Developmental differences in study behavior.

Abstract

This study is a developmental examination of strategy instruction and the context that promotes when and how strategy instruction is maximized. The 4 experimental manipulations included comparisons between 2 strategy conditions, familiar and unfamiliar text, dyad versus individual study, and 4 age groups (M = 10.5, 14.7, 19.9, and 21.9 years). The 486 students from Grades 5-6, and 9-10 and 1st-and 4th-year university were assigned randomly to 1 strategy condition (self-study or elaborative interrogation) and 1 study context (dyad or individual). Participants studied and recalled 60 facts about familiar and unfamiliar animals. Explicit instruction in elaborative interrogation promoted memory performance, especially in the younger population. Studying in dyads enhanced memory and quality of study across age.To enhance text learning performance, students should be given explicit strategy instruction and should study interactively with their peers.

Students' comprehension of science textbooks using a question‐based reading strategy

“…Of additional theoretical and practical importance, the differential posttest performances of students who produced adequate-linked responses and adequate-not-linked responses to why questions supported elaborative interrogation (Martin & Pressley, 1991;Wood et al, 1999). Students who provided adequate-notlinked or no responses failed to generate reasonable why question responses.…”

“…The results of elaborative interrogation studies (e.g., Wood et al, 1999) were encouraging. For example, these studies explored: (a) different kinds of questions asked (Martin & Pressley, 1991); (b) how high and low levels of prior knowledge influence learning (Willoughby, Wood, & Kahn, 1994;Woloshyn, Pressley, & Schneider, 1992); (c) differential quality of responses students made to why questions (Pressley, Symons, McDaniel, Snyder, & Turnure, 1988); (d) different aged students using why questions (Willoughby, Porter, Belsito, & Yearsley, 1999); (e) differing formats of presented information (Seifert, 1993;Woloshyn, Willoughby, Wood, & Pressley, 1990); and (f) recall and comprehension of text (McDaniel & Donnelly, 1996;Seifert, 1993).…”

“…Why question responses were scored according to a four-level rubric similar to those used in previous why question studies (e.g., Martin & Pressley, 1991;Wood et al, 1999). Elaborations expressed by students to why questions were coded into four categories that reflected the quality of the students' responses: ''adequate-linked,'' ''adequate-not-linked,'' ''inadequate,'' and ''no response.''…”

Enhancing learning through strategy instruction and group interaction: is active generation of elaborations critical?

“…The ®ndings, however, are inconsistent. For example, two studies explored the ecacy of elaborative interrogation when learners had the opportunity to study with one other peer (Wood et al, 1995; see also Wood et al, 1998). The results indicate that for university students, students studying in dyads demonstrated enhanced learning relative to those studying individually.…”

When can a lack of structure facilitate strategic processing of information?

“…In fact, prior knowledge is thought to be a critical aspect of the successful use of elaborative interrogation as a study strategy (Kuhara-Kojima & Hatano, 1991;Martin & Pressley, 1991;Willoughby, Waller, Wood, & MacKinnon, 1993;Woloshyn, Pressley, & Schneider, 1992;Wood et al, 1999). For example, when students are presented with novel facts about animals, using the elaborative interrogation strategy facilitates learning only when the animals are familiar.…”