Difference between revisions of "Analogical comparison principle"

From LearnLab
Jump to: navigation, search
(Brief statement of principle)
(Laboratory experiment support)
Line 7: Line 7:
 
==Experimental support==
 
==Experimental support==
 
===Laboratory experiment support===
 
===Laboratory experiment support===
Several factors have been shown to improve schema acquisition including: increasing the number of examples (Gick & Holyoak, 1983), increasing the variability of the examples (Chen, 1999; Paas & Merrienboer, 1994), using instructions that focus the learner on structural commonalities (Cummins, 1992; Gentner et al., 2003), focusing the learner on the subgoals of the problems (Catrambone, 1996, 1998), and using examples that minimize students cognitive load (Ward & Sweller, 1990).
+
Analogical comparison has also been shown to improve learning even when both examples are not initially well understood (Kurtz, Miao, & Gentner, 2001; Gentner Lowenstein, & Thompson, 2003). By comparing the commonalities between two examples, students could focus on the causal structure and improve their learning about the concept. Kurtz et al. (2001) showed that students who were learning about the concept of heat transfer learned more when comparing examples than when studying each example separately.
  
 
===In vivo experiment support===
 
===In vivo experiment support===

Revision as of 11:39, 25 March 2008

Brief statement of principle

Analogical comparison can facilitate schema abstraction and transfer of that knowledge to new problem. By comparing the commonalities between two examples, students can focus on the causal structure and improve their learning about the concept.

Description of principle

Operational definition

Examples

Experimental support

Laboratory experiment support

Analogical comparison has also been shown to improve learning even when both examples are not initially well understood (Kurtz, Miao, & Gentner, 2001; Gentner Lowenstein, & Thompson, 2003). By comparing the commonalities between two examples, students could focus on the causal structure and improve their learning about the concept. Kurtz et al. (2001) showed that students who were learning about the concept of heat transfer learned more when comparing examples than when studying each example separately.

In vivo experiment support

Theoretical rationale

(These entries should link to one or more learning processes.)

Conditions of application

Caveats, limitations, open issues, or dissenting views

Variations (descendants)

Generalizations (ascendants)

References