CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2Innovative Teaching and Learning MethodsMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesMathematics Education and Pedagogy

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Research on Group Learning and Cognitive Science: A Study of Motivation, Knowledge, and Self-Regulation in a Large Lecture College Algebra Class

Open access
Miller, David, Schraeder, Matthew·2015·THE MATHEMATICS EDUCATOR
DOI 10.63301/tme.v24i2.2002
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

At a research University near the east coast, researchers restructured a College Algebra course by formatting the course into two large lectures a week, an active recitation size laboratory class once a week, and an extra day devoted to active group work called Supplemental Practice (SP). SP was added as an extra day of class where the SP leader has students work in groups on a worksheet of examples and problems, based off of worked-example research, that were covered in the previous week’s class material. Two sections of the course were randomly chosen to be the experimental group and the other section was the control group. The experimental group was given the SP worksheets and the control group was given a questionand-answer session. The experimental group's performance was statistically significant compared to the control on a variety of components in the course, particularly when prior knowledge was factored into the data.

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 · 10.63301/tme.v24i2.2002

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.

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Alexander, J. M., Carr, M., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1995). Development of metacognition in gifted children: Directions for future research. Developmental Review, 15, 1-37.
  2. Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 181-214.
  3. Brody, N. (1992). Intelligence. (2 nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  4. Butler, M., Pyzdrowski, L., Walker, V., Butler, F., (2012). The effects of the immediate online homework feedback on homework attempts and mathematics performance. In Q. Liu (Ed.), Advancement in online education: Exploring the best practices (vol. 2), (pp. 125-137), New York: Nova Science.
  5. Carroll, W.M. (1994). Using worked examples as an instructional support in the algebra classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 360- 367.
  6. Catrambone, R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1990). Learning subgoals and methods for solving probability problems. Memory & Cognition, 18(6), 593-603.
  7. Cooper, G., & Sweller, J. (1987). Effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical problem-solving transfer. Journal of educational psychology, 79(4), 347-362.
  8. Crippen, K., & Boyd, E. (2007). The impact of web-based worked examples and self-explanation on performance, problem solving, and self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 49(3), 809-821.
  9. Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (1996). Theories and principles of motivation. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), The handbook of educational psychology (pp. 63-84). New York, NY: Macmillan.
  10. Herrnstein, R., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: Free Press.
  11. Hilbert, T.S., Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2004). Learning From worked-out examples: The transition from instructional explanations to self- explanation prompts. In P. Gerjets, P. A. Kirschner, J. Elen, & R. Joiner (Eds.), Instructional design for effective and enjoyable computer- supported learning. Tuebingen: Knowledge Media Research Center.
  12. Perkins, D.N., Farady, M., Bushey, B. (1987). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In Perkins, D.N., J.W. Segal, J.F. Voss. (Eds.). Informal reasoning and education (pp. 83-106). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  13. Reed, S. K., & Bolstad, C. A. (1991). Use of examples and procedures in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(4), 753-766.
  14. Schraw, G., Brooks, D. W., & Crippen, K. J. (2005). Using an interactive, compensatory model of learning to improve chemistry teaching. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(4), 637-640.
  15. Schunk, D. H. (1996). Goal and self-evaluative influences during children's cognitive skill learning. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 359-382.
  16. Steinberg, R.J., & Wagner, R.K. (1988). Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  17. Sullivan, M., & Sullivan, M. (2006). College algebra and trigonometry: Enhanced with graphing utilities. (6 th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
  18. Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2(1), 59-89.
  19. Sweller, J., & Owen, E. (1989). Should problem solving be used as a learning device in mathematics? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 20(3), 322-328.
  20. Tarmizi, R.A., & Sweller, J. (1988). Guidance during mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 424-436.
  21. Ward, M., & Sweller, J. (1990) Structuring effective worked examples. Cognitive and Instruction, 7(1), 1-39.
  22. Zhu, X. and Simon, H. (1987). Learning mathematics from examples and by doing. Cognition and Instruction, 4(3), 137-166.
  23. Zimmerman, B. J., Greenberg, D., & Weinstein, C. E. (1994). Self-regulated academic study time: A strategy approach. In D. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 181-201). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Miller, D., & Schraeder, M.
Affiliations
West Virginia University (US)
ORCID
Venue
THE MATHEMATICS EDUCATOR
Publisher
Department of Math, Science & Social Studies at the University of Georgia
Published
2015-12-15
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
27-55
ISSN
  • 1062-9017 (ISSN-L)
  • 2331-4451
DOI
10.63301/tme.v24i2.2002
OpenAlex
W2199245744
Cited by
2
References
0
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • THE MATHEMATICS EDUCATOR (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • THE MATHEMATICS EDUCATOR
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
group learning, college algebra, worked examples, active learning, student motivation, prior knowledge, self-regulation, course redesign, large lecture classes, mathematics education

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