Thesis (M. Ed.)--University of Hong Kong, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 106-120).

Research has shown that worked examples are superior to problem solving in many domains, particularly for novices. However, most research has only been conducted in individualised learning environments, despite a large body of literature indicating that learning can be effective in groups. This experiment aimed to engage students in a group work activity using worked examples or problems in geometry learning and compared the effect of the two approaches on numeric and reasoning abilities using both near and far transfer tests. Whether learning in a group work setting is beneficial compared with individual setting was also examined. One hundred and one Year 7 students were randomly allocated into four experimental groups: (I) problem solving in an individual setting; (2) worked examples in an individual setting; (3) problem solving during group work; (4) worked examples during group work. Each group received three consecutive instructional learning phases: worked example study, group work skill induction and an acquisition stage. Numeric and reasoning abilities of all groups using both near and far transfer tests were measured and analysed by 2 x 2 MANOVAs. A questionnaire was distributed to obtain information on students' interaction intensity and their impression of the learning activities. The results indicated a significant superiority of the worked example approach in both the individual and group work setting for numeric and reasoning abilities and most students stated that they preferred this study approach. The questionnaire data on interaction intensity revealed that the worked example condition fostered interaction between participants as much as the problem solving condition, nevertheless, a possible interaction effect was found favouring the group work condition under worked example conditions. This experiment adds evidence on the benefits of a worked example approach but does not suggest group work is advantageous. The group work effects are discussed using a cognitive load theory perspective.

Treatise (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2007. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Melbourne, Dept. of linguistics and Applied Linguistics, 2001. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 355-368) Also available in print.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Liberty University School of Education, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Liberty University, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1990. / Vita. Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 81-85). Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1992. / Vita. Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 120-126). Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (Th. M.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 1984. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves [49]-56).