This study investigated potential differences in learning between two instructional activities: reading from a text and using a computer simulation. Participants were undergraduate students with limited knowledge of the domain topic (project management). Participants in both conditions (Simulation and Text) improved equally on a decontextualized, abstract knowledge assessment. In contrast, only the participants in the Simulation condition significantly improved on a contextualized case-based assessment. A propositional analysis revealed that participants in the Simulation condition acquired a significant amount of implicit domain information from pretest to posttest, whereas participants in the Text condition did not. These results suggest that educational computer simulations have the potential to significantly enhance the learning of implicit domain knowledge.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BerrymanS. E. (1993). Learning in the workplace. In Darlin-HammondL. (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 19, pp. 343–401). Washington, DC: AERA.
2.
BransfordJ. D.FranksJ. J.VyeN. J., & SherwoodR. D. (1989). New approaches to instruction: Because wisdom can't be told. In VosniadouS. & OrtonyA. (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 470–497). New York: Cambridge University Press.
3.
BransfordJ. D., & SchwartzD. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61–100.
4.
BrownS. B.CollinsA., & DuguidP. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
5.
ChiM. T. H.BassokM.LewisM. W.ReimannP., & GlaserR. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.
6.
ChiM. T. H.De LeeuwN.ChiuM., & La VancherC. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.
7.
ClarkR. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.
8.
ClarkR. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29.
9.
CobbT. (1997). Cognitive efficiency: Toward a revised theory of media. Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(4), 21–35.
10.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2–10.
11.
CollinsA.BrownJ. S., & NewmanS. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and arithmetic. In ResnickL. B. (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
DedeC. J., & LewisM. (1995). Assessment of emerging technologies that might assist and enhance school-to-work transitions.Contractor report to the Office of Technology Assessment, Washington, DC, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia.
13.
EricssonK. A., & SimonH. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14.
FerrariM.TaylorR., & VanLehnK. (1999). Adapting work simulations for schools. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 21(1), 25–53.
15.
GickM. L., & HolyoakK. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12(3), 306–355.
16.
GickM. L., & HolyoakK. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology15(1), 1–38.
17.
GottS. P.HallR. A.PokornyE.DibbleE., & GlaserR. (1993). A naturalistic study of transfer: Adaptive expertise in technical domains. In DettermanD. K. & SternbergR. J. (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 258–288). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
18.
JeongH.TaylorR., & ChiM. (2000, August). Learning from a computer workplace simulation. Proceedings of the 22nd annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 705–710). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19.
JonassenD. H.CampbellJ. P., & DavidsonM. E. (1994). Learning with media: Restructuring the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 31–39.
20.
KozmaR. (1994). Will media influence learning? Refraining the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7–19.
21.
LaveJ. (1993). Word problems: A microcosm of theories of learning. In LightP. & ButterworthsG. (Eds.), Context and cognition. Ways of learning and knowing (pp. 74–92). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22.
MayerR. E., & WittrockM. C. (1996). Problem-solving transfer. In BerlinerD. C. & CalfeeR. C. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 47–62). New York: Macmillan.
23.
McNamaraD. S.LevinsteinI. B., & BoonthumC. (2004). iSTART: Interactive strategy trainer for active reading and thinking. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 222–233.
24.
NormanD. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things.New York: Basic Books.Project Management Institute. (1996). A guide to the project management body of knowledge.Sylva, NC: PMI Publishing.
25.
ResnickL. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16(9), 13–20.
26.
SalomonG., & PerkinsD. N. (1989). Rocky road to transfer. Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 113–142.
27.
SchankR. (1997). Virtual learning: A revolutionary approach to building a highly skilled workforce.New York: McGraw Hill.
28.
SchankR., & NeamanA. (2001). Motivation and failure in educational simulation design. In ForbusK. D. & FeltovichP. (Eds.), Smart machines in education: The coming revolution in educational technology (pp. 37–69). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press/MIT Press.
29.
Thinking Tools, Inc. (1996). Project Challenge [Computer software].
30.
WhiteheadA. N. (1929). The aims of education and other essays.New York: Macmillan.
