Learning by Teaching With Deliberate Errors Promotes Argumentative Reasoning.
Saved in:
| Title: | Learning by Teaching With Deliberate Errors Promotes Argumentative Reasoning. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Wong, Sarah Shi Hui1,2 (AUTHOR) psywshs@nus.edu.sg |
| Source: | Journal of Educational Psychology. Oct2025, Vol. 117 Issue 7, p1013-1038. 26p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Learning by teaching, *Critical thinking, *Metacognition, *Teaching methods |
| Abstract: | Reasoning and arguing well lies at the core of thinking and constructing knowledge about complex, controversial issues. Leveraging the techniques of learning by teaching and deliberate erring, the present study developed and tested a novel intervention—learning by misteaching—to boost argumentative reasoning. University students (N = 208) were trained on argumentation strategies and studied a dual-position argumentative text on a controversial topic using one of three learning methods: notetaking, correct teaching, or misteaching. The notetaking group prepared to be tested and wrote study notes while generating good arguments about the topic, whereas both teaching groups prepared to teach and wrote a verbatim teaching script about the topic exactly as how they would orate a lecture while generating good arguments (correct teaching) or deliberately weak arguments (misteaching) for their intended audience to spot. All students were then tested on their basic recall of the text and higher order argumentative reasoning in integrating opposing views to form conclusions about the topic (e.g., weighing arguments and counterarguments, developing new alternative solutions or compromises). On both tests, students who had taught outperformed their peers who had written study notes. Importantly, misteaching produced additional gains for argumentative reasoning over correct teaching, even after controlling for recall performance. Yet, students' metacognitive judgments revealed that they were largely unaware of these benefits even after the tests. Overall, these findings demonstrate how learning by teaching and deliberate erring can be strategically combined to improve higher order outcomes such as argumentative reasoning, while highlighting the counterintuitive benefits of intentionally making errors in low-stakes contexts. Educational Impact and Implications Statement: The skill to reason and argue well is vital for 21st-century education and democratic participation but is challenging to master. This study demonstrates how argumentative reasoning (e.g., weighing and integrating arguments, designing new solutions) can be enhanced via learning by misteaching—a novel combination of the techniques of learning by teaching and deliberate erring. Students displayed not only superior recall but also argumentative reasoning when they had taught a controversial issue by writing a verbatim teaching script than study notes. Crucially, students' argumentative reasoning further benefited from teaching incorrectly with deliberately weak arguments they had generated for their intended audience to spot, relative to teaching correctly with good arguments. This advantage of misteaching held even when controlling for students' recall of the material, suggesting that it was not merely driven by better memory per se. Learning by teaching with deliberate errors is a promising way to boost argumentative reasoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Educational Psychology is the property of American Psychological Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: ehh DbLabel: Education Research Complete An: 188347884 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Learning by Teaching With Deliberate Errors Promotes Argumentative Reasoning. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wong%2C+Sarah+Shi+Hui%22">Wong, Sarah Shi Hui</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> psywshs@nus.edu.sg</i> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Journal+of+Educational+Psychology%22">Journal of Educational Psychology</searchLink>. Oct2025, Vol. 117 Issue 7, p1013-1038. 26p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learning+by+teaching%22">Learning by teaching</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Critical+thinking%22">Critical thinking</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Metacognition%22">Metacognition</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+methods%22">Teaching methods</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Reasoning and arguing well lies at the core of thinking and constructing knowledge about complex, controversial issues. Leveraging the techniques of learning by teaching and deliberate erring, the present study developed and tested a novel intervention—learning by misteaching—to boost argumentative reasoning. University students (N = 208) were trained on argumentation strategies and studied a dual-position argumentative text on a controversial topic using one of three learning methods: notetaking, correct teaching, or misteaching. The notetaking group prepared to be tested and wrote study notes while generating good arguments about the topic, whereas both teaching groups prepared to teach and wrote a verbatim teaching script about the topic exactly as how they would orate a lecture while generating good arguments (correct teaching) or deliberately weak arguments (misteaching) for their intended audience to spot. All students were then tested on their basic recall of the text and higher order argumentative reasoning in integrating opposing views to form conclusions about the topic (e.g., weighing arguments and counterarguments, developing new alternative solutions or compromises). On both tests, students who had taught outperformed their peers who had written study notes. Importantly, misteaching produced additional gains for argumentative reasoning over correct teaching, even after controlling for recall performance. Yet, students' metacognitive judgments revealed that they were largely unaware of these benefits even after the tests. Overall, these findings demonstrate how learning by teaching and deliberate erring can be strategically combined to improve higher order outcomes such as argumentative reasoning, while highlighting the counterintuitive benefits of intentionally making errors in low-stakes contexts. Educational Impact and Implications Statement: The skill to reason and argue well is vital for 21st-century education and democratic participation but is challenging to master. This study demonstrates how argumentative reasoning (e.g., weighing and integrating arguments, designing new solutions) can be enhanced via learning by misteaching—a novel combination of the techniques of learning by teaching and deliberate erring. Students displayed not only superior recall but also argumentative reasoning when they had taught a controversial issue by writing a verbatim teaching script than study notes. Crucially, students' argumentative reasoning further benefited from teaching incorrectly with deliberately weak arguments they had generated for their intended audience to spot, relative to teaching correctly with good arguments. This advantage of misteaching held even when controlling for students' recall of the material, suggesting that it was not merely driven by better memory per se. Learning by teaching with deliberate errors is a promising way to boost argumentative reasoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Journal of Educational Psychology is the property of American Psychological Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=188347884 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1037/edu0000934 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 26 StartPage: 1013 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Learning by teaching Type: general – SubjectFull: Critical thinking Type: general – SubjectFull: Metacognition Type: general – SubjectFull: Teaching methods Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Learning by Teaching With Deliberate Errors Promotes Argumentative Reasoning. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Wong, Sarah Shi Hui IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 10 Text: Oct2025 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 00220663 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 117 – Type: issue Value: 7 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Educational Psychology Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
