时间：2024年07月19日下午4:00-6:00     

地点：企业微信会议、腾讯会议, 会议号：659674872，    

会议链接：https://work.weixin.qq.com/webapp/tm/IdflyyaQPf7     

主讲人：陈鸥昊    

主讲人简介：

陈鸥昊现为英国拉夫堡大学（Loughborough University, UK）数学教育系讲师。他于澳大利亚新南威尔士大学获得教育心理学博士学位，于中国beat356唯一官网获得课程与教学论硕士学位。陈鸥昊感兴趣的研究领域为认知负荷理论及其在数学教育中的应用。在拉夫堡工作前，陈鸥昊曾任澳洲南十字大学博士后研究员及新加坡南洋理工大学讲师及研究员。    

陈鸥昊的研究得到了多家英国资助机构的资助，例如勒沃休姆信托基金会(Leverhulme Trust)、教育捐赠基金会(Education Endowment Foundation，EEF)和经济社会研究理事会(Economic and Social Research Council，ESRC)。陈鸥昊现任英国数学研究委员会委员及拉夫堡大学数学学习支援中心负责人。    

主讲内容简介： 

Working memory resources, mental rehearsal and the spacing effect    

Background: The spacing effect occurs when learning is facilitated by being spaced over longer periods of time rather than being massed over shorter periods. Within the framework of cognitive load theory, the resting effect posits that resting periods due to spacing facilitate the replenishment of depleted working memory resources, thereby enhancing subsequent learning, leading to a type of spacing effect explained by the working memory resource depletion. The imagination effect, which does not involve mental rest, posits that actively visualising or internally rehearsing learning materials can enhance learning more effectively than re-studying them, leading to another type of spacing effect explained by mental rehearsal. Both the restoration of working memory capacity and imagination during the rest may independently facilitate effective learning.

Aim: Since simultaneous resting for restoring the working memory resources and imagination are incompatible, it is important to determine when either should be used to enhance learning and to explain the spacing effect. This study reported two experiments to investigate this issue by comparing materials that are high or low in complexity as determined by element interactivity.

Sample: One hundred and twenty-one Year 7 students were recruited for Experiment 1 and another One hundred and twenty-one Year 7 students were recruited for Experiment 2.

Methods: Students were randomly assigned to one of the groups: (a) Free Rest group, (b) Imagination Prevented group, (c) Instructed Imagination group, and (d) No Rest group with working memory resources and knowledge acquisition measured.

Results and Conclusions: The findings indicate that for materials low in element interactivity (low-complexity materials), which can be readily imagined, engaging in imagination improves learning despite a reduction of working memory resources. Conversely, for materials high in element interactivity (high-complexity materials), which may be difficult or impossible to imagine because of the large number of elements that must be processed simultaneously in working memory, restoring working memory resources appears to be more critical for effective learning than imagination. Therefore, the spacing effects explained by restoring the working memory resources and explained by mental rehearsal depend on the complexity of learning materials.

Keywords: cognitive load theory, element interactivity, working memory resource depletion, imagination effect, resting effect