Making the failure more productive: scaffolding the invention process to improve inquiry behaviors and outcomes in invention activities

Holmes, N. G.; Day, James; Park, Anthony; Bonn, D. A.; Roll, Ido

doi:10.1007/s11251-013-9300-7

Cited by 66 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As previously mentioned, these studies (e.g., Holmes et al 2014;Roll et al 2012;Schwartz et al 2011;Schwartz and Martin 2004) intertwined the processes of inventing and comparing; thus, the invention tasks guided the search for contrasts between the cases. By contrast, as we were interested in whether inventing per se entails a beneficial effect relative to case comparisons, the inventing task in the present study was scheduled only after the learners had compared the cases.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In their work on inventing to prepare for future learning, Martin (2004, see also Glogger et al 2013b;Holmes et al 2014;Loibl and Rummel 2014b;Roll et al 2012;Schwartz et al 2011;Wiedmann et al 2012) extended Schwartz and Bransford's (1998) case comparison approach. They recommended that learners should not only be required to identify the similarities and differences among the cases, but also to invent explanations or solutions that deal with any detected patterns.…”

Section: Inventing To Prepare Future Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Holmes et al (2014; see also Roll et al 2012) emphasize that inventing helps learners detect the relevant similarities and differences of contrasting cases step by step, which, in turn, drives the learners' preparation for future learning. In other words, inventing tasks might serve as (particularly effective) comparison prompts.…”

Section: Inventing To Prepare Future Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two types of inquiry with contrasting cases in particular have been shown to have a positive effect on preparing learners for future learning: (a) comparing (e.g., Glogger et al 2013a;Roelle and Berthold 2015;Schwartz and Bransford 1998) and (b) inventing (e.g., Glogger-Frey et al 2015;Holmes et al 2014;Schwartz et al 2011;Schwartz and Martin 2004;Wiedmann et al 2012). The (a) case comparison approach is based on Schwartz and Bransford's (1998) theoretical notion that when learners identify the contrasting cases' distinctive similarities and differences that reflect the target learning content, they are better able to focus on the main information of the target content included in subsequent instruction.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effects of comparing contrasting cases and inventing on learning from subsequent instructional explanations

Roelle

Berthold

2016

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparing contrasting cases is a promising means to prepare learners for future learning from related direct instruction. The most prevalent type of preparation intervention used in this case comparison approach is providing contrasting cases together with comparison prompts. However, if the contrasting cases are complex learners might need more guidance than mere prompts in order to detect their relevant similarities and differences and thus exploit their full potential. The inventing approach entails having learners invent explanations that deal with the detected similarities and differences in addition to comparing contrasting cases. In this approach, however, it is unclear whether the generation of inventions per se has an added value to the concomitant detection of similarities and differences. Against this background, in a 2 9 2 factorial experiment with N = 80 eighth-grade students we varied the preparation intervention the learners received before they processed some instructional explanations according to: (a) type of task while comparing contrasting cases (responding to a comparison prompt vs. verifying provided comparisons), and (b) inventing task after comparing contrasting cases (with vs. without). We found that if there was no invention task, the learners who verified the provided comparisons learned more from the instructional explanations than those who received a comparison prompt. Requiring learners to generate inventions only after comparing the cases yielded differential results. The learners who detected only one similarity or difference among the cases benefitted from the inventing task, whereas the learners who detected all of the relevant features were hindered by it, albeit marginally.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Inventing To Prepare Future Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Inventing To Prepare Future Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of comparing contrasting cases and inventing on learning from subsequent instructional explanations

Roelle

Berthold

2016

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…19 The software simulates the decision-making environment within which dispensing occurs without the reminders and prompts in commercial dispensing software and encourages students to learn by making mistakes, knowing they can fail in a safe learning environment. 17,20 MyDispense helps teach skills and the importance of discerning among products, various patient details and facts, while understanding the need to use unambiguous language on dispensing labels to clearly convey the prescriber's intentions.…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Simulated Learning Environment for Teaching Medicine Dispensing Skills

McDowell

Styles

Sewell

et al. 2016

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To develop an authentic simulation of the professional practice dispensary context for students to develop their dispensing skills in a risk-free environment. Design. A development team used an Agile software development method to create MyDispense, a web-based simulation. Modeled on virtual learning environments elements, the software employed widely available standards-based technologies to create a virtual community pharmacy environment. Assessment. First-year pharmacy students who used the software in their tutorials, were, at the end of the second semester, surveyed on their prior dispensing experience and their perceptions of MyDispense as a tool to learn dispensing skills. Conclusion. The dispensary simulation is an effective tool for helping students develop dispensing competency and knowledge in a safe environment.

show abstract

PROTOCOL: Problem solving before instruction (PS‐I) to promote learning and motivation in child and adult students

González-Cabañes

García

Chase

et al. 2023

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: The purpose of this review is to synthesize the evidence about the efficacy of problem solving before instruction (PS‐I) to promote learning and motivation in students. Specifically, this review is designed to answer the following questions: To what degree does PS‐I affect learning and motivation, relative to alternative learning approaches? To what extent is the efficacy of PS‐I associated with the use of different design features within it, including the use of group work, contrasting cases, and metacognitive guidance in the initial problem‐solving activity, and the use of explanations that build upon students' solutions in the explicit instruction phase? To what extent is the relative efficacy of PS‐I associated with the contextual factors of activities used as control, age of students, duration of the interventions, and learning domain? What is the quality of the existent evidence to evaluate these questions in terms of number of studies included and potential biases derived from publication and methodological restrictions?

show abstract

Making the failure more productive: scaffolding the invention process to improve inquiry behaviors and outcomes in invention activities

Cited by 66 publications

References 24 publications

Effects of comparing contrasting cases and inventing on learning from subsequent instructional explanations

Effects of comparing contrasting cases and inventing on learning from subsequent instructional explanations

A Simulated Learning Environment for Teaching Medicine Dispensing Skills

PROTOCOL: Problem solving before instruction (PS‐I) to promote learning and motivation in child and adult students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About