Britton, B. K., Van Dusen, L., Gulgoz, S., & Glynn, S. M. (1989). Instructional texts rewritten by five expert teams: Revisions and retention improvements. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(2), 226-239.

Britton, B.;Van Dusen, L.;Gulgoz, S.;Glynn, S.

1989

Britton, B. K., Van Dusen, L., Gulgoz, S., & Glynn, S. M. (1989). Instructional texts rewritten by five expert teams: Revisions and retention improvements. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(2), 226-239.

studie 2

700 undergraduates were tested in 3 experiments on original or rewritten versions of 52 instructional texts about Army job tasks, general science, philosophy, and history. 5 experts had rewritten various sets of the texts and stated hypotheses about the efficacious features of their revisions. We tested their hypotheses and several others. Recall and recognition tests were given immediately and after a 24hr delay. Results showed that revisions made by 3 of the 5 experts improved retention of text information. The kind and number of revisions and improvements varied across the text sets. Most expert hypotheses were not supported, and they made many revisions they were declaratively unaware of. Some of our hypotheses about the revision features were supported, but different features were effective for different sets of texts. It was concluded that some experts have effective knowledge about improving instructional text, but it exists primarily in procedural form.

On the 24-hour delay test, retention of the rewritten versions was significantly higher than retention of the original versions. Evidently the revisions improved retention of the texts.The amount of improvement is markedly different across texts, inidicating that the improvements were not uniformly effective.

63

12