Expertise produced large main effects on test scores and interacted with element interactivity, with the expertise advantage much larger for high element interactivity material¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The main effect of expertise was significant on both immediate and delayed tests, with Year 11 outperforming Year 10. → Relations Between the Worked Example and Generation Effects on Immediate and Delayed Tests 2016 q2 i3 Expertise interacted with element interactivity on the immediate test; Year 11 outperformed Year 10 with d = 1.71 for high and d = .86 for low element interactivity material. → Relations Between the Worked Example and Generation Effects on Immediate and Delayed Tests 2016 (2)

Evidence¶

Relations Between the Worked Example and Generation Effects on Immediate and Delayed Tests 2016¶

Relations Between the Worked Example and Generation Effects on Immediate and Delayed Tests. (2016). Submitted 29/01/2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.06.007

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Immediate-test ANOVA main effect: "The main effect of expertise was significant", with Year 11 percentage correct scores higher than Year 10. The delayed test showed the same effect, F(1, 76) = 288.67, p < .001; no standardised effect size in comparable printed form is reported here.

"The main effect of expertise was significant, F(1, 90) = 190.82, MSe = 437.78, p < .001, ηр² = .680."

Relations Between the Worked Example and Generation Effects on Immediate and Delayed Tests 2016 (2)¶

Relations Between the Worked Example and Generation Effects on Immediate and Delayed Tests. (2016). Submitted 29/01/2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.06.007

q2 · i3 · causal · r2

Simple-effects tests following the significant expertise x element interactivity interaction on the immediate test (F(1, 90) = 47.94, p < .001): "Year 11 students significantly outperformed Year 10 students", d = 1.71 for high element interactivity material versus d = .86 for low.

"for high element interactivity materials, Year 11 students significantly outperformed Year 10 students, t(92) = 16.18, SEdiff = 3.88, p < .001, d = 1.71"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Prior Knowledge — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• On the delayed test, a significant three-way interaction showed a worked example effect for high element interactivity material and a generation effect for low element interactivity material for novices — related
• For more knowledgeable learners on the delayed test, a generation effect was obtained for both low and high element interactivity materials — related
• On the immediate test, novices showed a worked example effect (high guidance superior) while more knowledgeable learners showed a generation effect (low guidance superior) — related
• The learning benefit of increasing integration is substantially larger for high element interactivity (complex) materials than for low element interactivity materials — related