Wie lässt sich die Experimentierstrategie-Nutzung fördern?

Abstract

Zusammenfassung: Beim selbstregulierten Lernen durch experimentieren zeigen Schüler ein Produktionsdefizit, d. h. verfügbares Strategiewissen resultiert nicht in entsprechender Strategienutzung. Ursachen dafür können mangelnde metakognitive Fähigkeiten und Motivation sein. Deshalb sollten diese Aspekte unterstützt werden, um die Strategienutzung zu fördern. Das Geben von Prompts (Anregungen) ist dafür eine vielversprechende Methode. Die Frage ist, wie diese optimal gestaltet werden sollten. In einer experimentellen Studie wurden zwei Merkmale untersucht, nämlich die Adaptivität von Prompts sowie ihre Kombination mit strategiebezogenem Feedback. 93 Neunt-Klässler lernten selbstreguliert mit einer computerbasierten Experimentierumgebung. Es gab eine Kontrollgruppe und drei Experimentalgruppen mit nicht-adaptiven Prompts, adaptiven Prompts oder der Kombination aus adaptivem Prompt und Feedback. Als abhängige Variablen wurden Maße zur Experimentierstrategienutzung und die Motivation erfasst. Vorteile in der Strategienutzung zeigte nur die Gruppe mit der Kombination aus Rückmeldung und adaptivem Prompt. Ebenso blieben die Lerner in dieser Bedingung stärker motiviert als in den anders unterstützten Gruppen. Schlüsselwörter: Experimentierstrategien · Selbstreguliertes Lernen · Förderung von Strategienutzung · Prompts · Adaptive Unterstützung Z Erziehungswiss (2012) 15:77-93Abstract: Pupils display a production deficiency within self-regulated learning arrangements using experimentation. Available strategy-knowledge does not result in an effective strategy use. This may be due to a lack of metacognitive capabilities and motivation. These aspects should be supported, then, in order to foster strategy use. Providing prompts is a promising method. The question is how to design them to optimal effect. Two characteristics were investigated in an experimental study, namely the adaptability of prompts and their combination with strategyrelated feedback. 93 pupils in year 9 experienced self-regulated learning in a computer-based experiment setting. There was a control group and three experimental groups with non-adaptive prompts, adaptive prompts or a combination of feedback and adaptive prompts, respectively. The dependent variables were the extent of using a strategy for experimentation and pupils' motivation. Benefits for use of strategy were only observed for the group with a combination of feedback and adaptive prompts. The learners in this group were also more strongly motivated than in the other groups.

Providing guidance in virtual lab experimentation: the case of an experiment design tool

“…For example, providing prompts for experimentation based on the VOTAT heuristic was reported to favor reasoning skills (Chang et al 2008). On the other hand, embedding the VOTAT heuristic in another computer-based tool did not have any noteworthy effect on student learning (Marschner et al 2012).…”

“…In the same direction, Veermans et al (2006) have suggested that heuristics, such as the VOTAT heuristic, might amplify transfer. Additionally, there have been indications that feedback such as that provided by the Go Lab EDT might initiate self-regulation, i.e., an individual's competence to guide his/her own learning (Marschner et al 2012). For instance, self-regulation, in an inquiry context such as the one of this study, relates to the competence of the student to be able to plan and implement an inquiry task, such as designing an experiment, on his/her own.…”

“…The indeterminate findings reported for software scaffolds equipped with the VOTAT heuristic have also been seen in the context of buoyancy, which is the topic addressed by our participants in this study. Marschner et al (2012) reported that feedback and prompts promoting the VOTAT heuristic in a computer-supported learning environment did not yield gains in knowledge and skill. According to these authors, the enactment of feedback and prompts might have interrupted the learning activity sequence, which could have further reoriented student attention away from the domain; all of these consequences might have backfired by having an undesirable effect on student knowledge and skills.…”

“…This is because varying one variable at a time and keeping all other variables constant allows the experimental outcome for the dependent variable to be attributed to the variable that was varied. Obviously at least two successive experimental trials will be needed for the VOTAT heuristic to yield a conclusion (Marschner et al 2012).…”

“…Both of these affordances aimed at further problematizing the design of fair experiments for the students of the experimental condition. The subject domain of buoyancy was selected for our participants to study, because it is a topic with which students usually face problems when experimenting, including when designing a fair experiment (Hsin and Wu 2011;Marschner et al 2012;Meindertsma et al 2014).…”