Advertisement

Student and Teacher Perspectives on IMPROVE Self-Regulation Prompts in Web-Based Learning

  • Bracha Kramarski
  • Tova Michalsky
Chapter
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 28)

Abstract

This chapter describes the results of eight controlled experimentations examining different conditions for implementation of the IMPROVE self-questioning prompts (Kramarski & Mevarech, 2003; Mevarech & Kramarski, 1997) in web-based learning environments from two perspectives, first for students’ learning in the classroom, and second for preservice teachers’ learning during their professional preparation. The IMPROVE method aims to support key aspects of self-regulation targeting learning processes. In evaluating the effect of the IMPROVE prompts, we focused our efforts on assessing progress at high levels of conceptual understanding in the learning domain, referring to mathematical or scientific reasoning among students and teachers alike and also referring to designing traditional and technology-based lessons among the teachers. Thus, we assessed whether learners performed well not only on immediate posttests with items similar to training, but also on tests measuring near and far transfer. In addition, we assessed acquisition of self-regulated learning (SRL) that included offline aptitude questionnaires and online process measures during real-time forum discussions. In this chapter we critically discuss the findings and raise directions for practical implications and future inquiry.

Keywords

Preservice Teacher Conceptual Understanding Online Discussion Forum Discussion Metacognitive Awareness 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aleven, V., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26, 147–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers in Education, 52(1), 154–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arvaja, M., Salovaara, H., Hakkinen, P., & Jarvela, S. (2007). Combining individual and group-level perspectives for studying collaborative knowledge construction in context. Learning and Instruction, 17, 448–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azevedo, R., & Jacobson, M. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: A summary and critical analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Bannert, M. (2006). Effects of reflection prompts when learning with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4, 359–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science ­students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 91–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2010). The measurement of learners’ self-regulated cognitive and metacognitive processes while using computer-based learning environments [Special issue]. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 1–9.Google Scholar
  10. Hadwin, H. F., Oshige, M., Gress, C. L. Z., & Winne, P. H. (2010). Innovative ways for using gStudy to orchestrate and research social aspects of self-regulated learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 794–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science, 25(3), 167–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2012). Task-related and social regulation during online collaborative learning. Metacognition and Learning, 7(2), 25–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. King, E. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children’s problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 307–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kramarski, B. (2008). Promoting teachers’ algebraic reasoning and self-regulation with metacognitive guidance. Metacognition and Learning, 3(2), 83–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kramarski, B. (2011). Developing and assessing self-regulation through sharing feedback in online mathematical problem solving. In G. Dettori & D. Persico (Eds.), Fostering self-regulated learning through ICTs (pp. 232–247). Hershey: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  16. Kramarski, B., & Dudai, V. (2009). Group-metacognitive support for online inquiry in mathematics with differential self-questioning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(4), 365–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kramarski, B., & Gutman, M. (2006). How can self-regulated learning be supported in mathematical e-learning environments? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: Effects of cooperative learning and metacognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 281–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2009a). Investigating preservice teachers’ professional growth in self-regulated learning environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 161–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2009b). Three metacognitive approaches to training pre-service teachers in different learning phases of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Special issue: Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal on Theory and Practice, 15(5), 465–490.Google Scholar
  21. Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2010). Preparing preservice teachers for self-regulated learning in the context of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 20, 434–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kramarski, B., & Mizrachi, N. (2006). Online discussion and self-regulated learning: Effects of four instructional methods on mathematical literacy. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 218–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kramarski, B., & Revach, T. (2009). The challenge of self-regulated learning in mathematics teachers’ professional training. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(3), 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1997). IMPROVE: A multidimensional method for teaching mathematics in heterogeneous classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 34(2), 365–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Michalsky, T., Zion, M., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2007). Developing students’ metacognitive awareness in asynchronous learning networks in comparison to face-to-face discussion groups. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36, 421–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pajares, F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 544–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivational strategies learning questionnaire (MSLQ ). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.Google Scholar
  29. Programme for International Student Assessment—PISA. (2003). Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: Further results from PISA 2000. Paris: Author.Google Scholar
  30. Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for ­scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Research, 29(1), 4–15.Google Scholar
  32. Randi, J., & Corno, L. (2000). Teacher innovations in self-regulated learning. In P. Pintrich, M. Boekaerts, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 651–685). San Diego: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  34. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 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
  36. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (Original work published in 1934).Google Scholar
  37. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wenger, E. (2007). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. http://www.ewenger.com/theory/. Accessed 5 Oct 2010.Google Scholar
  39. White, B., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. White, B., Frederiksen, J. R., & Collins, A. (2009). The interplay of scientific inquiry and metacognition: More than a marriage of convenience. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 175–205). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 532–566). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  42. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attainment of self-regulated learning: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research and applications (pp. 13–39). Orlando, FL: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulated and motivation: Historical background, methodological development, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zion, M., Michalsky, T., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2005). The effects of metacognitive instruction embedded within an asynchronous learning network on scientific inquiry skills. International Journal of Science Education, 27(8), 957–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationBar-Ilan UniversityRamat-GanIsrael

Personalised recommendations