A Systematic Approach to Designing, Implementing, and Evaluating Learner-Generated Digital Media (LGDM) Assignments and Its Effect on Self-regulation in Tertiary Science Education


This study explored the self-regulation strategies and learning experiences of undergraduate science students completing Learner-Generated Digital Media (LGDM) assignments that had been implemented using a theory-driven, systematic approach. The rationale for using LGDM in science education is to facilitate student learning of complex scientific concepts through the multimodal representation of content using digital media. The study was conducted in seven science subjects from first to third year in Autumn 2017, using a sample of 348 undergraduate science students attending a university located in Sydney, Australia. All the participants were enrolled in subjects that required them to communicate complex scientific concepts using digital media. Training on LGDM was conducted online (n = 199) and in blended mode (n = 149). The study used a mixed-methods approach with a validated self-regulation questionnaire, LMS logs, assessment scores, group contribution data, open-ended questions, and interviews. Online students were more likely than blended students to report using self-regulation strategies for goal setting, time management, task strategies, and help-seeking. Data triangulation revealed that participation in LGDM assignments was perceived by students to contribute to their science content knowledge, provide them with digital media skills, and nurture their capacity for working in groups. The findings of this study have implications for how LGDM is deployed in science education.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1


  1. Agustiani, H., Cahyad, S., & Musa, M. (2016). Self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of students academic performance. The Open Psychology Journal, 9(1), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alexander, B., Adams, S. & Cummins, M. (2016). Digital Literacy: An NMC Horizon Project Strategic Brief. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. (Volume 3.3, October 2016). Retrieved August 12, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/182085/.

  3. Anderson, J. (2013). Active learning through student film: a case study of cultural geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 37(3), 385–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Anuradha, V., & Rengaraj, M. (2017). Storytelling: creating a positive attitude toward narration among engineering graduates. IUP Journal of English Studies, 12(1), 32.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Arvidsson, A., & Delfanti, A. (2019). Introduction to Digital Media. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

  6. Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 523–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bader, J. D., & Lowenthal, P. R. (2018). Using visual design to improve the online learning experience: a synthesis of research on aesthetics. In Learner Experience and Usability in Online Education (pp. 1-35).Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

  8. Bailey, T. R., Jaggars, S. S., & Jenkins, D. (2015). Redesigning America’s community colleges. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  9. Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-hall.

  10. Barak, M., Hussein-Farraj, R., & Dori, Y. J. (2016). On-campus or online: examining self-regulation and cognitive transfer skills in different learning settings. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(1), 35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Barnard, L., Lan, W. Y., To, Y. M., Paton, V. O., & Lai, S.-L. (2009). Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(1), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Barnard-Brak, L., Paton, V. O., & Lan, W. Y. (2010). Profiles in self-regulated learning in the online learning environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(1), 61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bekhet, A. K., & Zauszniewski, J. A. (2012). Methodological triangulation: an approach to understanding data. Nurse Researcher, 20(2), 40–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bidjerano, T. (2005). Gender differences in self-regulated learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association (36th, Kerhonkson, NY, Oct 19-21, 2005).

  15. Blum, M., & Barger, A. (2018). The CASPA model: an emerging approach to integrating multimodal assignments. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 27(3), 309–321.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Broadbent, J. (2017). Comparing online and blended learner’s self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 24–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Buckingham, D. (2007). Digital media literacies: Rethinking media education in the age of the Internet. Research in Comparative and International Education, 2,: 43–55.

  18. Calder, N. (2012). The layering of mathematical interpretations through digital media. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1–2), 269–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chen, C. S. (2002). Self-regulated learning strategies and achievement in an introduction to information systems course. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 20(1), 11–23. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/95111/

  20. Cho, V., & Lam, W. (2017). The power of LinkedIn: will professionals leave their organizations for professional advancement because of their use of LinkedIn? PACIS 2017 Proceedings. 290. Retrieved Feb 9, 2018 from http://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2017/290

  21. Chou, P.-N., & Chang, C.-C. (2018). Small or large? The effect of group size on engineering students’ learning satisfaction in project design courses. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14, 10, 3-9.

  22. Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, J. (2011). Efficiency in learning: evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load: Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

  23. Coulson, S., & Frawley, J. K. (2017). Student-generated multimedia for supporting learning in an undergraduate physiotherapy course. in H. Partridge, K. Davis, & J. Thomas (Eds.), Me! Us! IT! Proceedings ASCILITE2017: 34th International Conference on Innovation, Practice and Research in the Use of Educational Technologies in Tertiary Education, (pp. 235–244). Toowoomba, QLD: ASCILITE.

  24. Dunnigan, J. E. (2018). The relationship of self-regulated learning and academic risk factors to academic performance in community college online mathematics courses (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved May 2nd, 2018 from https://digitalcommons.spu.edu/soe_etd/29/

  25. Edwards, F. (2018). The relationship between college student attitudes towards online learning based on reading self-efficacy, ethnicity, and age. (Doctoral dissertation.) Retrieved March 7th, 2018 from https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/1729/

  26. Gorissen, P., Bruggen, J. V., & Jochems, W. (2013). Methodological triangulation of the students’ use of recorded lectures. International Journal of Learning Technology, 8(1), 20–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gurel, D. K., Eryılmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2015). A review and comparison of diagnostic instruments to identify students’ misconceptions in science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(5), 989-1008.

  28. Henriksen, B., Henriksen, J., & Thurston, J. S. (2016). Building health literacy and cultural competency through video recording exercises. Innovations in Pharmacy, 7(4), 17.

  29. Hoban, G., Nielsen, W., & Shepherd, A. (2015). Student-generated digital media in science education: learning, explaining and communicating content. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  30. Hobbs, R. (2017a). Create to learn: introduction to digital literacy. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  31. Hobbs, R. (2017b). Measuring the digital and media literacy competencies of children and teens. In Cognitive Development in Digital Contexts (pp. 253-274). Cambridge, MA: Elsevier

  32. Hodges, C. B. (2008). Self-efficacy in the context of online learning environments: a review of the literature and directions for research. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20(3–4), 7–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jablonski, D., Hoban, G., Ransom, H., & Ward, K. (2015). Exploring the use of “slowmation” as a pedagogical alternative in science teaching and learning. Pacific-Asian Education Journal, 27(1), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Jamani, K. J. (2011). A semiotics discourse analysis framework: understanding meaning-making in science education contexts. Semiotics Theory and Applications, Ontario, Canada: Nova Science Publishers.

  35. Jenson, J. D. (2011). Promoting self-regulation and critical reflection through writing students’ use of an electronic portfolio. International Journal of ePortfolio, 1(1), 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Johnson, C. I., & Mayer, R. E. (2010). Applying the self-explanation principle to multimedia learning in a computer-based game-like environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1246-1252.

  37. Johnson, R. L., & Morgan, G. B. (2016). Survey scales: A Guide to Development, Analysis, and Reporting. New York: Guilford Press.

  38. Kaufmann, R., & Buckner, M. M. (2018). Revisiting “power in the classroom”: exploring online learning and motivation to study course content. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(3), 1–8.

  39. Kearney, M. (2009). Towards a learning design for student-generated digital storytelling. Paper presented at the future of learning design conference, University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia (2009). Retrieved Feb 7th, 2018 from http://ro.uow.edu.au/fld/09/Program/4/

  40. Kearney, M. (2013). Learner-generated digital video: using ideas videos in teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 21(3), 321–336.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kearney, M., & Schuck, S. (2005). Students in the Director’s Seat: Teaching and Learning with Student-generated Video. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2005--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 2864-2871). Montreal, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 12, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/20518/.

  42. Kenney, J., & Newcombe, E. (2018). Supporting student self-regulation: In a blended, flipped learning format. In Online Course Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 1302-1318). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

  43. Kocdar, S., Karadeniz, A., Bozkurt, A., & Buyuk, K. (2018). Measuring self-regulation in self-paced open and distance learning environments. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(1), 25-42. Retrieved, Jan 12th, 2018 from https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.3255.

  44. Kooloos, J. G. M., Klaassen, T., Vereijken, M., Van Kuppeveld, S., Bolhuis, S., & Vorstenbosch, M. (2011). Collaborative group work: effects of group size and assignment structure on learning gain, student satisfaction and perceived participation. Medical Teacher, 33(12), 983–988. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.588733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Licht, B. G., & Dweck, C. S. (1984). Determinants of academic achievement: the interaction of children’s achievement orientations with skill area. Developmental Psychology, 20(4), 628–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self-regulation and online learning in a blended learning context. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2), 1–16. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/49426/

  47. Manzi, C., Coen, S., Regalia, C., Yevenes, A. M., Giuliani, C., & Vignoles, V. L. (2018). Being in the social: a cross-cultural and cross-generational study on identity processes related to Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 81–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Martin, J. M., & Zahrndt, J. (2017). Media and digital literacies. London: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  49. McLoughlin, C., & Loch, B. (2012). Engaging students in cognitive and metacognitive processes using screencasts. Paper presented at the EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2012, Denver, Colorado, USA. Retrieve May 4th, 2018 from http://www.editlib.org/p/40891.

  50. McMahon, M., & Oliver, R. (2001). Promoting self-regulation learning in an on-line environment. In C. Montgomerie & J. Viteli (Eds.), Proceedings of Ed-Media 2001--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 1299-1305). Norfolk, VA USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 12, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/8630/.

  51. Miller, D. A. (2015). Learning how students learn: an exploration of self-regulation strategies in a two-year college general chemistry class. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(3), 11–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Musburger, R. B., & Kindem, G. (2012). Introduction to media production: the path to digital media production. Burlington: Focal Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  53. New South Wales Board of Studies. (2012). Science K-10 syllabus. Sydney, NSW: NSW BOS.

  54. Nielsen, W., Hoban, G., & Hyland, C. J. (2017). Pharmacology students’ perceptions of creating multimodal digital explanations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(2), 329-339.

  55. Nielsen, W., Georgiou, H., Jones, P., & Turney, A. (2018). Digital Explanation as Assessment in University Science. Research in Science Education., 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9785-9.

  56. Niemivirta, M. (1997). Gender differences in motivational-cognitive patterns of self-regulated learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Chicago, IL, March 24-28, 1997)

  57. Nota, L., Soresi, S., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Self-regulation and academic achievement and resilience: a longitudinal study. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(3), 198–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Ottenhoff, J. (2011). Learning how to learn: metacognition in liberal education. Liberal Education, 97, 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Pardo, A., Han, F., & Ellis, R. A. (2016). Exploring the relation between self-regulation, online activities, and academic performance: A case study. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 422-429). ACM.

  60. Pauli, R., Mohiyeddini, C., Bray, D., Michie, F., & Street, B. (2008). Individual differences in negative group work experiences in collaborative student learning. Educational Psychology, 28(1), 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Pearce, K. L. (2014). Undergraduate creators of video, animations and blended media: The students' perspective. In Proceedings of The Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe Science Conference) (p. 138).

  62. Pearce, K. L., & Vanderlelie, J. J. (2016a). Teaching and evaluating graduate attributes in the multimedia science-based assessment task. Paper presented at the Proceedings of The Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education, The University of Queensland, Australia.

  63. Pearce, K. L., & Vanderlelie, J. J. (2016b). Teaching and evaluating graduate attributes in the multimedia science-based assessment task. Paper presented at the Proceedings of The Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education.

  64. Phillips, R., McNaught, C., & Kennedy, G. (2012). Evaluating e-learning: guiding research and practice. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  65. Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Pintrich, P. R., & Zusho, A. (2007). Student motivation and self-regulated learning in the college classroom. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: an evidence-based perspective (pp. 731–810). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Retrived from ERIC database. (ED338122)

  68. Pirhonen, J., & Rasi, P. (2017). Student-generated instructional videos facilitate learning through positive emotions. Journal of Biological Education, 51(3), 215-227.

  69. Potter, J., & McDougall, J. (2017). Digital media, culture and education: theorising third space literacies. London: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  70. Powell, L., & Robson, F. (2014). Learner-generated podcasts: a useful approach to assessment? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(3), 326–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Reyna, J. (2019). A model to explore learning processes in learner-generated digital media assignments. Paper presented at the 13th International Technology, Education and Development Conference, Valencia, Spain.

  72. Reyna, J., & Meier, P. (2018a). Learner-Generated Digital Media (LGDM) as an Assessment Tool in Tertiary Science Education: A Review of Literature. IAFOR Journal of Education, 6(3), 93-109.

  73. Reyna, J., & Meier, P. (2018b). Using the learner-generated digital media (LGDM) framework in tertiary science education: a pilot study. Education Sciences, 8(3), 106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Reyna, J., Meier, P., Geronimo, F., & Rodgers, K. (2016). Implementing digital media presentations as assessment tools for pharmacology students. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(14), 983–991. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-4-14-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Reyna, J., Hanham, J., & Meier, P. (2017a). A taxonomy of digital media types for learner-generated digital media assignments. E-learning and Digital Media, 14(6), 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753017752973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Reyna, J., Horgan, F., Ramp, D., & Meier, P. (2017b). Using learner-generated digital media (LGDM) as an assessment tool in geological sciences. Paper presented at the 11th annual International Technology, Education and Development Conference, INTED2017, INTED, Valencia (Spain), 6th–8th of March 2017.

  77. Reyna, J., Hanham, J., & Meier, P. C. (2018a). A framework for digital media literacies for teaching and learning in higher education. E-learning and Digital Media, 15(4), 176–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Reyna, J., Hanham, J., & Meier, P. (2018b). The Internet explosion, digital media principles and implications to communicate effectively in the digital space. E-learning and Digital Media, 15(1), 36–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753018754361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Reyna, J., Hanham, J., & Meier, P. (2018c). A methodological approach to evaluate the effectiveness of learner-generated digital media (LGDM) assignments in science education. In T. Bastiaens, J. Van Braak, & M. Brown (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 303–314). Amsterdam: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieve April 7th, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/184211/.

  80. Reyna, J., Hanham, J., Vlachopoulos, P., & Meier, P. (2019). Using factor analysis to validate a questionnaire to explore self-regulation in learner-generated digital media (LGDM) assignments in science education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 128–152.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Rich, P. J., & Hannafin, M. (2009). Video annotation tools technologies to scaffold, structure, and transform teacher reflection. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 52–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Salomon, D. (2013). Moving on from Facebook using Instagram to connect with undergraduates and engage in teaching and learning. College & Research Libraries News, 74(8), 408–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory competence. Educational Psychologist, 32(4), 195–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Shen, C., Kasra, M., Pan, W., Bassett, G. A., Malloch, Y., & O’Brien, J. F. (2018). Fake images: the effects of source, intermediary, and digital media literacy on the contextual assessment of image credibility online. New Media & Society, 1461444818799526.

  85. Sluijsmans, D. M., Brand-Gruwel, S., van Merriënboer, J. J., & Bastiaens, T. J. (2002). The training of peer assessment skills to promote the development of reflection skills in teacher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29(1), 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Sørensen, B. H., & Levinsen, K. T. (2014). Digital production and students as learning designers. Designs for Learning, 7(1), 54–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Suzuki, N., Imashiro, M., Shoda, H., Ito, N., Sakata, M., & Yamamoto, M. (2018). Effects of group size on performance and member satisfaction. In: Yamamoto, S., Mori, H. (Eds.) Human Interface and the Management of Information. Information in Applications and Services, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10905, pp. 191–199. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92046-7_17

  88. Tang, K. s., Delgado, C., & Moje, E. B. (2014). An integrative framework for the analysis of multiple and multimodal representations for meaning-making in science education. Science Education, 98(2), 305–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioural research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  90. Tümay, H. (2016). Emergence, learning difficulties, and misconceptions in chemistry undergraduate students’ conceptualizations of acid strength. Science & Education, 25(1–2), 21–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Vanslambrouck, S., Zhu, C., Lombaerts, K., Philipsen, B., & Tondeur, J. (2018). Students’ motivation and subjective task value of participating in online and blended learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 36, 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Vasilchenko, A., Green, D. P., Qarabash, H., Preston, A., Bartindale, T., & Balaam, M. (2017). Media literacy as a by-product of collaborative video production by CS students. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education.

  93. Virtanen, P., & Nevgi, A. (2010). Disciplinary and gender differences among higher education students in self-regulated learning strategies. Educational Psychology, 30(3), 323–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Webb, N. M., & Mastergeorge, A. (2003). Promoting effective helping behaviour in peer-directed groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1–2), 73–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Weller, K., Bruns, A., Burgess, J., Mahrt, M., & Puschmann, C. (2014). Twitter and society, New York: Peter Lang.

  96. Wells, J., & Blincoe, M. (2015). An examination of the use of online resources in a University E-Learning environment. In Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 715-723). Kona, Hawaii, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 12, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/152243/.

  97. Wolters, C. A. (1999). The relation between high school students’ motivational regulation and their use of learning strategies, effort, and classroom performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 11(3), 281–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-regulation involves more than metacognition: A social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 217–221. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3004_8

  100. Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Academic studing and the development of personal skill: A self-regulatory perspective, Educational Psychologist, 33:2-3, 73-86.

  101. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Achieving academic excellence: A self-regulatory perspective. The pursuit of excellence through education, 85-110.

  102. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of educational Psychology, 82(1), 51.

  103. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. (2011). Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning and performance. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Educational psychology handbook series. Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 49-64). New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

  104. Zimmerman, B. J., & Tsikalas, K. E. (2005). Can computer-based learning environments (CBLEs) be used as self-regulatory tools to enhance learning? Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 267–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jorge Reyna.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reyna, J., Hanham, J., Vlachopoulos, P. et al. A Systematic Approach to Designing, Implementing, and Evaluating Learner-Generated Digital Media (LGDM) Assignments and Its Effect on Self-regulation in Tertiary Science Education. Res Sci Educ (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09885-x

Download citation


  • Learner-generated digital media
  • Digital media assignments
  • Multimedia assignments
  • Self-regulation
  • Science education