Advertisement

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

, Volume 23, Issue 2–3, pp 104–123 | Cite as

Challenges in supporting self-regulation in distance education environments

  • Linda Bol
  • Joanna K. Garner
Article
First Online:

Abstract

This article considers the application of selected components of self-regulated learning (SRL; Zimmerman 2000) to student-content interaction in online learning and distance education (DE). In particular we discuss how, when interacting with electronically enhanced text, students must carefully employ self-regulated learning strategies that include planning, goal setting, self-monitoring processes, and calibration judgments. Because the student is often learning independently in DE courses, and because of the potential for non-linear navigation through online learning materials, we argue that the careful deployment of SRL skills is especially critical for successful outcomes. Consequently we discuss examples of how the demands of student-content interactions put students with self-regulation difficulties at risk of failure. We highlight research on learners who have poor SRL skills, inadequate calibration capabilities, and low executive functions in order to highlight areas of particular difficulty and areas in which support might be most beneficial. We conclude with the recognition that while support strategies can be derived from the research literature, there is a great need for research that addresses questions about student-content interaction in DE course settings specifically, and pertains to the increasingly diverse group of learners who take these courses.

Keywords

Self-regulated learning Calibration Executive functioning Instructional design Distance education 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Bures, E. M., Borokhovski, E., & Tamim, R. N. (2011). Interaction in distance education and online learning: Using evidence and theory to improve practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. doi: 10.1007/s12528-011-9043-x.
  2. Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. International Review of Research in Distance and Open Learning, 4, 1–14.Google Scholar
  3. Anglin, G. J., Morrison, G. R., & Maddrell, J. (2010). Distance education: Practice before research or research before practice. In Y. Visser, M. Simonson, R. Amirault, & L. Visser (Eds.), Trends, issues in distance education: International perspectives (2nd ed.). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2009). Beyond grades in on-line learning: Adaptive profiles of academic self-regulation among naval academy undergraduates. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20, 568–601.Google Scholar
  5. Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 523–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J. T., & Seibert, D. (2004). 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
  7. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. G. (2008). Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Education Technology Research and Development, 56, 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (2000). Self-regulation: An introductory overview. In M. Boekarts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bol, L., & Hacker, D. (2001). The effect of practice tests on students’ calibration and performance. Journal of Experimental Education, 69(2), 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bol, L., Hacker, D., O’Shea, P., & Allen, D. (2005). The influence of practice and achievement level on calibration accuracy. The Journal of Experimental Education, 73, 269–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bol, L., Riggs, R., Hacker, D., Dickerson, D., & Nunnery, J. (2010). The calibration accuracy of middle school math students. The Journal for Research in Education, 20(2) (in press).Google Scholar
  12. Bol, L., Walck, C., Hacker, D. J., Dickerson, D., & Nunnery, J. (2010). The effect of individual or group guidelines on the calibration accuracy and achievement of high school biology students (manuscript in preparation).Google Scholar
  13. Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2004). Supporting self-regulation in student-centered Web-based learning environments. International Journal of E-Learning, 3, 40–47.Google Scholar
  14. Eslinger, P. J. (1996). Conceptualizing, describing, and measuring components of executive function: A summary. In G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Attention, memory and executive function (pp. 367–395). Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
  15. Garner, J. K. (2009). Conceptualizing the relations between executive functions and self-regulated learning. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 143, 405–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Garner, J. K., & Bol, L. (2011). The challenges of e-Learning initiatives in supporting students with self-regulated learning and executive function difficulties. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement, January 4–8, Cyprus.Google Scholar
  17. Garner, J. K., & Tocker, M. B. (2011). Relationships between executive functions, metacognitive awareness, and academic achievement in students with and without risk factors for executive dysfunction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April 8–12, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  18. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Adolescents’ use of self-regulatory processes and their relation to qualitative mental model shifts while using hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36, 125–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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, 18–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Greene, J., Bolick, C. M., & Robertson, J. (2010). Fostering historical knowledge and thinking skills using hypermedia learning environment. Computers & Education, 54, 230–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Bahbahani, K. (2008a). Explaining calibration accuracy in classroom contexts: The effects of incentives, reflection and explanatory style. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 101–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D., & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 160–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Keener, M. C. (2008b). Metacognition in education: A focus on calibration. In J. Dunlosky & R. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of memory and metacognition (pp. 411–455). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  24. Juslin, P., Winman, A., & Olsson, H. (2000). Naïve empiricism and dogmatisim in confidence research: A critical examination of the hard-easy effect. Psychological Review, 107, 384–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kanta, J. (2001). Designing for users with cognitive disabilities. http://otal.umd.edu/uupractice/cognition/.
  26. Keren, G. (1991). Calibration and probability judgments: Conceptual and methodological issues. Acta Psychologica, 77, 217–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krugar, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1121–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lajoie, S. P., Azevedo, R., & Fleiszer, D. (1998). Cognitive tools for assessment and learning in a high information flow environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 18, 205–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Locascio, G., Mahone, E. M., Eason, S. H., & Cutting, L. E. (2010). Executive dysfunction among children with reading comprehension deficits. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 441–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., & Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 723–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Manganello, R. (1995). Executive function deficits in the post secondary student population. Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, 12, 15–22.Google Scholar
  32. Mariger, H. (2006). Cognitive disabilities and the web: Where accessibility and usability meet? http://ncdae.org/tools/cognitive/.
  33. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge Press.Google Scholar
  34. McCabe, D. P., Roediger, H. L., McDaniel, M., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2010). The relationship between working memory capacity and executive functioning: Evidence for a common executive attention construct. Neuropsychology, 24, 222–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McCloskey, G., Perkins, L. A., & Van Diviner, B. (2009). Assessment and intervention for executive function difficulties. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  36. Metzler, L. (2007). Executive function in education: From theory to practice. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  37. Meyer, E., Abrami, P. C., Wade, C. A., Aslan, O., & Deault, L. (2010). Improving literacy and metacognition with electronic portfolios: Teaching and learning with ePearl. Computers & Education, 55, 84–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Miranda, A., Presentacion, M. J., & Soriano, M. (2002). Effectiveness of a school-based multi-component program for the treatment of ADHD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 546–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nelson, T. O. (1996). Gamma is a measure of the accuracy of predicting performance on one item relative to another item, not of the absolute performance on an individual item. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 257–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nietfield, J. L., Cao, L., & Osborne, J. W. (2006). The effect of distributed monitoring exercises on performance, monitoring accuracy, and self-efficacy. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 159–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pearson, P. D., & Fielding, L. (1991). Comprehension instruction. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume II (pp. 815–860). White Plains, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
  42. Peterson, R., Lavelle, E., & Guarino, A. J. (2006). The relationship between college students’ executive functioning and study strategies. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 36, 59–67.Google Scholar
  43. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 491–501). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  44. Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume III (pp. 545–561). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  45. Pressley, M., & Ghatala, E. S. (1990). Self-regulated learning: Monitoring learning from text. Educational Psychologist, 25, 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Radosh, A., & Gittelman, R. (1981). The effect of appealing distractors on the performance of hyperactive children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 9, 179–189. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reid, R., Trout, A. L., & Schartz, M. (2005). Self-regulation interventions for children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Exceptional Children, 71, 361–377.Google Scholar
  48. Schrader, P. G., Lawless, K., & Mayall, H. (2008). The model of domain learning as a framework for understanding internet navigation. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17, 235–238.Google Scholar
  49. Scope, A., Empson, J., & McHale, S. (2010). Executive function in children with high and low attentional skills: Correspondence between behavioral and cognitive profiles. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 28, 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sesma, H. W., Mahone, M. E., Levine, T., Eason, S. H., & Cutting, L. E. (2009). The contribution of executive skills to reading comprehension. Child Neuropsychology, 15, 232–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Spinella, M. (2005). Self-rated executive function: Development of the executive function index. International Journal of Neuroscience, 115, 649–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Thiede, K. W., & Anderson, M. C. M. (2003). Summarizing can improve metacomprehension accuracy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 129–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Thiede, K. W., & Dunlosky, J. (1994). Delaying students’ metacognitive monitoring improves their accuracy in predicting their recognition performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 290–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wilson, B. A., Alderman, N., Burgess, P. W., Emslie, H., & Evans, J. J. (1996). Behavioral assessment of the dysexecutive syndrome. Bury St. Edmunds, U.K.: Thames Valley Test Company.Google Scholar
  55. Winne, P. (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
  56. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  57. Wood, E., Woloshyn, V. E., & Willoughby, T. (1995). Cognitive strategy instruction for middle and high schools. Cambridge, M. A.: Brookline.Google Scholar
  58. Zentall, S. (2005). Theory and evidence-based strategies for children with attentional problems. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 821–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  60. Zohar, A. (1999). Teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and the instruction of higher order thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 413–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zumbach, J. (2006). Cognitive overhead in hypertext learning reexamined: overcoming the myths. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15, 411–432.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Educational Foundations and Leadership, Darden College of EducationOld Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA
  2. 2.The Center for Educational Partnerships, Darden College of EducationOld Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options