Advertisement

Metacognition and Learning

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 77–98 | Cite as

An investigation of the role of contingent metacognitive behavior in self-regulated learning

  • Banu Binbasaran Tuysuzoglu
  • Jeffrey Alan Greene
Article

Abstract

Studies have shown that, to achieve a conceptual understanding of complex science topics, learners need to use self-regulated learning (SRL) skills, particularly when learning with Hypermedia Learning Environments (HLEs). Winne and Hadwin (2008) claimed that metacognition is a key aspect of SRL, particularly metacognitive monitoring and control. The aim of this study was to investigate the contingent relationship between metacognitive monitoring [e.g., judgment of learning (JOL)] and metacognitive control (e.g., strategy change) and whether those contingencies predicted learning about the circulatory system using an HLE. As a measure of contingency in metacognitive behavior, we examined the frequencies of learners’ change in strategy use (i.e., adaptive), or lack thereof (i.e., static), when they verbalized a negative JOL. The results showed that the frequency of adaptive metacognitive behavior positively related to learning, and static metacognitive behavior negatively related to learning, above and beyond the effect of prior knowledge. These findings suggest implications regarding future research into SRL, as well as the benefits of helping learners to recognize the necessary contingency that follows from metacognitive monitoring when learning with HLEs.

Keywords

Judgment of learning Metacognition Contingent metacognitive behavior Self-regulated learning Hypermedia learning environments 

References

  1. Ariel, R. (2013). Learning what to learn: the effects of task experience on strategy shifts in the allocation of study time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(6), 1697–1711.Google Scholar
  2. Azevedo, R. (2005a). Computer environments as metacognitive tools for enhancing learning. Educational Psychologist, 40, 193–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Azevedo, R. (2005b). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 523–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azevedo, R., & Witherspoon, A. M. (2009). Self-regulated use of hypermedia. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 319–339). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004a). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(3), 344–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J. T., & Seibert, D. (2004b). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students’ conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30, 87–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J., Winters, F., Moos, D., & Greene, J. (2005). Adaptive human scaffolding facilitates adolescents’ self-regulated learning with hypermedia. Instructional Science, 33(5–6), 381–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Azevedo, R., Greene, J. A., & Moos, D. C. (2007). The effect of a human agent’s external regulation upon college students’ hypermedia learning. Metacognition and Learning, 2(2/3), 67–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. C. (2008). Why is externally-regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Johnson, A. M., & Chauncey, A. D. (2010). Measuring cognitive and metacognitive regulatory processes during hypermedia learning: issues and challenges. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 210–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Azevedo, R., Johnson, A., Chauncey, A., & Graesser, A. (2011). Use of hypermedia to assess and convey self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 102–121). New York: Routledge Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Beatty, P. C., & Willis, B. G. (2007). Research synthesis: the practice of cognitive interviewing. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(2), 287–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen, S. Y., Fan, J., & Macredie, R. D. (2006). Navigation in hypermedia learning systems: experts vs. novices. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cleary, T. J. (2011). Emergence of self-regulated learning microanalysis: Historical overview, essential features, and implications for research and practice. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self- regulation of learning and performance (pp. 329–345). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Conklin, J. (1987). Hypertext: an introduction and survey. IEEE Computer, 20(9), 17–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Duncan, T. G., & McKeachie, W. J. (2005). The making of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dunlosky, J., & Ariel, R. (2011). Self-regulated learning and the allocation of study time. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 54, 103–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. A. (2012). Overconfidence produces underachievement: inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention. Learning and Instruction, 22, 271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dunlosky, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2013). Four cornerstones of calibration research: why understanding students’ judgments can improve their achievement. Learning and Instruction, 24, 58–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (revised edition). Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ericsson, K., & Simon, H. A. (1998). How to study thinking in everyday life: contrasting think-aloud protocols with descriptions and explanations of thinking. Mind, Culture & Activity, 5(3), 178–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Flavell, J. H. (1971). First discussant’s comments: what is memory development the development of? Human Development, 14, 272–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231–236). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Gerjets, P., Scheiter, K., & Schuh, J. (2008). Information comparisons in example-based learning environments: supporting learners with processing prompts and an interactive comparison tool. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 73–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Adolescents’ use of self-regulatory processes and their relation to qualitative mental model shift while using hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(2), 125–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2009). A macro-level analysis of SRL processes and their relations to the acquisition of a sophisticated mental model of a complex system. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 18–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Greene, J. A., Moos, D. M., Azevedo, R., & Winters, F. (2008). Exploring differences between gifted and grade-level students’ use of self-regulatory learning processes with hypermedia. Computers & Education, 50(3), 1069–1083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Greene, J. A., Costa, L., Robertson, J., Pan, Y., & Deekens, V. M. (2010a). Exploring relations among college students’ prior knowledge, implicit theories of intelligence, and self-regulated learning in a hypermedia environment. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1027–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Greene, J. A., Muis, K. R., & Pieschl, S. (2010b). The role of epistemic beliefs in students’ self-regulated learning with computer-based learning environments: conceptual and methodological issues. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 245–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Greene, J. A., Costa, L.-J., & Dellinger, K. (2011a). Analysis of self-regulated learning processing using statistical models for count data. Metacognition & Learning, 6, 275–301. doi: 10.1007/s11409-011-9078-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Greene, J. A., Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2011b). Self-regulation of learning with computer-based learning environments. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 126, 107–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Greene, J. A., Robertson, J., & Costa, L. C. (2011c). Assessing self-regulated learning using think-aloud protocol methods. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 313–328). New York: Routledge Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Greene, J. A., Hutchison, L. A., Costa, L., & Crompton, H. (2012). Investigating how college students’ task definitions and plans relate to self-regulated learning processing and understanding of a complex science topic. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 307–320. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.02.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Greene, J. A., Dellinger, K., Binbasaran Tuysuzoglu, B., & Costa, L. (2013). A two-tiered approach to analyzing self-regulated learning process data to inform the design of hypermedia learning environments. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 117–128). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Azevedo, R. (2006). Understanding complex systems: some core challenges. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 75(1), 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnson, A., Azevedo, R., & D’Mello, S. (2011). The temporal and dynamic nature of self-regulatory processes during independent and externally assisted hypermedia learning. Cognition & Instruction, 29(4), 471–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Koriat, A. (2007). Metacognition and consciousness. In P. D. Zelazo, M. Moscovitch, & E. Thompson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 289–325). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lajoie, S. P., & Azevedo, R. (2006). Teaching and learning in technology-rich environments. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 803–821). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  40. Mayer, R. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognitive judgments and control of study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 159–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Microsoft Corporation (2007) Encarta Premium [Computer Software]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation.Google Scholar
  43. Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2006). The role of goal structure in undergraduates’ use of self-regulatory variables in two hypermedia learning tasks. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(1), 49–86.Google Scholar
  44. Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2008). Self-regulated learning with hypermedia: the role of prior knowledge. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 270–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2009). Self-efficacy and prior domain knowledge: to what extent does monitoring mediate their relationship with hypermedia learning? Metacognition and Learning, 4(3), 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. National Research Council (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  47. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–27). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  48. Pintrich, P. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). San Diego: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., García, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.Google Scholar
  50. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., García, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2007). Learner control in hypermedia environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schraw, G. (2006). Knowledge: Structures and processes. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 245–264). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  53. Sinatra, G. M. & Chinn, C. (2011). Thinking and reasoning in science: Promoting epistemic conceptual change. In K. Harris, C. B. McCormick, G. M. Sinatra, & J. Sweller (Eds.). Critical theories and models of learning and development relevant to learning and teaching, Volume 1 (pp. 257–282). APA Publications.Google Scholar
  54. Son, L. K., & Metcalfe, J. (2000). Metacognitive and control strategies in study-time allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(1), 204–221.Google Scholar
  55. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multi-method designs? In C. Artelt & B. Moschner (Eds.), Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis (pp. 75–97). Berlin: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  57. Veenman, M. V. J. (2007). The assessment and instruction of self-regulation in computer-based environments: a discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 2, 177–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Winne, P. H. (1987). Why process-product research cannot explain product findings and a proposed remedy: the cognitive meditational program. Teaching & Teacher Education, 3(4), 333–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Winne, P. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspective (pp. 153–189). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  60. Winne, P. H. (2004). Students’ calibration of knowledge and learning processes: implications for designing powerful software learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 466–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Winne, P., & Hadwin, A. (2008). The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In D. Schunk & B. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 297–314). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  62. Winne, P., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2002). Exploring students’ calibration of self reports about study tactics and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(4), 551–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531–566). Orlando: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Winters, F., Greene, J., & Costich, C. (2008). Self-regulation of learning within computer-based learning environments: a critical analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 429–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, M. Zeidner, M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zimmerman, B. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 1–37). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
  67. Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Banu Binbasaran Tuysuzoglu
    • 1
  • Jeffrey Alan Greene
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations