Model method drawing acts as a double-edged sword for solving inconsistent word problems

Drawing bar diagrams has been shown to improve performance on mathematical word problems wherein the relational keyword is consistent with the required arithmetic operation. This study extends this by testing the effectiveness of bar diagram drawing for word problems with an inconsistent keyword-arithmetic operation mapping. Seventy-five fifth graders solved consistent and inconsistent word problems while encouraged to draw bar diagrams. For each word problem, we assessed problem type (consistent/inconsistent), performance (correct/incorrect), and bar diagrams (accurate/inaccurate/no drawing). Overall, bar diagram drawing was associated with increased performance on both consistent and inconsistent word problems, but the strongest benefits of drawing were found for inconsistent word problems. For inconsistent word problems, bar diagram accuracy was more clearly related to performance (accurate bar diagrams related to correct answers, but inaccurate ones to incorrect answers) than for consistent word problems. We conclude that bar diagram drawing provides an effective graphical support for solving inconsistent word problems

A Cognitive Load Theory Approach to Understanding Expert Scaffolding of Visual Problem-Solving Tasks: A Scoping Review

Visual problem-solving is an essential skill for professionals in various visual domains. Novices in these domains acquire such skills through interactions with experts (e.g., apprenticeships). Experts guide novice visual problem-solving with scaffolding behaviours. However, there is little consensus about the description and classification of scaffolding behaviours in practice, and to our knowledge, no framework connects scaffolding to underlying cognitive mechanisms. Understanding effective scaffolding is particularly relevant to domain-specific expert-novice research regarding visual problem-solving, where in-person scaffolding by an expert is a primary teaching method. Scaffolding regulates the flow of information within the learner’s working memory, thereby reducing cognitive load. By examining scaffolding research from the perspective of cognitive load theory, we aspire to classify scaffolding behaviours as cognitive behaviours of cueing (which involves attention allocation) and chunking (the practice of grouping information, often in conjunction with prior knowledge), into a cohesive and unified framework. In this scoping review, 6533 articles were considered, from which 18 were included. From these 18 articles, 164 excerpts describing expert-novice interaction were examined and categorised based on cognitive strategy (cueing or chunking) and method of expression (verbal or nonverbal). An inductive category (active or passive) was also identified and coded. Most scaffolding behaviours were categorised as active verbal cueing and active verbal chunking. Qualitative patterns in excerpts were collated into 12 findings. Our framework may help to integrate existing and new scaffolding research, form the basis for future expert-novice interaction research, and provide insights into the fine-grained processes that comprise scaffolded visual problem-solving

Does visualization affect monitoring accuracy, restudy choice, and comprehension scores of students in primary education?

In the present study, we investigated how 116 fourth and fifth grade students’ monitoring skills were associated with restudy choices and explored whether drawing was a useful intervention to improve monitoring accuracy, restudy choice, and comprehension scores. During the first session, all students read a text, judged their learning of the information within that text, selected paragraphs to reread, reread those parts, and then made another judgment of learning (JOL) before doing a post-test. Several significant correlations were found between the various variables involved, such as higher JOLs before rereading related to fewer paragraphs being reread, and JOL-accuracy after rereading was positively correlated with the scores on the postreading questions. For the second session, students were split-up into three conditions: a control condition and two drawing conditions. In the long-drawing condition, students were allowed to draw throughout the whole second session, including post-test. In the brief-drawing condition participants only got to draw the first time they read the second text. We did not find significant differences on the postreading scores. The only differences we found were that the participants in the long drawing group were more accurate in their JOLs before rereading and selected more paragraphs to reread than the other two groups, and invested more mental effort in comparison to the other groups. Drawing more elements was positively correlated with the posttest scores and JOLs, whereas drawing more details was negatively correlated with posttest scores and did not correlate with JOLs. As students in the long drawing condition drew both more elements but also created more detail in those drawings compared to the short drawing condition, it is possible that the beneficial effects of creating drawings were cancelled out by the negative effects

Latest trends to optimize computer-based learning: Guidelines from cognitive load theory

ANID/PIA/Basal Funds for Centers of Excellence FB0003 ANID Fondecyt 1118025

Effects of mouse pointing on learning from labeled and unlabeled split-attention materials: An eye-tracking study

Learning from mutually referring but spatially separated text and picture (i.e., split-attention materials) is cognitively demanding. We investigated whether mouse pointing could support learning from split-attention materials in which the related elements between the text and picture were indicated by visual labels or not. One hundred thirty-two university students studied a text and picture about the human nervous system in one cell of a 2 (Mouse Pointing: yes vs. no) × 2 (Labeling: yes vs. no) between-subjects design. Results indicated neither mouse pointing nor labeling had a significant impact on retention, comprehension, and cognitive load ratings. However, there was an interaction between mouse pointing and labeling on comprehension scores, indicating that mouse pointing on labeled materials resulted in worse performance than mouse pointing on unlabeled materials. Eye tracking results revealed that both mouse pointing and labeling led to shorter fixation durations and less fixations on the text and more transitions between text and picture. Labeling also led to longer fixation durations and more fixations on the picture. These findings suggest that mouse pointing and labeling influenced perceptual but not cognitive processing

Finger pointing to self-manage cognitive load in learning from split-attention examples

We investigated whether finger pointing can be used as a cognitive load self-management strategy when learning from split-attention examples. We expected that pointing would reduce cognitive load and enhance learning performance. In a guided self-management phase, 122 university students studied a split-attention example under three pointing conditions (i.e., no pointing, one-handed pointing, two-handed pointing) or an integrated example without pointing. In the subsequent unguided self-management phase, all students studied a new split-attention example without pointing instructions. Results on retention and comprehension tests and self-ratings of cognitive load after studying each split-attention example revealed no differences between conditions. An exploratory analysis of pointing movements in the unguided self-management phase revealed that participants who frequently pointed outperformed those who barely pointed on the comprehension test in this phase. Our findings provide some suggestive evidence for the effectiveness of pointing as a self-management strategy in the learning from split-attention examples

Does presentation size of instructional materials influence the split-attention effect?

The split-attention effect posits that learning outcomes are negatively impacted when interrelated text and graphics are spatially segregated rather than cohesively integrated. This study explored how the instructional material\u27s presentation size influences the manifestation of the split-attention effect. Based on cognitive load theory and perceptual load theory, we hypothesized that elevated information density in a compact presentation format would attenuate the advantage of integrated text and graphics, thereby diminishing the salience of the split-attention effect relative to a more expansive presentation size. University students (n = 146) studied a split-attention format or integrated format in either large or small presentation size. Results on retention and comprehension tests and extraneous cognitive load ratings revealed no effects of instructional format, presentation size or their interaction. The present results call for a more nuanced understanding of the split-attention effect and suggest additional research to explore its cognitive foundations

Finger pointing to self-manage cognitive load in learning from split-attention examples

We investigated whether finger pointing can be used as a cognitive load self-management strategy when learning from split-attention examples. We expected that pointing would reduce cognitive load and enhance learning performance. In a guided self-management phase, 122 university students studied a split-attention example under three pointing conditions (i.e., no pointing, one-handed pointing, two-handed pointing) or an integrated example without pointing. In the subsequent unguided self-management phase, all students studied a new split-attention example without pointing instructions. Results on retention and comprehension tests and self-ratings of cognitive load after studying each split-attention example revealed no differences between conditions. An exploratory analysis of pointing movements in the unguided self-management phase revealed that participants who frequently pointed outperformed those who barely pointed on the comprehension test in this phase. Our findings provide some suggestive evidence for the effectiveness of pointing as a self-management strategy in the learning from split-attention examples

Finger pointing to support learning from split-attention examples

We investigated whether finger pointing is an effective cognitive-load self-management strategy to mitigate the split-attention effect during learning. This effect holds that learning from split-attention examples consisting of spatially separated, but mutually referring text and picture, is less effective than learning from equivalent spatially integrated sources. One-hundred-and-twenty-nine undergraduates studied a picture with accompanying text about the nephron in a between-subjects design with the factors strategy use (pointing vs. no pointing) and instructional format (split-attention vs. integrated). The split-attention effect was confirmed by results on a comprehension test and a combined measure of learning effort and test performance (i.e. instructional efficiency). However, evidence for the benefits of pointing was only found for retention performance (i.e. not for comprehension performance and cognitive load ratings) for participants who learned from the split-attention example (i.e. not for participants who learned from the integrated example). Replications are invited to examine pointing as a self-management strategy