• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

通过预测试优化学习目标的效果。

Optimizing the Efficacy of Learning Objectives through Pretests.

作者信息

Sana Faria, Forrin Noah D, Sharma Mrinalini, Dubljevic Tamara, Ho Peter, Jalil Ezza, Kim Joseph A

机构信息

Centre for Psychology, Athabasca University, Edmonton, Alberta, T5J 3S8, Canada.

Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada.

出版信息

CBE Life Sci Educ. 2020 Sep;19(3):ar43. doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-11-0257.

DOI:10.1187/cbe.19-11-0257
PMID:32870085
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8711814/
Abstract

Learning objectives (LOs) are statements that typically precede a study session and describe the knowledge students should obtain by the end of the session. Despite their widespread use, limited research has investigated the effect of LOs on learning. In three laboratory experiments, we examined the extent to which LOs improve retention of information. Participants in each experiment read five passages on a neuroscience topic and took a final test that measured how well they retained the information. Presenting LOs before each corresponding passage increased performance on the final test compared with not presenting LOs (experiment 1). Actively presenting LOs increased their pedagogical value: Performance on the final test was highest when participants answered multiple-choice pretest questions compared with when they read traditional LO statements or statements that included target facts (experiment 2). Interestingly, when feedback was provided on pretest responses, performance on the final test , regardless of whether the pretest format was multiple choice or short answer (experiment 3). Together, these findings suggest that, compared with the passive presentation of LO statements, pretesting (especially without feedback) is a more active method that optimizes learning.

摘要

学习目标(LOs)通常是在学习环节开始前呈现的陈述,描述了学生在该环节结束时应掌握的知识。尽管学习目标被广泛使用,但对其对学习效果影响的研究却很有限。在三项实验室实验中,我们研究了学习目标在多大程度上能提高信息留存率。每项实验的参与者阅读五篇关于神经科学主题的文章,并参加一次最终测试,以衡量他们对信息的留存程度。与不呈现学习目标相比,在每篇相应文章之前呈现学习目标能提高最终测试的成绩(实验1)。主动呈现学习目标增加了其教学价值:与阅读传统学习目标陈述或包含目标事实的陈述相比,当参与者回答多项选择题预测试题时,最终测试的成绩最高(实验2)。有趣的是,当对预测试题的回答提供反馈时,无论预测试题的形式是多项选择题还是简答题,最终测试的成绩都有所提高(实验3)。综合来看,这些发现表明,与被动呈现学习目标陈述相比,预测试(尤其是没有反馈的预测试)是一种更能优化学习的主动方法。

相似文献

1
Optimizing the Efficacy of Learning Objectives through Pretests.通过预测试优化学习目标的效果。
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2020 Sep;19(3):ar43. doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-11-0257.
2
When pretesting fails to enhance learning concepts from reading texts.当预测试无法增强从阅读文本中学习概念的效果时。
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2018 Sep;24(3):331-346. doi: 10.1037/xap0000160. Epub 2018 May 3.
3
A little can go a long way: giving learners some context can enhance the benefits of pretesting.一点小改变,效果大不同:给学习者一些背景知识能增强前测的效果。
Memory. 2021 Oct;29(9):1206-1215. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2021.1974048. Epub 2021 Sep 6.
4
True-false tests enhance retention relative to rereading.正误判断题测试比重读更能增强记忆。
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2022 Mar;28(1):114-129. doi: 10.1037/xap0000363. Epub 2021 Jun 10.
5
Pretesting versus posttesting: Comparing the pedagogical benefits of errorful generation and retrieval practice.前测与后测:比较错误生成和检索练习的教学效益。
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2021 Jun;27(2):237-257. doi: 10.1037/xap0000345. Epub 2021 Apr 1.
6
The pretesting effect: do unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance learning?前测效应:不成功的检索尝试是否能增强学习?
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2009 Sep;15(3):243-57. doi: 10.1037/a0016496.
7
The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests.反馈类型和时机对多项选择题学习效果的影响。
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2007 Dec;13(4):273-81. doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.13.4.273.
8
Retrieval practice with short-answer, multiple-choice, and hybrid tests.检索练习采用简答题、选择题和混合题的形式。
Memory. 2014;22(7):784-802. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2013.831454. Epub 2013 Sep 23.
9
Effectiveness of flipped classroom with Poll Everywhere as a teaching-learning method for pharmacy students.将“Poll Everywhere”作为教学方法的翻转课堂对药学专业学生的有效性。
Indian J Pharmacol. 2016 Oct;48(Suppl 1):S41-S46. doi: 10.4103/0253-7613.193313.
10
Both multiple-choice and short-answer quizzes enhance later exam performance in middle and high school classes.选择题和简答题测验都能提高初中和高中课堂上学生后续考试的成绩。
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2014 Mar;20(1):3-21. doi: 10.1037/xap0000004. Epub 2013 Nov 25.

引用本文的文献

1
A Road Map for Planning Course Transformation Using Learning Objectives.使用学习目标规划课程转型的路线图。
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2024 Jun;23(2):es4. doi: 10.1187/cbe.23-06-0114.
2
Annotations of Research: Enhancing Accessibility and Promoting High Quality Biology Education Research.研究注释:提高可及性并促进高质量生物学教育研究。
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2024 Mar;23(1):fe2. doi: 10.1187/cbe.23-09-0171.
3
Insight from Biology Program Learning Outcomes: Implications for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment.生物学课程学习成果的启示:对教学、学习和评估的影响。

本文引用的文献

1
How Undergraduate Science Students Use Learning Objectives to Study.本科理科学生如何利用学习目标进行学习。
J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2018 Jun 29;19(2). doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v19i2.1510. eCollection 2018.
2
When pretesting fails to enhance learning concepts from reading texts.当预测试无法增强从阅读文本中学习概念的效果时。
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2018 Sep;24(3):331-346. doi: 10.1037/xap0000160. Epub 2018 May 3.
3
The effects of prequestions on classroom learning.预提问对课堂学习的影响。
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2023 Mar;22(1):ar5. doi: 10.1187/cbe.22-09-0177.
4
Writing and Using Learning Objectives.编写和使用学习目标
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2022 Sep;21(3):fe3. doi: 10.1187/cbe.22-04-0073.
5
Brief Training and Intensive Mentoring Guide Postdoctoral Scholars to Student-Centered Instruction.博士后学者简要培训与强化指导,以实现以学生为中心的教学。
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2021 Dec;20(4):ar64. doi: 10.1187/cbe.21-03-0083.
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2018 Mar;24(1):34-42. doi: 10.1037/xap0000145.
4
Prequestions do not enhance the benefits of retrieval in a STEM classroom.预提问并不能提高STEM课堂中的检索效果。
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2017;2(1):42. doi: 10.1186/s41235-017-0078-z. Epub 2017 Oct 25.
5
Learning from Errors.从错误中学习。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2017 Jan 3;68:465-489. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044022. Epub 2016 Sep 14.
6
On the difficulty of mending metacognitive illusions: A priori theories, fluency effects, and misattributions of the interleaving benefit.论修复元认知错觉的难度:先验理论、流畅性效应及交错学习益处的错误归因
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2016 Jul;145(7):918-33. doi: 10.1037/xge0000177. Epub 2016 May 26.
7
Multiple-choice pretesting potentiates learning of related information.多项选择题预测试可增强对相关信息的学习。
Mem Cognit. 2016 Oct;44(7):1085-101. doi: 10.3758/s13421-016-0621-z.
8
Can Multiple-Choice Testing Induce Desirable Difficulties? Evidence from the Laboratory and the Classroom.多项选择题测试能引发有益的困难吗?来自实验室和课堂的证据。
Am J Psychol. 2015 Summer;128(2):229-39. doi: 10.5406/amerjpsyc.128.2.0229.
9
Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives.布鲁姆认知学习目标分类法。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2015 Jul;103(3):152-3. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010.
10
Optimizing multiple-choice tests as tools for learning.优化多项选择题作为学习工具。
Mem Cognit. 2015 Jan;43(1):14-26. doi: 10.3758/s13421-014-0452-8.