The influence and mechanism of instructional sequences on students' online learning

Abstract

This study aims to compare the differences between I-PS and PS-I in an online setting and investigate how instructional sequences influence fifth-grade students’ online learning. Three research questions were proposed in this study: (1) What are the differences in learning engagement between PS-I and I-PS groups? (2) What are the differences in learning outcomes between PS-I and I-PS groups? (3) What is the influence and mechanism of instructional sequences on students’ learning? A quasi-experimental approach was employed to gather data on students’ learning outcomes and engagement in an online setting to address the research questions. Participants were selected from three primary schools in Wuhan, China. There was a valid sample of 648, with 336 being assigned to the PS-I group and 312 to the I-PS group randomly.

For the first question, results showed the I-PS group was more engaged than the PS-I group. The two groups differed in activating prior knowledge, recognizing deep features, and cognitive load, but there was no significant difference in awareness of knowledge gaps. The differences in the quality of received information between the groups varied depending on the learning engagement mode. For the second question, this study found that students in the PS-I group underperformed compared to their counterparts in the I-PS group in terms of the post-test scores on procedural knowledge. Besides, the difference only exists in students who exhibited active engagement but not in students with passive or constructive modes. For the third question, the major findings were that instructional sequences might influence online learners’ learning outcomes via three mechanisms—activation of prior knowledge, recognition of deep features, and reduction of cognitive loads—but only extraneous cognitive load played a significant role in mediating the effects of instructional sequences (PS-I vs I-PS) on the learning outcome, with an overall negative mediation effect. Additionally, the influential mechanism of instructional sequences varied across the three groups of different engagement modes, suggesting the moderation role of engagement modes. Finally, online learners’ engagement mode was found to associate with their epistemic beliefs and goal orientations.

The results generally supported the hypothesis that the instructional sequences would influence students’ learning outcomes through the mediation role of learning engagement, and that students’ engagement modes would moderate the influences. Based on the findings, theoretical and practical implications for online instructional design are discussed. (1) Since reversing the order of I-PS did not lead to an improvement in students’ learning, it is advisable for teachers to focus on activation of prior knowledge, reduction of cognitive load, and the enhancement of awareness of knowledge limitations when designing their instructional approaches. (2) Given that students’ engagement plays a moderating role in the influential mechanism, it is recommended to choose instructional sequences that align with students’ engagement modes. (3) Students demonstrated a behavioral pattern valuing procedural knowledge over conceptual knowledge, aligning with the traditional Chinese culture, underscoring the importance of integrating cultural predispositions into the instructional design.