Instructional Efficiency: Revisiting the Original Construct in Educational Research

Gog, Tamara van; Paas, Fred

doi:10.1080/00461520701756248

Cited by 355 publications

(287 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

268

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These questions were measured on a five-point Likert scale. In addition, mental effort during the learning and testing phase was measured after each individual item on a five-point Likert scale adapted from Paas (1992) and Paas et al (2003b), ranging from Bvery low effort^to Bvery high effort.^This measure gives an indication of the cognitive load children experience and has been used in many educational psychology studies (see Paas et al 2003a, b;Van Gog and Paas 2008). The mental effort rating scale (RSME) has shown good internal consistency.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Watch Your Step Children! Learning Two-Digit Numbers Through Mirror-Based Observation of Self-Initiated Body Movements

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It was investigated whether task-related body movements yield beneficial effects on children's learning of two-digit numbers and whether these learning effects are affected by mirror-based self-observation of those movements. Participants were 118 first-graders, who were randomly assigned to two movement conditions and two nonmovement control conditions. In the movement conditions, children were instructed to build two-digit numbers by making and simultaneously verbalizing out loud different sized steps representing the smaller units the numbers consisted of (e.g., the number B36^was construed by saying out loud B10,^B20,^B30,^B35,^B36,^while making three big steps, one medium, and one small step) on a ruler across the floor. In one of the movement conditions, the children were additionally asked to observe their steps in a mirror. In the first conventionally taught control condition, the children were asked to verbally build and mark the two-digit numbers on a ruler depicted on a sheet of paper. In the second control condition, children were seated before the ruler across the floor, and after verbally constructing the two-digit number, they had to walk to the appropriate position of the number on the ruler across the floor. In the subsequent test phase, children's knowledge of two-digit numbers was assessed by a final math test. The results confirmed the hypothesis that the movement conditions lead to higher test performance than the non-movement condition and revealed that test performance was not differentially affected by mirror-based self-observation.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Watch Your Step Children! Learning Two-Digit Numbers Through Mirror-Based Observation of Self-Initiated Body Movements

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another widely used subjective measure of cognitive load are ratings of perceived task difficulty (Bratfisch et al 1972;Kalyuga et al 1999;Marcus et al 1996;Paas et al 2003a, b), which typically ask learners to rate their perceived difficulty of a task on a 7-or 9-point Likert scale, ranging from ''very, very easy'' to ''very, very difficult''. Note that while perceived task difficulty and perceived mental effort may correlate, they are different constructs (see Van Gog and Paas 2008, for a discussion).…”

Section: Measurement Of Cognitive Loadmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in many of the early studies, the item was repeatedly applied. Moreover, these studies showed the effectiveness of the rating scale by showing that the variation in learners' cognitive load ratings depended on variations in task complexity or instructional design (Ayres 2006;; for overviews see Paas et al 2003a, b;Van Gog and Paas 2008). In this regard, Sweller et al (2011) conclude that ''the simple subjective rating scale, regardless of the wording used (mental effort or difficulty), has, perhaps surprisingly, been shown to be the most sensitive measure available to differentiate the cognitive load imposed by different instructional procedures (p. 74).…”

Section: Measurement Of Cognitive Loadmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this regard, one of the measures that have been used very early in research are mental effort rating scales (see Paas 1992;Paas et al 2003a, b;Van Gog and Paas 2008), which typically ask learners to rate the amount of mental effort they invested in completing a task on a 7-or 9-point Likert scale, ranging from ''very, very low mental effort'' to ''very, very high mental effort''. Another widely used subjective measure of cognitive load are ratings of perceived task difficulty (Bratfisch et al 1972;Kalyuga et al 1999;Marcus et al 1996;Paas et al 2003a, b), which typically ask learners to rate their perceived difficulty of a task on a 7-or 9-point Likert scale, ranging from ''very, very easy'' to ''very, very difficult''.…”

Section: Measurement Of Cognitive Loadmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring cognitive load with subjective rating scales during problem solving: differences between immediate and delayed ratings

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subjective cognitive load (CL) rating scales are widely used in educational research. However, there are still some open questions regarding the point of time at which such scales should be applied. Whereas some studies apply rating scales directly after each step or task and use an average of these ratings, others assess CL only once after the whole learning or problem-solving phase. To investigate if these two approaches are comparable indicators of experienced CL, two experiments were conducted, in which 168 and 107 teacher education university students, respectively, worked through a sequence of six problems. CL was assessed by means of subjective ratings of mental effort and perceived task difficulty after each problem and after the whole process. Results showed that the delayed ratings of both effort and difficulty were significantly higher than the average of the six ratings made during problem solving. In addition, the problems we assumed to be of higher complexity seemed to be the best predictors for the delayed ratings. Interestingly, for ratings of affective variables, such as interest and motivation, the delayed rating did not differ from the average of immediate ratings.

show abstract

“…This single item is applied immediately after each learning task. It has been shown to be reliable and sensitive for differences in task complexity (i.e., the higher the complexity, the higher the mental effort ratings: Paas, Van Merrienboer, & Adam, 1994) and has been used frequently in the context of cognitive load research (for reviews, see Paas, Tuovinen, Tabbers, & Van Gerven, 2003;Van Gog & Paas, 2008). In this study, the mental effort ratings were additionally used for determining appropriate task selection in line with the method for system-controlled task selection used in the studies by Camp et al (2001), Corbalan et al (2008), Salden et al (2004) and Salden, Paas, and Van Merriënboer (2006) where a system rather than the learner made task selections.…”

Section: Participants and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training self-assessment and task-selection skills: A cognitive approach to improving self-regulated learning

Kostons

Gog

Paas

2012

Learning and Instruction

Self Cite

214

201

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tFor self-regulated learning to be effective, students need to be able to accurately assess their own performance on a learning task and use this assessment for the selection of a new learning task. Evidence suggests, however, that students have difficulties with accurate self-assessment and task selection, which may explain the poor learning outcomes often found with self-regulated learning. In experiment 1, the hypothesis was investigated and confirmed that observing a human model engaging in self-assessment, task selection, or both could be effective for secondary education students' (N ¼ 80) acquisition of selfassessment and task-selection skills. Experiment 2 investigated and confirmed the hypothesis that secondary education students' (N ¼ 90) acquisition of self-assessment and task-selection skills, either through examples or through practice, would enhance the effectiveness of self-regulated learning. It can be concluded that self-assessment and task-selection skills indeed play an important role in selfregulated learning and that training these skills can significantly increase the amount of knowledge students can gain from self-regulated learning in which they choose their own learning tasks.

show abstract

Instructional Efficiency: Revisiting the Original Construct in Educational Research

Cited by 355 publications

References 71 publications

Watch Your Step Children! Learning Two-Digit Numbers Through Mirror-Based Observation of Self-Initiated Body Movements

Watch Your Step Children! Learning Two-Digit Numbers Through Mirror-Based Observation of Self-Initiated Body Movements

Measuring cognitive load with subjective rating scales during problem solving: differences between immediate and delayed ratings

Training self-assessment and task-selection skills: A cognitive approach to improving self-regulated learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About