Closing the research-practice gap in education is an important aim. The ICAP framework (for interactive, constructive, active, and passive engagement modes) explicitly targets this aim and has gained broad attention. The ICAP framework is supposed to support practitioners in translating research findings into practice by distinguishing between four modes of student engagement. In this comment, we consider two central assumptions of the ICAP framework. First, the four modes of engagement are assumed to be “reflected in the overt behavior the student exhibits while undertaking an activity”1, and thus observable for teachers. Second, the ICAP framework assumes that the interactive mode of engagement is most effective for learning, followed by constructive, then active, and lastly passive modes (i.e. I > C > A > P, the so-called ‘ICAP-hypothesis’1,2). We argue that both assumptions are inconsistent with central tenets of empirical educational research. First, it is not sufficient to rely on overt behaviors as indicators of learning, because they are ambiguous with respect to the underlying learning process and do not reliably indicate them. Second, there is no “one size fits all”-order of engagement modes. Supposedly inferior engagement modes excel when used in the right way, on the right learners, and with the right timing regarding the learning process. We elucidate the use of formative assessment to gain insight into covert learning processes. Whereas the ICAP framework provides a seemingly plausible and easily actionable guide for practice, practitioners should not be advised to rely on ICAP for selecting effective interventions and assessing learning processes in the classroom.

Conceptual change theories assume that knowledge structures grow during the learning process but also get reorganized. Yet, this reorganization process itself is hard to examine. By using concept maps, we examined the changes in students’ knowledge structures and linked it to conceptual change theory. In a longitudinal study, thirty high-achieving students (M = 14.41 years) drew concept maps at three timepoints across a teaching unit on magnetism and electrostatics. In total, 87 concept maps were analyzed using betweenness and PageRank centrality as well as a clustering algorithm. We also compared the students’ concept maps to four expert maps on the topic. Besides a growth of the knowledge network, the results indicated a reorganization, with first a fragmentation during the unit, followed by an integration of knowledge at the end of the unit. Thus, our analysis revealed that the process of conceptual change on this topic was non-linear. Moreover, the terms used in the concept maps varied in their centrality, with more abstract terms being more central and thus more important for the structure of the map. We also suggest ideas for the usage of concept maps in class.

We explored the mediating role of prior knowledge on the relation between intelligence and learning proportional reasoning. What students gain from formal instruction may depend on their intelligence, as well as on prior encounters with proportional concepts. We investigated whether a basic curriculum unit on the concept of density promoted students’ learning in a training on proportional reasoning. A 2 × 2 design with the factors basic curriculum unit (with, without) and intervention context to introduce proportional reasoning (speed, density) was applied in two consecutive, randomized classroom studies (N1 = 251, N2 = 566 fourth- and fifth-graders; 49%/56% female). We controlled for intelligence and mathematical achievement. We expected the combination of having received the basic curriculum unit on floating and sinking and proportional reasoning introduced via density (a familiar problem-solving context for this group) to be especially favorable. Whereas this hypothesis was not supported, we showed that mathematical achievement mediated the relation between intelligence and proportional reasoning and enabled learners to better exploit the learning opportunities.