We tested two potential ways to help students learn from feedback on their problem-solving errors in physics: (a) design the feedback to align with established principles of multimedia learning (Experiment 1), and/or (b) explicitly prompt students to generate self-explanations of their errors (Experiment 1 and 2). Experiment 1 (n = 131) found no effect of feedback design and limited effects of self-explaining: Self-explaining improved error correction and near (but not far) transfer performance for only one of the feedback conditions. In Experiment 2 (n = 110), we tested a more explicit form of self-explanation support. Students who received scaffolded self-explanation prompts generated higher quality explanations, corrected more errors, and performed better on the near (but not far) transfer test than those who received standard self-explanation prompts or a control group who received no prompts. Students receiving standard self-explanation prompts did not significantly outperform the control group. Overall, this study suggests scaffolded self-explanation prompts help students correct and avoid similar problem-solving errors in the future. © 2024 The Author(s)

This study explored why students rarely create drawings when learning from science texts despite potential learning benefits. Undergraduates (n = 114) studied a 10-part text on the human respiratory system and took notes by choosing their own strategies (free choice group) or by choosing to create a drawing or write a verbal summary (forced choice group). Other students were instructed to create drawings (draw group) or write summaries (summarize group). All students then completed a series of post-tests. The forced choice group chose to draw significantly more frequently than the free choice group; however, both groups still overwhelmingly chose summarizing. Participants across all groups reported lower prior experience, lower expectancies for success, lower perceived value, and higher perceived cost of drawing compared to summarizing. Students' prior experiences and beliefs about drawing were also associated with how frequently they chose to draw, providing implications for future instructional interventions.

Errors are inevitable in most learning contexts, but under the right conditions, they can be beneficial for learning. Prior research indicates that generating and learning from errors can promote retention of knowledge, higher-level learning, and self-regulation. The present review proposes an integrated theoretical model to explain two major phases of learning from self-generated errors: the Generating Errors (GE) phase, which contributes to learning via semantically related prior knowledge activation, and the Detecting and Correcting Errors (DCE) phase, which contributes to learning via self-explanation when processing and comparing one's responses with provided reference information to promote high-quality internal feedback. Our model identifies general design principles that support each phase based on prior empirical research. We conclude by identifying research gaps and future directions regarding specific design features of the GE and DCE phases and the role of students' emotion, motivation, and individual differences in learning from errors.