Key ideas
Core concepts
- Step-by-step demonstrations produce better learning outcomes than discovery-based problem-solving for novices.
- Each example works best when followed immediately by near-identical practice questions, rather than presenting multiple examples first. As students become experts, worked examples become less beneficial and problem-solving becomes more effective.
The worked-example effect is the improvement in learning outcomes when step-by-step demonstrations are used for instruction compared to discovery-based problem-solving approaches. It applies to novice learners (Sweller & Cooper, 1985).
Connected to
Worked Examples | Non-Explicit Teaching | Expertise Reversal Effect | Self-Explanation Effect | Cognitive Load Theory | Scaffolding | Problem-Solving
Sequencing
The worked-example effect requires careful sequencing (Atkinson, Derry, Renkl, & Wortham, 2000). Present a worked example with a step-by-step demonstration, then provide practice with very similar questions immediately, not after multiple examples (Trafton & Reiser, 1993). Gradually increase problem complexity as competence develops, and leverage the Self-Explanation Effect during example study to deepen understanding (Chi, Bassok, Lewis, Reimann, & Glaser, 1989). Effective instruction alternates individual examples with immediate practice rather than bundling examples together (Trafton & Reiser, 1993; McLaren, Lim, & Koedinger, 2008).
Each worked example should contain a clear statement of the problem, an explicit demonstration of each solution step, an explanation of the reasoning behind each step, and a connection to underlying principles where appropriate.
Expertise reversal
The effectiveness of worked examples depends on learner expertise (Kalyuga, Ayres, Chandler, & Sweller, 2003). What helps novices can hinder experts. Novices lack solution schemas and need explicit guidance through worked examples followed by similar practice to avoid cognitive overload (Sweller & Cooper, 1985). Developing learners benefit from a mix of examples and guided practice as they build procedural fluency (Renkl & Atkinson, 2003). Expert learners have automated procedures and find worked examples redundant (Kalyuga, Chandler, Tuovinen, & Sweller, 2001); for experts, problem-solving with complex examples is more effective. Instruction must adapt as students develop competence (Kalyuga et al., 2003).
Pitfalls
Several common errors undermine the worked-example effect. Bundling multiple worked examples before any practice reduces effectiveness (Trafton & Reiser, 1993); interleave individual examples with immediate practice instead. Ignoring expertise wastes time and creates frustration, since worked examples become redundant for experts who already know procedures (Kalyuga et al., 2001). Insufficient explanation lets students copy procedures without understanding if examples lack clear reasoning (Chi et al., 1989; Renkl, 1997): the steps alone are not enough. And examples must be followed by practice to consolidate learning (Sweller & Cooper, 1985), because studying examples alone does not build independent capability.
The most common error is presenting several examples then asking for practice, which is the less effective problem-solving condition (Sweller & Cooper, 1985).
Practical examples
In algebra, demonstrate solving 3x + 5 = 17, then give immediate practice with 2x + 7 = 15, avoiding immediate progression to more complex equations. In fraction addition, work through 1/4 + 1/12 step-by-step, then practise with 1/15 + 1/3 rather than jumping to unlike denominators. In essay writing, model paragraph construction with topic sentence, evidence, and explanation, then have students write a similar paragraph with different content.
References
Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 181-214. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070002181
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13(2), 145-182. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1302_1
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 23-31. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., Tuovinen, J., & Sweller, J. (2001). When problem solving is superior to studying worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 579-588. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.579
McLaren, B. M., Lim, S. J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2008). When and how often should worked examples be given to students? New results and a summary of the current state of research. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2176-2181). Cognitive Science Society.
Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2101_1
Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. K. (2003). Structuring the transition from example study to problem solving in cognitive skill acquisition: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 15-22. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_3
Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2(1), 59-89. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0201_3
Trafton, J. G., & Reiser, B. J. (1993). The contributions of studying examples and solving problems to skill acquisition. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1017-1022). Cognitive Science Society.