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
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
THE ROLE OF TUTORING IN PROBLEM SOLVING *
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x · Cited by 8,851
Self‐Explanations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1302_1 · Cited by 1,714
Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: making science accessible to all students
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1601_2 · Cited by 1,394 · cited 7×
“Questions in text can highlight important features (Rothkopf, 1966) or promote self-assessment (White & Frederiksen, 1995, 1998).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe Metaphor of Scaffolding: Its Utility for the Field of Learning Disabilities
Stone, C. A. (1998) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/002221949803100404 · Cited by 465
Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P. L., & Brown, A. L. (1995) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1302_3 · Cited by 422
Cited by
HMELO-SILVER, C. E., DUNCAN, R. G., & CHINN, C. A. (2007) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520701263368 · Cited by 2,641
Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006) · Research in Science Education · doi:10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8 · Cited by 1,529
Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012 · Cited by 1,421
Scaffolding Complex Learning: The Mechanisms of Structuring and Problematizing Student Work
Reiser, B. J. (2004) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2 · Cited by 1,054
Pea, R. D. (2004) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1303_6 · Cited by 1,047
McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1 · Cited by 798
Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4001_1 · Cited by 787
Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654307309920 · Cited by 647
Synthesizing Results From Empirical Research on Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEM Education
Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654316670999 · Cited by 346
“Scaffolding researchers often argue whether scaffolding should be generic or context-specific (Davis, 2003; McNeill & Krajcik, 2009; Reiser, 2004).”
BackgroundJumping the PBL Implementation Hurdle: Supporting the Efforts of K–12 Teachers
Ertmer, P. A., & Simons, K. D. (2006) · Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning · doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1005 · Cited by 262
Zhu, M., Liu, O. L., & Lee, H.-S. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103668 · Cited by 229
Kim, N. J., Belland, B. R., & Walker, A. E. (2018) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-017-9419-1 · Cited by 220
(2015) · Educational Technology & Society · Cited by 68
Chatbots in Healthcare Curricula: The Case of a Conversational Virtual Patient
Dolianiti, F., Tsoupouroglou, I., Antoniou, P., Konstantinidis, S., Anastasiades, S., & Bamidis, P. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-60735-7_15 · Cited by 37
Thomann, H., & Deutscher, V. (2025) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100686 · Cited by 40
The effects of reflection on seventh grade social studies student learning and perception
Denton, D. W., & Ellis, A. K. (2023) · Educational Studies · doi:10.1080/03055698.2020.1835616 · Cited by 4
(2020) · ePrints Soton (University of Southampton)
Metadata
- Authors
- Davis, E. A.
- Venue
- Journal of the Learning Sciences
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- 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
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.
