Other decomposition paths of this indirect effect are not significant. Therefore, H5 is partly supported, largely consistent with the findings of Seufert et al. Therefore, H4 is supported, based on the research of Myhill and Brackley It puts concrete self-regulated learning strategies, namely help-seeking behaviors instrumental help-seeking, executive help-seeking, and avoidance of help-seeking into the research model.
Prior knowledge had a positive effect on learning engagement, which is consistent with claims made by other researchers Rodrigues, ; Pecore et al. However, our work further explores the direct and indirect effects. More prior knowledge gives students more working memory to acquire more new knowledge to enhance their learning engagement Sweller et al.
Cognitive load is also affected by instructional design, which can reduce extraneous cognitive load or increase germane cognitive load Kirschner et al. If teachers take advantage of technology to explain complicated concept and assign small unit task in learning, students will have lower level cognitive load and lead to better learning engagement.
Consistent with the study of Shapiro , prior knowledge interacted with cognitive load and instrumental help-seeking to affect learning engagement. Executive help-seeking and avoidance of help-seeking do not promote understanding knowledge, but students update their cognitive schema with instrumental help-seeking Ryan et al. Therefore, students who have a higher level of prior knowledge and lower cognitive load may be able to allocate cognitive resources to instrumental help-seeking to enhance their understanding, leading to good quality learning engagement.
If teachers design simple tasks for students who have lower level of prior knowledge could choose instrumental help-seeking, students would benefit from learning process and engage more in learning. Third, cognitive load had a negative effect on instrumental help-seeking, but positive effects on executive help-seeking and avoidance of help-seeking due to the opposite nature of these help-seeking behaviors. Intuitively, we expect that students perceiving a high cognitive load might engage in instrumental help-seeking to lessen the load.
However, when students experience a high cognitive load, they are unable to manage their learning due to limited working memory and cognitive recourses. Fourth, cognitive load mediated the impact of prior knowledge on instrumental help-seeking, executive help-seeking, and avoidance of help-seeking. Although we explain cognitive load as a mediating variable between prior knowledge and learning engagement, the mediated effects will aggravate different help-seeking behaviors that affect student learning.
These are very high percentages, indicating mediated effects that play key roles in the relationships between prior knowledge and the three types of help-seeking.
As Amadieu et al. We therefore infer that students can adopt instrumental help-seeking to bring about good quality support for their learning. If teachers expect students to use instrumental help-seeking to improve learning, decreasing their cognitive load is a very important way to ensure that students have available cognitive resources to handle instrumental help-seeking.
Furthermore, instrumental help-seeking mediates the impact of cognitive load on learning engagement. By the same rationale, the degree of cognitive load influences learning engagement through available cognitive recourses and students obtain real help through instrumental help-seeking, which helps them to construct a cognitive schema to improve learning engagement. Despite its strengths, this study also has limitations. First, causal relations cannot be established as we relied on cross-sectional approaches.
Experimental studies are needed to make causal conclusions. Second, the study did not measure objective performance and only relied on self-reported engagement. This might have led to common method bias. Future studies may want to incorporate objective measures of engagement or achievement.
Third, the social aspects of learning have not been included. Future research could examine how students interact with their peers and teachers as these are usually the people from whom they seek help from.
Learning engagement is strongly influenced by prior knowledge. However, past studies on engagement have failed to take this into account. Our findings indicate that cognitive load plays a crucial role in the relationship between prior knowledge and learning engagement via help-seeking behaviors.
Paradoxically, it is students who least need help because they already know more high prior knowledge are also more likely to engage in adaptive instrumental help-seeking. Conversely, students who most needed help because they knew less low prior knowledge were less likely to seek help or seeking or engage in executive help-seeking.
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation. All authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. We are especially grateful to the two reviewers and the editor, whose encouraging and constructive comments challenged us to deepen and strengthen our arguments.
We would like to thank all of the teachers and their students who participated in the study. We also thank the data analysis advice provided by Jun Wei from Tsinghua University. Amadieu, F. Effects of prior knowledge and concept-map structure on disorientation, cognitive load, and learning.
Google Scholar. Chang, C. Outdoor ubiquitous learning or indoor CAL? Achievement and different cognitive loads of college students. De Bruin, A. Bridging cognitive load and self-regulated learning research: A complementary approach to contemporary issues in educational research.
Duchesne, S. Achievement goals and engagement with academic work in early high school: does seeking help from teachers matter? Early Adolesce. Finney, S. Exploring profiles of academic help seeking: A mixture modeling approach. Fredricks, J. School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Froiland, J. Intrinsic motivation, perceived competence and classroom engagement as longitudinal predictors of adolescent reading achievement.
Fullan, M. Deep learning: Engage the world change the world. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Fung, F. Student engagement and mathematics achievement: unraveling main and interactive effects.
Schools 55, — Furrer, C. Galy, E. What is the relationship between mental workload factors and cognitive load types? Hughes, C. The effects of self-regulated learning and cognitive load on beginning to watch and completing video lectures at a cyber-university.
Smart Educat. Hughes, J. Teacher-student support, effortful engagement, and achievement: A 3-year longitudinal study. Hwang, G. Jong, M. Huang and J. Spector, Heidelberg: Springer , — Karabenick, S. Zimmerman , Ed Edn, eds T. Bembenutty and A. Relationship of academic help seeking to the use of learning strategies and other instrumental achievement behavior in college students.
Kirschner, F. Cognitive load theory and multimedia learning, task characteristics and learning engagement: The Current State of the Art. Kong, Q. Student engagement in mathematics: Development of instrument and validation of construct. Koriat, A. Lawson, M. New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Leppink, J.
Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Li, X. Academic help-seeking: Its relation to self-efficacy, value, classroom context and academic achievement. Acta Psychol. Marchand, G. Formative, informative, and summative assessment: the relationship among curriculum-based measurement of reading, classroom engagement, and reading performance.
Schools 51, — Martin, A. Interpersonal relationships, motivation, engagement, and achievement: Yields for theory, current issues, and educational practice. Mihalca, L. However, you can have too much of a good thing. The activities which follow serve to activate and build background knowledge as a support, not as a bypass, for students in meeting the Common Core standards.
Activities for tapping prior knowledge are typically designed for use before reading activities, but we have used the ones listed here to also help students access writing, speaking, and listening tasks.
Students write and share what they already know about the topic in the K What I Know section. They then add questions in the W What I Want to Know section and write their learnings in the L What I Learned section as they uncover new information through written and digital texts.
They are often organized as a list of statements which students have to agree or disagree with. This can be done in writing or speaking. It can be helpful to have students revisit their anticipation guides at the end of a unit in order to reflect on changes in their thinking and in preparation for writing an essay. This comprehension strategy should be taught on an ongoing basis so that students learn independently to use it as they are reading.
It should be taught explicitly and systematically over an extended period of time, moving from modeling the thinking process out loud by the teacher, to students using the strategy as a natural part of their comprehension process.
Prior knowledge should be discussed before reading the text to help set the stage for what is coming. During reading, students should be encouraged to make connections to the text from their experience and the teacher should model this process using his or her own connections. After reading, the discussion should center on how the connections helped students to better understand the text and how the text helped them to build their foundation of prior knowledge.
At the early stages of teaching students the strategy of making connections to their prior knowledge, the teacher models "thinking aloud. Slowly, after students have seen and heard the teacher using the strategy, they are given the opportunity to share their experiences and thinking. Finally, students make connections to texts independently. Teachers can check in periodically to have students articulate their thinking, in order to track progress, spot difficulties, and intervene individually or conduct a mini-lesson to reteach or move students forward.
As students are activating their prior knowledge and making connections, they use graphic organizers, such as a concept map , a flow chart, or a KWL chart , to help map their thinking. Often students keep reflection or response journals where they record thoughts, feelings, insights, and questions about what they read. Students, in large and small groups, discuss and write about the connections they are making to texts.
For examples of these and other graphic organizers , click the link. TeacherVision Staff. A complete collection of resources for applying this critical reading strategy Help your students be good readers with this resource.
0コメント