The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.04.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effects of reading to prepare for argumentative discussion on cognitive engagement and conceptual growth

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
13
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
2
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another significant indicator predicting learning performance was the number of words submitted in open text activities. On a surface level, these findings are also related to studies conducted in writing research and clearly reflect the impact of the variation in learning engagement [22,23].…”
Section: A Significance Of Findingssupporting
confidence: 63%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Another significant indicator predicting learning performance was the number of words submitted in open text activities. On a surface level, these findings are also related to studies conducted in writing research and clearly reflect the impact of the variation in learning engagement [22,23].…”
Section: A Significance Of Findingssupporting
confidence: 63%
“…The general assumption is that the intensity of mental effort aimed at achieving a greater understanding, i.e., time spent on reading task, is critical during learning. Findings indicate that increased reading times as a sign of greater learning engagement are positively related to learning performance measured as comprehension scores [23,24].…”
Section: Learning Engagementmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Some researchers have used this remaining variance as an indication of engagement, because it can represent the effort exerted above and beyond what would normally be required to comprehend the text (Stine-Morrow et al, 2008). For example, Miller et al (2014) used this approach to show that students who read to prepare for a discussion read more slowly than students without a stated purpose for reading. Defining engagement as dedicating resources above and beyond the level necessary for simple comprehension is also congruent with the cognitive aspects of the definition of engagement just described, although it does not include the emotional and behavior elements that are included in the LM.…”
Section: Definition Of Engagement and Theories Of Reading And Visual mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first assumption is supported by the correlation between reading time and comprehension (Miller et al, 2014), but it is undermined by the phenomena of mind wandering. People sometimes look at objects while their minds wander.…”
Section: Assumption 1-minimum Reading Times and Foveal View Measure Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the landscape model, people’s attention and working memory are limited, so in the process of learning new knowledge, students will slow their reading speed to understand and process learning materials (van den Broek, Young, Tzeng, & Linderholm, 1999). An experiment by Miller et al. (2014) supports this model.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 60%