Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1D’Mello, S. K. & Graesser, A. C. (2014). Confusion. In R. Pekrun & L. Linnenbrink-‐Garcia (Eds.). International handbook of emotions in education. New York, NY: Routledge. 2Hammer, D. (1996). Misconceptions or P-‐Prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(2), 97–127. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0502_1 3Christensen, S. M., & Turner, D. R. (Eds.). (1993). Folk psychology and the philosophy of mind. New York: Psychology Press. 4Lee, G., & Byun, T. (2011). An explanation for the difficulty of leading conceptual change using a counterintuitive demonstration: The relationship between cognitive conflict and responses. Research in Science Education, 42(5), 943–965. doi:10.1007/s11165-‐011-‐9234-‐5 5Jacobson, M. J., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 11–34. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1501_4 6Jacobson, M. J., Kapur, M., So, H.-‐J., & Lee, J. (2010). The ontologies of complexity and learning about complex systems. Instructional Science, 39(5), 763–783. doi:10.1007/s11251-‐010-‐9147-‐0 7Meyer, J. H., & Land, R. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education, 49(3), 373-‐388. 8diSessa, A. A. (2014). The Construction of Causal Schemes: Learning Mechanisms at the Knowledge Level. Cognitive Science, 38(5), 795–850. doi:10.1111/cogs.12131 9Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Schulze, S. K. (1994). The influence of topic knowledge, domain knowledge, and interest on the comprehension of scientific exposition. Learning and Individual Differences, 6(4), 379-‐397. 10Kapur, M. (2008). Productive Failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424. doi:10.1080/07370000802212669 11VanLehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C., & Yamauchi, T. (2003). Why do only some events cause learning during human tutoring? Cognition and Instruction, 21(3), 209–249. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2103_01 12Storm, C., & Storm, T. (1987). A taxonomic study of the vocabulary of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 805–816. 13D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2014). Confusion and its dynamics during device comprehension with breakdown scenarios. Acta Psychologica, 151(C), 106-‐116. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.06.005 14Hess, U. (2003). Now you see it, now you don't-‐-‐the confusing case of confusion as an emotion: Commentary on Rozin and Cohen (2003). Emotion, 3(1), 76–80. doi:10.1037/1528-‐3542.3.1.76 !
15Silvia, P. J. (2010). Confusion and interest: The role of knowledge emotions in aesthetic experience. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4(2), 75. 16D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (in press) Inducing and tracking confusion and cognitive disequilibrium with breakdown scenarios. Memory and Cognition. 17Hays, M. J., Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2010). The costs and benefits of providing feedback during learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(6), 797–801. doi:10.3758/PBR.17.6.797 18Lehman, B., D'Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2013). Who benefits from confusion induction during learning? An individual differences cluster analysis. In K. Yacef et al. (Eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Education (51–60), Berlin: Spinger-‐Verlag. 19D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2012). Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145–157. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.10.001 20D’Mello, S., Lehman, B., Pekrun, R., & Graesser, A. (2014). Confusion can be beneficial for learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 153–170. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.05.003 21Pekrun, R., & Stephens, E. J. (2011). Academic emotions. In APA educational psychology handbook, Vol 2: Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors. (pp. 3–31). Washington: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/13274-‐001 22Acee, T. W., Kim, H., Kim, H. J., Kim, J.-‐I., Chu, H.-‐N. R., Kim, M., et al. (2010). Academic boredom in under-‐ and over-‐challenging situations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 17–27. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.08.002 23Graesser, A. C., Conley, M. W., & Olney, A. (2011). Intelligent tutoring systems. In APA educational psychology handbook, Vol 3: Application to learning and teaching. (pp. 451–473). Washington: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/13275-‐018 24Esteban-‐Millat, I., & Martínez-‐López, F. J. (2014). Modelling students' flow experiences in an online learning environment. Computers & Education. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.012 25Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Commonsense Conceptions of Emergent Processes: Why Some Misconceptions Are Robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 161–199. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1402_1 26Dweck, C. S. (2002). Messages that motivate: How praise molds students’ beliefs, motivation, and performance (in surprising ways). In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 37–60). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Predicting confusion !
1. Is there a robust method for inducing learner confusion?
!2. What are the similarities/differences in functional
activation across epistemological domains? !3. What are the neural correlates of constructive
confusion? !4. Can cognitive neuroscience research on error correction
and feedback inform learning design and interventions for non-‐constructive confusion?
Predicting learner confusion for enhanced feedback and self-regulation: A conceptual frameworkJason Lodge1, Mariya Pachman2, Amael Arguel2, Rachel Buckley3, Gregor Kennedy1, Lori Lockyer2, Ottmar Lipp4, Rob Hester3, & Mike Timms5 1Centre for the Study of Higher Education & Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne, 2School of Education, Macquarie University, 3School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, 4School of Psychology & Speech Pathology, Curtin University, 5Australian Council for Educational Research
A framework for learner confusion
Research QuestionsUnderstanding confusion
!1. Does confusion contribute to conceptual change -‐ if so,
how? !2. What are the behavioural and information processing
factors underpinning constructive confusion? !3. Does confusion differ between novices and experts? If
so, can the differences be used to inform learning design?
!4. What is the relationship between confusion, interest
and motivation?
Designing for constructive confusion !
1. What types of learning designs lead to constructive confusion?
!2. How can feedback be used to ensure that confusion
leads to constructive outcomes? !3. What is the role of self-‐regulation in constructive
confusion? !4. How can students be assisted to recover from the
effects of non-‐constructive confusion?
Methods
engagement/flow24!(equilibrium)
confusion1!(disequilibrium)16 frustration21
boredom22!(equilibrium)
impasse detected
impasse resolved
failure/
goals blocked
additional impasse
persistent failure/
hopelessness
lack of control/
forced effort
Adapted from D’Mello & Graesser, 20141
misconception2!folk knowledge3 counterintuitive4
complex knowledge5!systemic6
troublesome7
novel information8!unfamiliar6
knowledge domain9
Discovery Translation Application
neural and physiological !correlates of confusion!
fMRI facial electromyography
skin conductance
neuroscience of productive !confusion!
error correction feedback
processing and confusion!recognition, recall, transfer
judgments of learning disfluency/cognitive load/
disequilibrium
design and confusion!performance irt memory
prototype testing analytics/data mining
experience of confusion!confidence
self-regulation frustration & boredom interest & motivation
learning designs!learner performance
confidence metacognition
conceptual change
constructive!confusion18
non-constructive!confusion19
reinforcement of!misconception25
cognitive12 !processing difficulty13
emotional14 !epistemic emotion15
combine
epistemological antecedents underlying processes phenomenological experience
intervention/ feedback17
conceptual change
process
conceptual !change20
disengagement26!(learned
helplessness)
intervention/ feedback17
academic recovery23
primary outcome secondary outcome meta-level outcome
learning design10,11
References
