Worked Examples Versus Non‐goal‐specific Problems: a test of schema development in geometry

Abstract

A multiple baseline across subjects experimental design was used to compare the effects of a teaching programme designed to enhance schemata acquisition with that of worked examples, traditionally used to teach geometry to high school students. In the first treatment, students were guided to form their own personal, independent schema through the use of non‐goal‐specific questions, that is, questions that did not ask to find a single, specific unknown. The second treatment introduced students to solved examples of problems asking for specific values. Following exposure to one or other of the treatments, measures were obtained of students’ success in problem solving, the time taken and the processes used. Results show that students in both groups had gains in the number of problems solved following intervention, with those exposed to the non‐goal‐specific procedure showing greater rates of improvement and greater efficacy in their problem‐solving strategies. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for a schemata acquisition and problem‐solving hypothesis.