Problem-solving or Explicit Instruction: Which Should Go First When Element Interactivity Is High?

Abstract

The concept of productive failure posits that a problem-solving phase prior to explicit instruction is more effective than explicit instruction followed by problem-solving. This prediction was tested with Year 5 primary school students learning about light energy efficiency. Two, fully randomised, controlled experiments were conducted. In the first experiment (N = 64), explicit instruction followed by problem-solving was found to be superior to the reverse order for performance on problems similar to those used during instruction, with no difference on transfer problems. In the second experiment, where element interactivity was increased (N = 71), explicit instruction followed by problem-solving was found to be superior to the reverse order for performance on both similar and transfer problems. The contradictory predictions and results of a productive failure approach and cognitive load theory are discussed using the concept of element interactivity. Specifically, for learning where element interactivity is high, explicit instruction should precede problem-solving.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Chen, O., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2015). The worked example effect, the generation effect, and element interactivity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(3), 689–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen, O., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2016a). Relations between the worked example and generation effects on immediate and delayed tests. Learning and Instruction, 45, 20–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chen, O., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2016b). When instructional guidance is needed. Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 33(2), 149–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chen, O., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2017). The expertise reversal effect is a variant of the more general element interactivity effect. Educational Psychology Review, 29(2), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9359-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen, O., Castro-Alonso, J. C., Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2018). Extending cognitive load theory to incorporate working memory resource depletion: evidence from the spacing effect. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 483–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9426-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cook, M. A. (2017). A comparison of the effectiveness of worked examples and productive failure in learning procedural and conceptual knowledge related to statistics (Order No. 10666475). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1984948629).

  7. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Crooks, N. M., & Alibali, M. W. (2014). Defining and measuring conceptual knowledge in mathematics. Developmental Review, 34(4), 344–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. DeCaro, M. S., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2012). Exploring mathematics problems prepares children to learn from instruction. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113(4), 552–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fyfe, E. R., DeCaro, M. S., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2014). An alternative time for telling: when conceptual instruction prior to problem solving improves mathematical knowledge. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 502–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Geary, D. (2008). An evolutionarily informed education science. Educational Psychologist, 43(4), 179–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Geary, D., & Berch, D. (2016). Evolution and children’s cognitive and academic development. In D. Geary & D. Berch (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on child development and education (pp. 217–249). Switzerland: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Glogger-Frey, I., Fleischer, C., Grüny, L., Kappich, J., & Renkl, A. (2015). Inventing a solution and studying a worked solution prepare differently for learning from direct instruction. Learning and Instruction, 39, 72–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Glogger-Frey, I., Gaus, K., & Renkl, A. (2017). Learning from direct instruction: best prepared by several self-regulated or guided invention activities? Learning and Instruction, 51, 26–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hirshman, E., & Bjork, R. A. (1988). The generation effect: support for a two-factor theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(3), 484.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ho, J., Tumkaya, T., Aryal, S., Choi, H., & Claridge-Chang, A. (2018). Moving beyond P values: everyday data analysis with estimation plots. bioRxiv, 377978.

  17. Hsu, C.-Y., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2015). When should guidance be presented in physics instruction? Archives of Scientific Psychology, 3(1), 37–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hwang, J., Choi, K. M., Bae, Y., Dong, & Shin, H. (2018). Do teachers’ instructional practices moderate equity in mathematical and scientific literacy? An investigation of the PISA 2012 and 2015. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9909-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jacobson, M. J., Markauskaite, L., Portolese, A., Kapur, M., Lai, P. K., & Roberts, G. (2017). Designs for learning about climate change as a complex system. Learning and Instruction, 52, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., Tuovinen, J., & Sweller, J. (2001). When problem solving is superior to studying worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 579–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kapur, M. (2012). Productive failure in learning the concept of variance. Instructional Science, 40(4), 651–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kapur, M. (2014). Productive failure in learning math. Cognitive Science, 38(5), 1008–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kapur, M. (2016). Examining productive failure, productive success, unproductive failure, and unproductive success in learning. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 289–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kapur, M., & Bielaczyc, K. (2012). Designing for productive failure. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(1), 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.591717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lai, P. K., Portolese, A., & Jacobson, M. J. (2017). Does sequence matter? Productive failure and designing online authentic learning for process engineering. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), 1217–1227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Leppink, J., Paas, F., Van Gog, T., Van der Vleuten, C., & Van Merrienboer, J. (2014). Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 30, 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Loibl, K., & Rummel, N. (2014a). The impact of guidance during problem-solving prior to instruction on students’ inventions and learning outcomes. Instructional Science, 42(3), 305–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Loibl, K., & Rummel, N. (2014b). Knowing what you don’t know makes failure productive. Learning and Instruction, 34, 74–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Martin, A. J. (2016). Using load reduction instruction (LRI) to boost motivation and engagement. Leicester: British Psychological Society.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(3), 219–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rittle-Johnson, B., Fyfe, E. R., & Loehr, A. M. (2016). Improving conceptual and procedural knowledge: the impact of instructional content within a mathematics lesson. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 576–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rosenshine, B. (2009). The empirical support for direct instruction. In S. Tobias and T. Duffy (Eds.) Constructivist instruction: success or failure? (pp. 201–220). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14, 59, 1.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Schwartz, D. L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: the hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 129–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Schwartz, D. L., Lindgren, R., & Lewis, S. (2009). Constructivism in an age of non-constructivist assessments. In Constructivist Instruction (pp. 46-73). Routledge.

  38. Schwartz, D. L., Chase, C. C., Oppezzo, M. A., & Chin, D. B. (2011). Practicing versus inventing with contrasting cases: the effects of telling first on learning and transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 759–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Schwonke, R., Renkl, A., Krieg, C., Wittwer, J., Aleven, V., & Salden, R. (2009). The worked-example effect: not an artefact of lousy control conditions. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 258–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4(6), 592.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12(3), 185–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sweller, J., & Paas, F. (2017). Should self-regulated learning be integrated with cognitive load theory? A commentary. Learning and Instruction, 51, 85–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sweller, J., & Sweller, S. (2006). Natural information processing systems. Evolutionary Psychology, 4, 434–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  46. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Van Gog, T., Kester, L., & Paas, F. (2011). Effects of worked examples, example-problem, and problem-example pairs on novices’ learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(3), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.10.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Weaver, J. P., Chastain, R. J., DeCaro, D. A., & DeCaro, M. S. (2018). Reverse the routine: problem solving before instruction improves conceptual knowledge in undergraduate physics. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 52, 36–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the students, parents, staff, and leadership team of the Ballarat Clarendon College for their support with this research.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Greg Ashman.

Ethics declarations

Prior to the study, approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Advisory Panel of the lead author’s institution.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ashman, G., Kalyuga, S. & Sweller, J. Problem-solving or Explicit Instruction: Which Should Go First When Element Interactivity Is High?. Educ Psychol Rev 32, 229–247 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09500-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Productive failure
  • Cognitive load theory
  • Expertise reversal effect
  • Element interactivity