An official website of the United States government
This study tested whether exploring with simulations before instruction offers the conceptual benefits of “productive failure,” compared to a more traditional lecture-then-practice method. Undergraduate students (N=218) in introductory chemistry courses completed an activity using an online simulation about atomic structure. Students either completed the simulation activity before (explore-first condition) or after (instruct-first condition) a lecture on the topic. Students in both conditions scored equally on an assessment of basic facts taught in the instruction. However, students in the explore-first condition scored significantly higher on assessments of conceptual understanding and transfer to a new concept, compared to students in the instruct-first condition. Students in the explore-first condition also reported experiencing greater competence and curiosity during the learning activities. A guided simulation activity prior to instruction can have both motivational benefits and deepen students’ understanding.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on July 8, 2026
Flipping a simulation before instruction can improve students' learning, interest and perceived competence
Abstract BackgroundUsing simulations in science instruction can help make abstract topics more concrete and boost students' understanding. AimsThe current research examined whether using a simulation as an exploratory learning activity before an accompanying lecture has additional learning and motivational benefits compared to a more common lecture‐then‐simulation approach. SamplesParticipants (Experiment 1,N = 168; Experiment 2,N = 357) were undergraduate students in several sections of a first‐year chemistry course. MethodsStudents were randomly assigned to explore a simulation on atomic structure either before a lecture (explore‐first condition) or after the lecture (instruct‐first condition). In Experiment 1, the simulation activity time was limited (15 min) and the activity varied in whether self‐explanation (‘why’) prompts were included. In Experiment 2, the activity time was lengthened (20 min), and only ‘why’ prompts were used. After the activity and lecture, students completed a survey and posttest. ResultsIn Experiment 1, students in the explore‐first condition scored lower on posttest conceptual knowledge scores and reported lower curiosity compared to students in the instruct‐first condition. Scores for basic facts and transfer knowledge, and self‐reported situational interest, self‐efficacy, and competence, were equal between conditions. No effects of prompt condition were found. In Experiment 2, with longer activity time, the results reversed. Students in the explore‐first condition scored equally on basic facts and higher on conceptual knowledge and transfer measures, while also reporting higher curiosity, situational interest, self‐efficacy, competence, and cognitive engagement. ConclusionWhen properly designed, placing simulations before—rather than after—lecture can deepen learning, motivation, and competence.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2012342
- PAR ID:
- 10614090
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- British Journal of Educational Psychology
- ISSN:
- 0007-0998
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This research work in progress research paper examines student perceptions after completing an exploratory learning lesson before instruction on an introductory programming concept. During exploratory learning activities, students explore a novel concept prior to instruction—the reverse of typical instruct-then-practice methods. Exploratory learning before instruction can help students activate prior knowledge, become aware of their knowledge gaps, and discern important problem features to improve conceptual understanding. Students in a first-year engineering course (N=402) learned about Python error messages in one of two conditions. In the explore-first condition, students completed a collaborative activity prior to instruction. In the instruct-first condition, students received instruction prior to the activity. Following the activity and instruction, students completed a survey to assess their perceptions of the activities. Survey items (e.g. cognitive load, self-efficacy, belonging, knowledge gaps) were chosen as potential factors that could explain learning outcomes between the two conditions. In prior work, we found higher posttest scores in the instruct-first compared to explore-first condition, contrary to the majority of previous studies. Cognitive load and knowledge gaps were higher in the explore-first condition than the instruct-first condition. Self-efficacy and competence were lower in the explore-first condition. No other significant differences were found. Exploring before instruction might disrupt learning and perceived efficacy and competence if the activity is too challenging, or if the instruction does not fully resolve gaps in students’ knowledge.more » « less
-
Given that the active learning literature lacks systematic investigations on how the intensity and integration of lecture and active learning affects learning, we conducted two experiments to examine the impact of these variables. The first experiment involved 146 participants who learned about biological taxonomies through pure lecture or pure active learning. Participants in the pure lecture condition scored significantly higher on a posttest than those in the pure active learning condition. The second experiment involved 219 participants who learned about biological taxonomies through pure lecture, a lecture and active learning activity that were interspersed, or a lecture and active learning activity that were blocked. Participants in the interspersed condition scored significantly higher than participants in the blocked and pure lecture conditions (which did not significantly differ). Based on these experiments, it may not be a question of either/or but rather a question of how to integrate lecture and active learning.more » « less
-
STEM undergraduate instructors teaching remote courses often use traditional lecture-based instruction, despite evidence that active learning methods improve student engagement and learning outcomes. One simple way to use active learning online is to incorporate exploratory learning. In exploratory learning, students explore a novel activity (e.g., problem solving) before a lecture on the underlying concepts and procedures. This method has been shown to improve learning outcomes during in-person courses, without requiring the entire course to be restructured. The current study examined whether the benefits of exploratory learning extend to a remote undergraduate physics lesson, taught synchronously online. Undergraduate physics students (N = 78) completed a physics problem-solving activity either before instruction (explore-first condition) or after (instruct-first condition). Students then completed a learning assessment of the problem-solving procedures and underlying concepts. Despite lower accuracy on the learning activity, students in the explore-first condition demonstrated better understanding on the assessment, compared to students in the instruct-first condition. This finding suggests that exploratory learning can serve as productive failure in online courses, challenging students but improving learning, compared to the more widely-used lecture-then-practice method.more » « less
-
This work in progress paper discusses preliminary research testing the causal effectiveness of exploratory learning in undergraduate STEM courses. Exploratory learning is an active-learning technique that has been shown to improve students’ conceptual understanding, and is therefore well suited for STEM education. This method reverses the order of traditional lecture-then practice methods, by having students explore a novel problem prior to instruction. Participants (N=150) were first-year engineering students enrolled in an introductory engineering calculus course. Students were taught about two-dimensional vectors in an online, asynchronous learning module. Students were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. In the instruct-first condition, students viewed the instruction and then completed a Geogebra™ activity. In the explore-first condition, students completed the activity and then viewed the instruction. Thus, the exact same activities were given to students, allowing us to test the causal effectiveness of reversing the placement of the activity. Afterwards, all students completed an online quiz and a later Vector test. A number of students opened but did not complete the activity. Of those students, no effects of condition were found. For the students who completed the activity, those in the explore-first condition scored higher on the quiz than those in the instruct-first condition. Scores were trending in a similar direction on the vector test. These results demonstrate the potential of exploratory learning to improve understanding in engineering mathematics, and in an online module format. This research also suggests that Geogebra™ may be a useful tool for developing an exploration activity students can complete online.more » « less
