Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pictorial support and specific instructions as design variables for children’s concept and rule learning

  • Articles
  • Published:
ECTJ Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How do young children most readily learn new concepts and rules? The authors contribute a new study to the literature on this important subject. They tested two design strategies on 69 elementary school children to investigate (a) the effect of using three types of pictorial supports to focus student attention on the important features of a concept or rule as described in accompanying written material and (b) the importance of specific pretraining instruction on how to use the pictorial to notice and label relevant rules and concepts. Posttests showed it works better to supply pictures than to have students draw their own, and both these methods work better than having students form mental images of the material studied. All three types of pictorials required about the same student time-on-task. The authors also found that specific pretraining instruction in how to use the pictorials is very important. The learning task involved two arithmetical rules—intersection and empty set.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Reference Notes

  • Feldman, K. V.The effects of number of positive and negative instances, concept definition, and emphasis of relevant attributes on the attainment of mathematical concepts (Tech. Rep. 243). Madison: Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markle, S. M., & Tiemann, P. W.Some principles of instructional design at higher cognitive levels. Paper presented at the International Congress for Instructional Technology, Berlin, April, 1972.

  • Merrill, M. D., & Tennyson, R. D.The effects of types of positive and negative examples on learning concepts in the classroom (Final Report No. 0-H-014). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

References

  • Danner, F. W., & Taylor, A. M. Integrated pictures and relational training in children’s learning.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1973,16, 47–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duchastel, P. C. & Brown, B. R. Incidental and relevant learning with instructional objectives.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974,66, 481–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, E. D., & Rothkopf, E. Z. Text organization and learning goals.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975,67, 445–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiselman, R. E. Memory for prose as a function of learning strategy and inspection time.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1977,69, 547–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E.J. Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York: Appleton, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, F. Effect of imagery on learning incidental material in the classroom.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974,66, 301–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guttmann, J., Levin, J. R., & Pressley, M. Pictures, partial pictures, and young children’s oral prose learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1977,69, 473–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houtz, J. C., Moore, J. W., & Davis, J. K. Effects of different types of positive and negative instances in learning“nondimensioned” concepts.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973,64, 206–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J. R. Inducing comprehension in poor readers: A test of a recent model.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973,65, 19–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J. R. What have we learned about maximizing what children learn? In J. R. Levin & V. L. Allen (Eds.),Cognitive learning in children: Theory and strategies. New York: Academic Press, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J. R., Divine-Hawkins, P., Kerst, S. M., & Guttmann, J. Individual differences in learning from pictures and words: The development and application of an instrument.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974,66, 296–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markle, S. M. They teach concepts, don’t they?Educational Researcher, 1975,4, 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D., & Tennyson, R. D. Concept classification and classification errors as a function of relationships between examples and nonexamples.Improving Human Performance, in press.

  • Rasco, R. W., Tennyson, R. D., & Boutwell, R. C. Imagery instructions and drawings in learning prose.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975,67, 188–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohwer, W. D., Jr. Elaboration and learning in childhood and adolescence. In H. W. Reese (Ed.),Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 8). New York: Academic Press, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohwer, W. D., Jr., & Harris, W. J. Media effects on prose learning in two populations of children.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975,67, 651–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohwer, W. D., Jr., & Matz, R. Improving aural comprehension in white and black children: Picture versus print.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1975,19, 23–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scandura, J. M. Role of rules in behavior: Toward an operational definition of what (rule) is learned.Psychological Review, 1970,77, 516–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scandura, J. M., & Voorhies, D. J. Effects of irrelevant attributes and irrelevant operations on rule learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971,62, 352–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shumway, R. The effect of negative instances in learning mathematical concepts.Research in Math Education, 1974,52, 139–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolurow, K. A. C. Objective rules of sequencing applied to instructional materials.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975,67, 909–912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, C. L., Tennyson, R. D., & Rothen, W. Content structure and instructional control strategies as design variables in concept acquisition.Journal of Educational Psychology, in press.

  • Tennyson, R. D. Effect of negative instances in concept acquisition using a verbal learning task.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973,64, 247–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D., Steve, M., & Boutwell, R. C. Instance sequence and analysis of instance attribute representation in concept acquisition.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975,67, 821–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D., & Tennyson, C. L. Simultaneous presentation of rules and interdisplay relationship of instances in a verbal task.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975,67, 852–859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varley, W. H., Levin, J. R., Severson, R. A., & Wolff, P. Training imagery production in young children through motor involvement.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974,66, 262–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, University of Minnesota, 55455, Minneapolis

    Robert D. Tennyson (Associate professor of instructional systems)

Authors
  1. Robert D. Tennyson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tennyson, R.D. Pictorial support and specific instructions as design variables for children’s concept and rule learning. ECTJ 26, 291–299 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766365

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766365

Keywords

Search

Navigation