Всегда ли готовые примеры эффективны в обучении? Экспериментальное исследование с восьмиклассниками

Контекст и актуальность. Обучение, основанное на играх, которое часто воспринимается как увлекательное занятие в классе, иллюстрируется моделью командных игровых турниров (КИТ), где ученики соревнуются в решении задач, а победители получают награды. Хотя игры могут повышать мотивацию, у неопытных учащихся когнитивная нагрузка может быть ниже, если их обучение сопровождается разбором готовых примеров. Цель. Цель исследования была направлена на проверку того, могут ли готовые примеры сделать обучение по модели КИТ более эффективным. Гипотеза. Предоставление готовых примеров (рабочих примеров) в рамках КИТ улучшит результаты обучения и снизит когнитивную нагрузку. Методы и материалы. Был проведен эксперимент с участием 55 восьмиклассников (средний возраст — 14,12 года). Учащиеся были случайным образом распределены в группы КИТ или в формат индивидуального обучения. Учебные материалы, к которым относились касательные к двум окружностям и кольца, были разработаны в виде брошюр с готовыми примерами в соответствии с принципами теории когнитивной нагрузки. Были собраны данные тестов на успеваемость, а также субъективные оценки учащимися собственной когнитивной нагрузки. Результаты. Учащиеся в модели индивидуального обучения показали значительно более высокие результаты, чем в модели КИТ (PES = 0,15). Разница была выраженной для более сложной темы (d Коэна = 0,87), но не для менее сложной (незначимо). Выводы. Готовые примеры надежно способствовали индивидуальному обучению, но не улучшили результаты в модели КИТ. Полученные данные позволяют предположить, что хотя игры и могут использоваться в процессе обучения в классе, они также могут создавать дополнительные (внешние) требования, которые мешают успешному выполнению сложных задач.

1. Alsadoon, E., Alkhawajah, A., Suhaim, A.B. (2022). Effects of a gamified learning environment on students’ achievement, motivations, and satisfaction. Heliyon, 8(8), e10249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10249
2. Arztmann, M., Hornstra, L., Jeuring, J., Kester, L. (2023). Effects of games in STEM education: a meta-analysis on the moderating role of student background characteristics. Studies in Science Education, 59(1), 109–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2057732
3. Atkinson, R.K., Derry, S.J., Renkl, A., Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70, 181– https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070002181
4. Awofala, A.O.A., Fatade, A.O., Ola-Oluwa,A. (2012). Achievement in cooperative versus individualistic goal-structured junior secondary school mathematics classrooms in Nigeria. International Journal of Mathematics Trends and Technology, 3. https://doi.org/10.14445/22315373/IJMTT-V3I1P502
5. Aziz, Z., Hossain, M.A. (2010). A comparison of cooperative learning and conventional teaching on students’ achievement in secondary mathematics. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 53– https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.115
6. Bingjie, L., Chunyi, Y., Haoyan, L., Qing, C., Xuelei, M. (2022). Impact of team-based learning versus lecture-based learning on chinese radiology education: a scoping review and meta-analysis. Sage Open, 12(2), https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221091724
7. Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and pedagogy. New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
8. Dever, D.A., Amon, M.J., Vrzakova, H., Wiedbusch, M.D., Cloude, E.B., Azevedo, R. (2022). Capturing sequences of learners' self-regulatory interactions with instructional material during game-based learning using auto-recurrence quantification analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 813677. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.813677
9. Devries, D.L., Edwards, K.J., Slavin, R.E. (1978). Biracial learning teams and race relations in the classroom: Four field experiments using Teams-Games-Tournament. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 356– https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.70.3.356.
10. DeVries, D.L., Mescon, Shackman, S.L. (1976). Student teams can improve basic skills: TGT applied to reading. Paper presented at the The Annual Convention (84th) of The American Psychological Association, Washington, C.
11. Døssing, F., Piovesan, M., Wengström, E. (2017). Cognitive load and cooperation. Review of Behavioral Economics, 4(1), 69– https://doi.org/10.1561/105.00000059
12. Dzan, W.Y., Hung, J., Yang, H.C., Lin. (2010). A research of digitizing ship design and stability analysis. WSEAS Transactions on Applied And Theoretical Mechanics, 5(2), 123–
13. Edwards, K.J., DeVries, D.L. (1973). Learning games and student teams: Their effects on student attitudes and achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 10(4), 307–318. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312010004307
14. Effandi, Z., Lu Chung, C., Md. Yusoff, D. (2010). The effects of cooperative learning on students' mathematics achievement and attitude towards mathematics. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2010.272.275
15. Hansson, S.O. (2020). Technology and mathematics. Philosophy & Technology, 33(1), 117– https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-019-00348-9
16. Hänze, M., Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and student characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and instruction, 17(1), 29– https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.11.004
17. Hsu, T.-C., Hsu, T.-P. (2026). Effects of game-based learning integrated with different thinking-guided methods on computational thinking of elementary school students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 60, 102056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2025.102056
18. Hu, Y., Wouters, P., van der Schaaf, M., Kester, L. (2025). Timing of information presentation matters: Effects on secondary school students' cognition, motivation and emotion in game-based learning. 56(1), 318– https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13510
19. Hossain, A., Tarmizi, R.A. (2013). Effects of Cooperative Learning on Students’ Achievement and Attitudes in Secondary Mathematics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 473– https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.09.222
20. Jalilifar, A. (2010). The effect of cooperative learning techniques on college students’ reading comprehension. System, 38(1), 96– https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.12.009
21. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. (1994). Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston: Allyn Bacon.
22. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., Smith, K.A. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. Washington, DC: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University.
23. Ke, F., Grabowski, B. (2007). Gameplaying for maths learning: Cooperative or not? British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 249– https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00593.x
24. Mayer, R.E. (2024). The Past, Present, and Future of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. Educ Psychol Rev, 36, 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09842-1
25. Martinsson, P., Pham-Khanh, N., Villegas-Palacio, C. (2013). Conditional cooperation and disclosure in developing countries. Journal of Economic Psychology, 34(C), 148– Retrieved from https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:34:y:2013:i:c:p:148-155.
26. Paas, F., van Merriënboer, J.J.G., Adam, J. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and motor skills, 79, 419– https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1994.79.1.419
27. Plass, J.L., O'Keefe, P.A., Homer, B.D., Case, J., Hayward, E.O., Stein, M., Perlin, K. (2013). The impact of individual, competitive, and collaborative mathematics game play on learning, performance, and motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1050–1066. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032688
28. Rand, D.G., Peysakhovich, A., Kraft-Todd, G.T., Newman, G.E., Wurzbacher, O., Nowak, M.A., Greene, J.D. (2014). Social heuristics shape intuitive cooperation. Nature Communications, 5(1), 3677. https://doi.org/1038/ncomms4677
29. Retnowati, E., Marissa. (2018). Designing worked examples for learning tangent lines to circles. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series Phys.: Conf. Ser. 983012124. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012124
30. Retnowati, E., Ayres, P., Sweller, J. (2010). Worked example effects in individual and group work settings. Educational Psychology, 30(3), 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443411003659960
31. Retnowati, E., Ayres, P., Sweller, J. (2017). Can collaborative learning improve the effectiveness of worked examples in learning mathematics? Journal of Educational Psychology, 109, 666– https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000167
32. Retnowati, E., Ayres, P., Sweller, J. (2018). Collaborative learning effects when students have complete or incomplete knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(6), 681–692. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3444
33. Saha, R.A., Ayub, A.F.M., Tarmizi, R.A. (2010). The effects of GeoGebra on mathematics achievement: enlightening coordinate geometry learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 686– https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.095
34. Saltymakov, M.S., Frantcuzskaia, E.O. (2015). Cooperative Learning Approach to Delivering Professional Modules to Bachelor and Master Students: TPU Experience. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 215, 90–97. https://doi.org/1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.579
35. Sanchez, E. (2017). Competition and collaboration for game-based learning: a case study. In: Wouters, P., van Oostendorp, H. (eds) Instructional Techniques to Facilitate Learning and Motivation of Serious Games. Advances in Game-Based Learning. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39298-1_9
36. Sharan, S. (1980). Cooperative Learning in Small Groups: Recent Methods and Effects on Achievement, Attitudes, and Ethnic Relations. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 241– https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543050002241
37. Slavin, R.E. (1995). Cooperative learning theory: research and practice. Allymand & Bacon.
38. Smolii, E.S., Kolysheva, O.N., Povalko, P.Y. (2025). Game format of the exam as an effective tool for assessing competence development. [Игровой формат экзамена как эффективный инструмент оценки сформированности компетенций]. Obrazovanie i Nauka, 27(3), 54– https://10.17853/1994-5639-2025-3-54-84
39. Sweller, J. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 252– https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205
40. Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648010-9128-5
41. Sweller, J., Cooper, G.A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 59– https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0201_3
42. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J.J., Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational psychology review, 31, 261– https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
43. Tarmizi, R.A., Sweller, J. (1988). Guidance during mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 424–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.424
44. Thomas, M., Sherman, L.W. (1986). Mathematics achievement in cooperative versus individualistic goal-structured high school classrooms. The Journal of Educational Research, 79(3), 169–
45. Tsay-Vogel, M., Brady, M. (2010). A case study of cooperative learning and communication pedagogy: does working in teams make a difference? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10, 78–
46. van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (1990). Strategies for programming instruction in high school: program completion vs. program generation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6(3), 265– https://doi.org/10.2190/7T4G-8HCG-T7J5-5Q8H
47. van Merriënboer, J.J.G., Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 8(2), 147– https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
48. Wiener, H., Plass, H., Marz, R. (2009). Team-based learning in intensive course format for first-year medical students. Croatian medical journal, 50(1), 69– https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2009.50.69
49. Zainuddin, Z., Chu, S.K.W., Shujahat, M., Perera, C.J. (2020). The impact of gamification on learning and instruction: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Educational Research Review, 30, 100326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100326