Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 428

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prompting Middle School Science Students for Productive Reflection: Generic and Directed Prompts

Davis, Elizabeth A.·2003·Journal of the Learning Sciences

Abstract

This classroom study, involving 178 middle school science students, investigates ways of prompting students for reflection. Reflection refers to both metacognition and sense-making. The primary research question is "Do students merely need to be prompted to reflect, or do they need guidance in reflecting productively?" Two types of reflection prompts are contrasted. The first type, called generic prompts, represents a view that asking students to "stop and think" will encourage reflection. The second type, called directed prompts, assumes that a generic request for reflection is insufficient, and that students should instead be provided with hints indicating potentially productive directions for their reflection. (Students in both conditions received identical activity prompts that helped them complete the project.) The results show that students in the generic prompt condition develop more coherent understandings as they work on a complex science project. Students reflect unproductively more often in response to directed prompts as compared to the generic prompts. These poor reflectors are less successful on the project than are other better reflectors. Students with some autonomy who received generic prompts develop more coherent understandings than do their similarly autonomous peers who receive directed prompts. The role of reflection in promoting multiple, complementary knowledge integration processes is described. The article concludes with a discussion of implications for both instruction and cognition, including strategies for promoting productive reflection in classroom situations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327809jls1201_4

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Metadata

Authors
Davis, E. A.
Venue
Journal of the Learning Sciences
Published
2003-01
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
91-142
ISSN
  • 1050-8406 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7809
OpenAlex
W2035261094
Cited by
428
References
5
FWCI
24.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prompting Middle School Science Students for Productive Reflection: Generic and Directed Prompts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327809jls1201_4
The paper
Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting Middle School Science Students for Productive Reflection: Generic and Directed Prompts. Journal of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1201_4

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.