Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles
Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015 Mar;10(2):176-99. doi: 10.1177/1745691615569000.
The primary goal of instruction should be to facilitate long-term learning-that is, to create relatively permanent changes in comprehension, understanding, and skills of the types that will support long-term retention and transfer. During the instruction or training process, however, what we can observe and measure is performance, which is often an unreliable index of whether the relatively long-term changes that constitute learning have taken place. The time-honored distinction between learning and performance dates back decades, spurred by early animal and motor-skills research that revealed that learning can occur even when no discernible changes in performance are observed. More recently, the converse has also been shown-specifically, that improvements in performance can fail to yield significant learning-and, in fact, that certain manipulations can have opposite effects on learning and performance. We review the extant literature in the motor- and verbal-learning domains that necessitates the distinction between learning and performance. In addition, we examine research in metacognition that suggests that people often mistakenly interpret their performance during acquisition as a reliable guide to long-term learning. These and other considerations suggest that the learning-performance distinction is critical and has vast practical and theoretical implications.
教学的主要目标应该是促进长期学习，也就是说，要在理解、理解和技能方面产生相对持久的变化，这些变化将支持长期的保留和迁移。然而，在教学或培训过程中，我们可以观察和测量的是表现，而表现往往是学习是否已经发生的相对长期变化的不可靠指标。学习和表现之间的这种由来已久的区别可以追溯到几十年前，这是早期的动物和运动技能研究的结果，这些研究表明，即使在没有明显表现变化的情况下，学习也可以发生。最近，情况正好相反——具体来说，表现的提高可能不会带来显著的学习，事实上，某些操作可能对学习和表现产生相反的影响。我们回顾了运动和言语学习领域的现有文献，这些文献需要区分学习和表现。此外，我们还研究了元认知研究，这些研究表明，人们通常错误地将他们在获取过程中的表现解释为长期学习的可靠指南。这些和其他考虑因素表明，学习与表现的区别至关重要，具有广泛的实际和理论意义。
