The process of learning a procedural task, such as
converting fractions to percentage, using the instructions is most helpful for
performance and learning. It is often assumed that instructions should be read
before performing a task, but more often than not people do not look at the
instructions until they do not know (or cannot guess) what to do
next Eriksdotti (2011). Therefore, should reading the instructions and/or
procedures before doing a task or using them as reference, influences the
learning of a procedural task or it's outcome.
Providing principles in instructions is believed to help
learners understand, and in turn make them better able to process. Providing
principles can be beneficial for learning and transfer under specific
conditions. As Pam mentioned, that according to Eriksdotti (2011), including
principles helps the learner to not only understand but to complete given
tasks.
Rachel further adds by adding enrichment tactics such as
generalities guides the learner from examples of observation to that of
exploration. Rachel then clarifies by explaining that math lessons on
generalities developed from principles may fall into the top two boxes, but
until a student can apply the generality, it will not become an ingrained
skill.
Question: Should we allow students to use discovery
and prior knowledge to develop procedure task? Or should teachers present
procedures at the onset of each lesson?
References
Eiriksdottir, A.
(2011). The role of principles in instructions for procedural tasks: timing of
use, method of study, and procedural instruction specificity (Doctoral
dissertation). Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta,Georgia.
Reigeluth,
C. (1999). Principles for teaching invariant tasks. Retrieved April 2, 2012,
fromhttp://www.indiana.edu/~idtheory/methods/m2e.html
Suggested
reading:
Eiriksdottir,
E., & Catrambone, R. (2011). Procedural instructions, principles, and
examples: how to structure instructions for procedural tasks to enhance
performance, learning, and transfer. Human Factors, 53(6),
749-770. (Online version: http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/53/6/749)
If
the goal is good learning and transfer, then instructions should be more
abstract, inducing learners to expend the necessary cognitive effort for
learning. Therefore, the objective of this article is to investigate how instructions can be
constructed to enhance performance and learning of procedural tasks.
Should we allow students to use discovery and prior knowledge to develop procedure task? Or should teachers present procedures at the onset of each lesson?
ReplyDeleteI think there are times when it is appropriate to allow students to use discovery or prior knowledge when learning a procedure task. As the article states, it depends on the goal of instruction. If we are looking for short term task performance then we should stick to explicit instruction but if the goal is deeper learning and transfer then the instructions can be more abstract requiring more cognitive effort on the part of the learner (Eriksdottir & Catrambone, 2011). I think that adding discovery experiences or problem solving activities before the students have explicit instruction on how to solve them can aid learning. Studies by Siler, Klahr and Price (2011) suggested that preparatory problem-solving activities can help students develop knowledge structures to support learning. The benefit appeared to be due to a better understanding of the task goal by students.
Eiriksdottir, E., & Catrambone, R. (2011). Procedural instructions, principles, and examples: how to structure instructions for procedural tasks to enhance performance, learning, and transfer. Human Factors, 53(6), 749-770.
Siler, S., Klahr, D., Price, N. (2011). Investigating the mechanisms of learning from a constrained preparation for future learning activity. Instructional Science, 20, 1-26. doi: 10.1007/s11251-012-9224-7
Yes, I do agree it depends on the goal of instruction furthermore, it also depends on the goal of the procedural task. Is the task a “one-time” procedural performance such as when new furniture is assembled? Or is the goal to learn to perform the procedure from memory, and be able to apply it across situations (Eriksdottir & Catrambone) such as converting fractions to percentage.
ReplyDeleteEiriksdottir, E., & Catrambone, R. Using instructions in procedural tasks. Retrieved from: http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2007/docs/p959.pdf
Sometimes the learning objective allows the teacher to facilitate while students work to develop their own procedures using their prior knowledge and higher-order thinking skills. Since there are so many different learning goals in a given day - reading, writing, math, science, history, technology, art, music, etc. - research tells us that student engagement and higher order thinking will increase achievement (Tate, 2010). Usually, educators assess a student's ability to take a new procedure or skill and apply it across new situations (Elriksdottir et. al, 2011). To answer the discussion question, teachers should ensure that the learning environment is as engaging and student-centered as possible. Discovery activities should be used when they fit the objective in developing procedural tasks.
ReplyDeleteEiriksdottir, E., & Catrambone, R. (2011). Procedural instructions, principles, and examples: how to structure instructions for procedural tasks to enhance performance, learning, and transfer. Human Factors, 53(6), 749-770.
Tate, M. (2010). Worksheets don't grow dendrites. (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Some educators treat the relations between conceptual and procedural knowledge as one directional (Putnam et al., 1992). In other words, they suggest that conceptual knowledge can support improved procedural knowledge but suggest that the reverse is not true. However Schneider (2011), found in contract that the relations between conceptual and procedural knowledge are bidirectional and that improved procedural knowledge can lead to improved conceptual knowledge, as well as the reverse. Thus, it is important that both types of knowledge are presented to the learner
ReplyDeleteReferences
Putnam, R. T., Heaton, R. M., Prewat, R. S., & Remillard, J. (1992). Teaching mathematics for understanding. Elementary School Journal, 93, 213–228.
Schneider, M., Star, J. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2011). Relations Among Conceptual Knowledge, Procedural Knowledge, and Procedural Flexibility in Two Samples Differing in Prior Knowledge. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1525-1538. doi:10.1037/a0024997