Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to Foster Active Processing of Explanations in Instructional Communication

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Educational Psychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In instructional communication settings, instructional explanations play an important role. Despite the very common use of instructional explanations, empirical studies show that very often, they have no positive effects on learning outcomes. This ineffectiveness might be due to mental passivity of the recipient learners that leads to shallow processing of the explanations. Against this background, we introduce several types of instructional assistance to foster active processing of written instructional explanations in asynchronous computer-mediated instructional communication settings. The findings of three experiments showed that prompts or training for focused processing regarding the central principles and concepts of the explanation are especially effective with respect to fostering learning outcomes.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bandura, A. (2001). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales (Monograph). Stanford: Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2008). Wie kann eine aktive Verarbeitung von instruktionalen Erklärungen zu multiplen Repräsentationen gefördert werden? [How can an active processing of instructional explanations on multiple representations be fostered?]. In E.-M. Lankes (Ed.), Pädagogische Professionalität als Gegenstand empirischer Forschung (pp. 177–188). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2009). Instructional aids to support a conceptual understanding of multiple representations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 70–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Training in self-explanation and self-regulation strategies: Investigating the effects of knowledge acquisition activities on problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 221–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biswas, G., Leelawong, K., Schwartz, D., Vye, N., & The Teachable Agents Group of Vanderbilt. (2005). Learning by teaching: A new agent paradigm for educational software. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19, 363–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodemer, D., Plötzner, R., Feuerlein, I., & Spada, H. (2004). The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualisations. Learning and Instruction, 14, 325–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M. (2007). What we have learned about the link between motivation and learning/performance. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 21(3/4), 263–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 141–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedrich, H. F., & Mandl, H. (1997). Analyse und Förderung selbstgesteuerten Lernens [Analysis and advancements of self-regulated learning]. In F. E. Weinert & H. Mandl (Eds.), Psychologie der Erwachsenenbildung, D/I/4, Enzyklopädie der Psychologie (pp. 237–293). Göttingen: Hogrefe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fries, S., Schmid, S., Dietz, F., & Hofer, M. (2005). Conflicting values and their impact on learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 259–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fries, S., Dietz, F., & Schmid, S. (2008). Motivational interference in learning: The impact of leisure alternatives on subsequent self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 119–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Große, C., & Renkl, A. (2006). Effects of multiple solution methods in mathematics learning. Learning and Instruction, 16, 122–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K., Alexander, P., & Graham, S. (2008). Michael Pressley’s contributions to the history and future of strategies research. Educational Psychologist, 43, 86–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, M., Schmid, S., Fries, S., Dietz, F., Clausen, M., & Reinders, H. (2007). Individual values, motivational conflicts, and learning for school. Learning and Instruction, 17, 17–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jucks, R., Bromme, R., & Runde, A. (2007). Explaining with unshared illustrations: How they constrain explanations. Learning and Instruction, 17, 204–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jucks, R., Becker, B.-M., & Bromme, R. (2008). Lexical entrainment in written discourse: Is experts’ word use adapted to the addressee? Discourse Processes, 45, 497–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalyuga, S. (2010). Schema acquisition and sources of cognitive load. In J. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory and research in educational psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press (in press).

  • Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koedinger, K. R., & Aleven, V. (2007). Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 239–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koedinger, K. R., Pavlik, P., McLaren, B., & Aleven, V. (2008). Is it better to give than to receive? The assistance dilemma as a fundamental unsolved problem in the cognitive science of learning and instruction. In C. Schunn (Ed.), Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2008. New York: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D. (2007). Is direct instruction an answer to the right question? Educational Psychologist, 42, 109–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leinhardt, G., & Steele, M. D. (2005). Seeing the complexity of standing to the side: Instructional dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 87–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31–48). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neber, H. (1995). Explanations in problem-oriented cooperative learning. In R. Olechowski & G. Khan-Svik (Eds.), Experimental research on teaching and learning (pp. 158–166). Frankfurt/M: Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nückles, M., Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2005). Information about a layperson’s knowledge supports experts in giving effective and efficient online advice to laypersons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 219–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nückles, M., Hübner, S., Dümer, S., & Renkl, A. (2010). Expertise-reversal effects in writing-to-learn. Instructional Science. doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9106-9.

  • Renkl, A. (2002). Worked-out examples: Instructional explanations support learning by self-explanations. Learning and Instruction, 12, 529–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renkl, A. (2005). The worked-out-example principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 229–246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Interactive learning environments: Contemporary issues and trends. An introduction to the special issue. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 235–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rheinberg, F., & Fries, S. (1998). Förderung der Lernmotivation: Ansatzpunkte, Strategien und Effekte. [Fostering learning motivation: Starting points, strategies, and effects.]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 44, 168–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robins, S., & Mayer, R. E. (1993). Schema formation in analogical reasoning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 529–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B., & Koedinger, K. (2006). Designing for metacognition—Applying cognitive tutor principles to the tutoring of help seeking. Metacognition and Learning, 2, 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez, E., García-Rodicio, H., & Acuña, S. R. (2009). Are instructional explanations more effective in the context of an impasse? Instructional Science, 37, 537–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiefele, U., & Heinen, S. (2001). Wissenserwerb und Motivation. [Knowledge acquisition and motivation.]. In D. H. Rost (Ed.), Handwörterbuch Pädagogische Psychologie (pp. 795–799). Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, S., Hofer, M., Dietz, F., Reinders, H., & Fries, S. (2005). Value orientations and action conflicts in students’ everyday life: An interview study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 3, 243–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, S., Fries, S., Hofer, M., Dietz, F., Reinders, H., & Clausen, M. (2007). The theory of motivational action conflicts: Empirical studies and practical consequences. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of schools. The final report on the DFG Priority Programme (pp. 317–331). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Self-regulated learning. From teaching to self-reflective practice. New York: Guildford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2006). Computer-supported example-based learning: When instructional explanations reduce self-explanations. Computers and Education, 46, 426–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seufert, T., & Brünken, R. (2006). Cognitive load and the format of instructional aids for coherence formation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 321–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spörer, N., & Brunstein, J. C. (2006). Erfassung selbstregulierten Lernens mit Selbstberichtsverfahren. Ein Überblick zum Stand der Forschung. [Assessment of self-regulated learning with self-report methods. An overview of the status of research.] Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 20(3), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2006). The worked example effect and human cognition. Learning and Instruction, 16, 165–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanLehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C., Yamauchi, T., & Baggett, W. B. (2003). Why do only some events cause learning during human tutoring? Cognition and Instruction, 2, 209–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M., & Farivar, S. (1999). Developing productive group interaction in middle school. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 117–149). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M., Ing, M., Kersting, N., & Nemer, K. M. (2006). Help seeking in cooperative learning groups. In S. A. Karabenick & R. S. Newman (Eds.), Help seeking in academic settings: Goals, groups, and contexts (pp. 45–88). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychologist, 43, 49–64.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Educational Psychology, University of Bielefeld, 33501, Bielefeld, Germany

    Kirsten Berthold

  2. Department of Psychology, Educational and Developmental Psychology, University of Freiburg, 79085, Freiburg, Germany

    Alexander Renkl

Authors
  1. Kirsten Berthold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander Renkl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirsten Berthold.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berthold, K., Renkl, A. How to Foster Active Processing of Explanations in Instructional Communication. Educ Psychol Rev 22, 25–40 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9124-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9124-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation