Narrative instruction produces higher transfer performance than expository instruction in undergraduate biology learning¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Undergraduate students learning biology with narrative materials showed significantly higher transfer performance than those with expository materials (d = 0.46, BF = 44.22). → Samuel Tobler 2025

Evidence¶

Samuel Tobler 2025¶

Samuel Tobler, Tanmay Sinha, Katja Köhler, Manu Kapur. (2025). Teaching biology with narratives: examining the impact of affective and cognitive variables on undergraduate student learning. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09723-w

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Two-way ANOVA in a randomized controlled classroom experiment with 90 second-semester undergraduate natural science students (42 narrative, 48 expository) found a medium effect size favoring narrative instruction on transfer, with "d = 0.46, BF = 44.22". No differences were found for recall or understanding.

"We found significant learning material-related differences with a medium effect size for students’ performance in the transfer task in favor of the narrative group (F(1,86) = 4.674, p <.05, d = 0.46, BF = 44.22)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Learning mechanisms are triggered to a greater extent for non-STEM-background students in the narrative condition and for STEM-background students in the expository condition
• Narrative and expository instruction produce no significant differences in recall or understanding of biological concepts — reports the opposite
• Narrative instruction leads to higher germane cognitive load and self-efficacy, and lower extraneous cognitive load, than expository instruction — related
• Prior biology knowledge tentatively moderates material effectiveness: non-STEM students favor narratives, STEM students favor expository texts for recall and understanding — related