The current article focuses on efforts to understand how a basic learning process—comparison—can be harnessed to improve learning, especially mathematics learning in schools. To harness the power of comparison in instruction, we must investigate three core decisions: what, when, and how to compare. Comparing different strategies for solving the same problem or easily confusable problem types is particularly effective for supporting mathematics learning. Comparing examples early in the learning process can be challenging, but delaying comparison can reduce procedural flexibility. Indeed, comparison is resource demanding, so it is more impactful when carefully supported (e.g., side-by-side visual presentation, explanation prompts). To bridge from research to practice, we communicated research findings to teachers and policymakers and developed curricular materials, instructional routines, and professional-development materials to help math teachers leverage these learning processes. We conclude this review with key open questions.
AlfieriL.Nokes-MalachT. J.SchunnC. D. (2013). Learning through case comparison: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 48, 87–113. doi:10.1080/00461520.2013.775712
2.
AtkinsonR. K.DerryS. J.RenklA.WorthamD. (2000). Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70, 181–214. doi:10.2307/1170661
3.
BegolliK. N.RichlandL. E. (2016). Teaching mathematics by comparison: Analog visibility as a double-edged sword. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108, 194–213. doi:10.1037/edu0000056
4.
BoothJ. L.LangeK. E.KoedingerK. R.NewtonK. J. (2013). Using example problems to improve student learning in algebra: Differentiating between correct and incorrect examples. Learning and Instruction, 25, 24–34. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.11.002
5.
CumminsD. (1992). Role of analogical reasoning in the induction of problem categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 1103–1124. doi:10.1037//0278-7393.18.5.1103
6.
DurkinK.Rittle-JohnsonB. (2012). The effectiveness of using incorrect examples to support learning about decimal magnitude. Learning and Instruction, 22, 206–214. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.11.001
7.
DurkinK.Rittle-JohnsonB.StarJ. R.LoehrA. (2020). Comparing and discussing multiple strategies: An approach to improving algebra instruction. Manuscript submitted for publication.
8.
GentnerD. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170. doi:10.1016/S0364-0213(83)80009-3
9.
GentnerD.LoewensteinJ.ThompsonL. (2003). Learning and transfer: A general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 393–405. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.393
10.
GickM. L.HolyoakK. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1–38. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6
11.
JeeB. D.AnggoroF. K. (2019). Relational scaffolding enhances children’s understanding of scientific models. Psychological Science, 30, 1287–1302. doi:10.1177/0956797619864601
NamyL. L.GentnerD. (2002). Making a silk purse out of two sow’s ears: Young children’s use of comparison in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 5–15. doi:1O.1037//O096-LWS1.31.I.5
14.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/24783
15.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.
16.
NewtonK. J.StarJ. R. (2013). Exploring the nature and impact of model teaching with worked example pairs. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 2, 86–102. doi:10.5951/mathteaceduc.2.1.0086
17.
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 results (Volume 1): Excellence and equity in education. Paris, France: Author. doi:10.1787/9789264266490-en
18.
RichlandL. E.BegolliK. N.SimmsN.FrauselR. R.LyonsE. A. (2016). Supporting mathematical discussions: The roles of comparison and cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 29, 41–53. doi:10.1007/s10648-016-9382-2
19.
RichlandL. E.McDonoughI. M. (2010). Learning by analogy: Discriminating between potential analogs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 28–43. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.09.001
20.
Rittle-JohnsonB.StarJ. R. (2007). Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 561–574. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.561.
21.
Rittle-JohnsonB.StarJ. R. (2009). Compared to what? The effects of different comparisons on conceptual knowledge and procedural flexibility for equation solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 529–544. doi:10.1037/a0014224
22.
Rittle-JohnsonB.StarJ. R. (2011). The power of comparison in learning and instruction: Learning outcomes supported by different types of comparisons. In MestreJ. P.RossB. H. (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation: Cognition in education (Vol. 55, pp. 199–222). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00007-7
23.
Rittle-JohnsonB.StarJ. R.DurkinK. (2009). The importance of prior knowledge when comparing examples: Influences on conceptual and procedural knowledge of equation solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 836–852. doi:10.1037/a0016026
24.
Rittle-JohnsonB.StarJ. R.DurkinK. (2012). Developing procedural flexibility: Are novices prepared to learn from comparing procedures?British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 436–455. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02037.x
25.
SchwartzD. L.BransfordJ. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 475–522. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1604_4
26.
StarJ. R. (2005). Reconceptualizing procedural knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36, 404–411. doi:10.2307/30034943
StarJ. R.DurkinK.LoehrA.FineS.DesharnaisC.Rittle-JohnsonB. (2019). Compare and discuss multiple strategies in Algebra I: A supplemental curriculum. Retrieved from https://www.compareanddiscuss.com/
29.
StarJ. R.KenyonM.JoinerR.Rittle-JohnsonB. (2010). Comparison helps students learn to be better estimators. Teaching Children Mathematics, 16, 557–559.
30.
StarJ. R.NewtonK.PollackC.KokkaK.Rittle-JohnsonB.DurkinK. (2015). Student, teacher, and instructional characteristics related to students’ gains in flexibility. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, 198–208. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.03.001
31.
StarJ. R.PollackC.DurkinK.Rittle-JohnsonB.LynchK.NewtonK.GogolenC. (2015). Learning from comparison in algebra. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 41–54. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.05.005
32.
StarJ. R.Rittle-JohnsonB.DurkinK. (2016). Comparison and explanation of multiple strategies. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 151–159. doi:10.1177/2372732216655543
33.
WoodwardJ.BeckmannS.DriscollM.FrankeM. L.HerzigP.JitendraA. K.. . . OgbuehiP. (2012). Improving mathematical problem solving in grades 4 to 8: A practice guide. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences.
34.
ZieglerE.SternE. (2014). Delayed benefits of learning elementary algebraic transformations through contrasted comparisons. Learning and Instruction, 33, 131–146. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.04.006
35.
ZieglerE.SternE. (2016). Consistent advantages of contrasted comparisons: Algebra learning under direct instruction. Learning and Instruction, 41, 41–51. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.09.006
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
