Generating explanations (oral or written) outperforms retrieval practice on inference-based questions for the high-difficult text¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Students who generated explanations outperformed students who retrieved the material, t(111) = 1.90, p = .030, d = 0.36. → Jacob 2019

Evidence¶

Jacob 2019¶

Jacob, L., Lachner, A., & Scheiter, K. (2019). Learning by Explaining Orally or In Written Form? Text Difficulty Matters. https://aspredicted.org/sv3zv.pdf

q3 · i1 · causal · r3

Planned contrast within the ANCOVA on inference-based questions in the high-difficult text condition, testing explaining (weighted 1, 1) against retrieval practice (weighted −2). The article reports "students who generated explanations (oral and written form) outperformed students who simply retrieved the learning material" with d = 0.36.

"The contrast analyses revealed that students who generated explanations (oral and written form) outperformed students who simply retrieved the learning material, t(111) = 1.90, p = .030, d = 0.36 (see Table 1)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Inferencing — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Text difficulty moderates the effect of explaining modality: oral explaining outperforms written explaining on inference-based questions only for the high-difficult text — related
• For the low-difficult text, oral explaining, written explaining, and retrieval practice yield comparable learning outcomes — related
• Oral explaining yields more accurate meta-comprehension judgments than written explaining and retrieval practice — related
• Explaining was not more effective than oral retrieval practice overall in Experiment 1 — related