The worked-example effect: Not an artefact of lousy control conditions

  • Authors:

  • Rolf Schwonke;Alexander Renkl;Carmen Krieg;Jörg Wittwer;Vincent Aleven;Ron Salden

  • Affiliations:

  • Department of Psychology, Educational and Developmental Psychology, University of Freiburg, Engelbergerstraíe 41, D-79085 Freiburg, Germany;Department of Psychology, Educational and Developmental Psychology, University of Freiburg, Engelbergerstraíe 41, D-79085 Freiburg, Germany;Department of Psychology, Educational and Developmental Psychology, University of Freiburg, Engelbergerstraíe 41, D-79085 Freiburg, Germany;Leibniz Institute for Science Education, University of Kiel, Ohlshausenstraíe 62, D-24098, Kiel, Germany;Human-Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 300 South Craig Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA;Human-Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 300 South Craig Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA

  • Venue:
  • Computers in Human Behavior
  • Year:
  • 2009

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Recently it has been argued that the worked-example effect, as postulated by Cognitive Load Theory, might only occur when compared to unsupported problem-solving, but not when compared to well-supported or tutored problem-solving as instantiated, for example, in Cognitive Tutors. In two experiments, we compared a standard Cognitive Tutor with a version that was enriched with faded worked examples. In Experiment 1, students in the example condition needed less learning time to acquire a comparable amount of procedural skills and conceptual understanding. In Experiment 2, the efficiency advantage was replicated. In addition, students in the example condition acquired a deeper conceptual understanding. The present findings demonstrate that the worked-example effect is indeed robust and can be found even when compared to well-supported learning by problem-solving.