Where it is used
Each entry identifies the volume, edition, chapter or appendix in which the work appears.
The evidence behind the series
Follow the research.
Explore every source.
Browse the scientific research and professional literature used across all seven volumes of The Science of Learning for Educators.
7book volumes
8author ranges
1searchable library
Search the collection
Find a paper, author or idea.
Choose an author range, search a title or concept, or narrow the collection by source type. Open any result to see where it appears in the books, read its evidence summary and follow available source links.
2 references
-
- Vol 2 RE: Chapters 1, 4, 5, 7
expertise reversal effectcognitive load theoryworked examplesredundancy effectadaptive instructionprior knowledgeJournal article Evidence summaryAt a glance
Kalyuga reviews the expertise reversal effect: instructional methods that help novices can become ineffective or harmful as learners acquire domain knowledge. Cognitive load theory explains this change through the interaction between working-memory limits and schemas stored in long-term memory.
Key ideas
Novices lack schemas and therefore benefit from explicit explanations, worked examples, integrated information, and other external guidance. For knowledgeable learners, the same support may duplicate what their schemas already provide. Processing and reconciling redundant guidance then consumes resources without adding useful knowledge, so less guided problem solving can be superior. The review connects this evidence to aptitude–treatment interactions and surveys approaches for adapting instruction to current expertise, including fading worked steps, selecting formats according to prior knowledge, and rapid diagnostic assessment during learning. It emphasizes that expertise is domain- and task-specific rather than a fixed learner trait.
Why it matters
Effective adaptive instruction must therefore monitor changing knowledge and adjust support over time. The central design lesson is that no instructional format is universally best: guidance should be sufficient for the learner’s present needs and withdrawn as internal guidance develops.
-
- Vol 4 RE: Chapters 7, 22
- Vol 4 TE: App C
generative questioningknowledge constructionexplanatory dialogueprior knowledge activationpeer learningcausal reasoningcollaborative discourseJournal article Evidence summaryAt a glance
King tests whether teaching children how to ask questions and generate explanations can improve peer learning after teacher-presented science lessons. Fourth- and fifth-grade students studied in pairs using self-generated questions.
Key ideas
One condition used prompts connecting ideas within the lesson; another added questions designed to activate prior knowledge and link it with new material; controls received less generative support. All treatment students learned to explain answers rather than exchange short responses. Analyses of dialogue, knowledge maps, and comprehension showed more complex knowledge construction when questioning explicitly connected new ideas with prior experience, with lesson-based generative questioning also offering benefits. The mechanism is not questioning frequency alone. Productive prompts invite comparison, causal reasoning, prediction, justification, and integration, while explaining makes understanding visible and gives partners material to examine. Teachers must model the discourse, provide stems, and establish norms for listening and elaborating.
Why it matters
The study involved particular ages, science lessons, and structured pair work, so transfer requires care. Its practical contribution is a teachable method for turning peer discussion from answer trading into collaborative knowledge construction.
A transparent research trail
More than a bibliography.
What it contributes
Evidence summaries explain the central idea and why the source matters to educators.
How to access it
Entries link to lawful full text where available, or to a publisher, library or purchase page.
Edition abbreviations
- TE
- Teacher Edition
- PE
- Practice Edition
- RE
- Research Edition
Citation checks
References are checked against publisher records, scholarly indexes, DOI or ISBN metadata, repositories and author records where available. An entry marked [Citation not verified] preserves the wording found in the relevant volume without attributing findings to an unconfirmed work.
From sources to a coherent pathway