Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Analogies have long been proposed as a valuable teaching mechanism, but the question of whether student-generated analogies are more effective for learning compared to those generated by the instructor has not been answered. We compare three different treatments: no analogy, an analogy provided by the instructor, and analogies generated by students. We apply these treatments to two upper-division computer science courses--Operating Systems (OS) and Programming Languages (PL)--and evaluate student learning. Our findings show that any effect of these treatments on student learning is minimal. We found no practical or statistically significant differences between them. Anecdotally, the student-generated analogies provided an active learning activity, and the instructor-provided analogies were the only ones mentioned in written responses to graded events. Given the small differences in learning, instructors can select the treatment based on their needs; for example, selecting the student-generated option for active learning or the instructor-provided option when time is short.
Ebling et al. (Thu,) studied this question.