classroom Toward epistemic justice in socio-scientific decision-making: How youth make sense of lively COVID-19 and vaccines data Learning and constructions of us and them in teachers’ collaborative groups Interdisciplinary learning in the humanities: Knowledge building and identity work
×
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