Effects of Prior Knowledge on the Generation Advantage

Calculators Versus Calculation to Learn Simple Multiplication

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Elementary school children learned simple multiplication by generating (i.e., computing the answers) or reading (i.e., reading the answers from a calculator display). The children were given a pretest, read or generate training, a posttest, and a retention test after 2 weeks. Read training involved approximately half as much training time compared with generate training and was moderately effective. In terms of accuracy, generate training effectiveness depended on children's prior knowledge of multiplication. It was highly effective for low-knowledge children and ineffective for high-knowledge children. In terms of test time, read children showed a loss in efficiency after the 2-week delay compared with the generate children who showed no loss. The results are explained in terms of a procedural account of the generation advantage, and instructional applications are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)307-318
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Educational Psychology
Volume87
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jun 1995
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

knowledge
Reading
schoolchild
elementary school
efficiency
time

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology

Cite this

@article{b8c8d3d8690f40ad9ce86a3943abaad0,
title = "Effects of Prior Knowledge on the Generation Advantage: Calculators Versus Calculation to Learn Simple Multiplication",
abstract = "Elementary school children learned simple multiplication by generating (i.e., computing the answers) or reading (i.e., reading the answers from a calculator display). The children were given a pretest, read or generate training, a posttest, and a retention test after 2 weeks. Read training involved approximately half as much training time compared with generate training and was moderately effective. In terms of accuracy, generate training effectiveness depended on children's prior knowledge of multiplication. It was highly effective for low-knowledge children and ineffective for high-knowledge children. In terms of test time, read children showed a loss in efficiency after the 2-week delay compared with the generate children who showed no loss. The results are explained in terms of a procedural account of the generation advantage, and instructional applications are discussed.",
author = "Danielle McNamara",
year = "1995",
month = "6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "87",
pages = "307--318",
journal = "Journal of Educational Psychology",
issn = "0022-0663",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of Prior Knowledge on the Generation Advantage

T2 - Calculators Versus Calculation to Learn Simple Multiplication

AU - McNamara, Danielle

PY - 1995/6

Y1 - 1995/6

N2 - Elementary school children learned simple multiplication by generating (i.e., computing the answers) or reading (i.e., reading the answers from a calculator display). The children were given a pretest, read or generate training, a posttest, and a retention test after 2 weeks. Read training involved approximately half as much training time compared with generate training and was moderately effective. In terms of accuracy, generate training effectiveness depended on children's prior knowledge of multiplication. It was highly effective for low-knowledge children and ineffective for high-knowledge children. In terms of test time, read children showed a loss in efficiency after the 2-week delay compared with the generate children who showed no loss. The results are explained in terms of a procedural account of the generation advantage, and instructional applications are discussed.

AB - Elementary school children learned simple multiplication by generating (i.e., computing the answers) or reading (i.e., reading the answers from a calculator display). The children were given a pretest, read or generate training, a posttest, and a retention test after 2 weeks. Read training involved approximately half as much training time compared with generate training and was moderately effective. In terms of accuracy, generate training effectiveness depended on children's prior knowledge of multiplication. It was highly effective for low-knowledge children and ineffective for high-knowledge children. In terms of test time, read children showed a loss in efficiency after the 2-week delay compared with the generate children who showed no loss. The results are explained in terms of a procedural account of the generation advantage, and instructional applications are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=21844501906&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=21844501906&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 87

SP - 307

EP - 318

JO - Journal of Educational Psychology

JF - Journal of Educational Psychology

SN - 0022-0663

IS - 2

ER -