Studying Student Use of Self-Regulated Learning Tools in an Open-Ended Learning Environment

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9112)


This paper discusses a design-based research study that we conducted in a middle school science classroom to test the effectiveness of SimSelf, an open-ended learning environment for science learning. In particular, we evaluated two tools intended to help students develop and practice the important regulatory processes of planning and monitoring. Findings showed that students who used the supporting tools as intended demonstrated effective learning of the science topic. Conversely, students who did not use the tools effectively generally achieved minimal success at their learning tasks. Analysis of these results provides a framework for redesigning the environment and highlights areas for additional scaffolding and guidance.


Open-ended learning environments Self-regulated learning Learning environment design 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Azevedo, R., Johnson, A., Chauncey, A., Burkett, C.: Self-regulated learning with metatutor: advancing the science of learning with metacognitive tools. In: Khine, M., Saleh, I. (eds.) New Science of Learning, pp. 225–247. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goel, A., Rugaber, S., Vattam, S.: Structure, behavior & function of complex systems: The sbf modeling language. AI for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 23, 23–35 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kinnebrew, J., Segedy, J., Biswas, G.: Analyzing the temporal evolution of students behaviors in open-ended learning environments. Metacognition and Learning, 1–29 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Land, S.: Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development 48(3), 61–78 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leelawong, K., Biswas, G.: Designing learning by teaching agents: The Betty’s Brain system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 18(3), 181–208 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Perry, N., Winne, P.: Learning from learning kits : gStudy traces of students self-regulated engagements with computerized content. Educational Psychology Review 18(3), 211–228 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roll, I., McLaren, B., Koedinger, K.: Improving students’ help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system. Learning and Instruction 21(2), 267–280 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schraw, G., Crippen, K., Hartley, K.: Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education 36(1), 111–139 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Segedy, J.R., Biswas, G., Blackstock, E.F., Jenkins, A.: Guided skill practice as an adaptive scaffolding strategy in open-ended learning environments. In: Lane, H.C., Yacef, K., Mostow, J., Pavlik, P. (eds.) AIED 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7926, pp. 532–541. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Winne, P., Hadwin, A.: The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In: Schunk, D., Zimmerman, B. (eds.) Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning: Theory, Research, and Applications, pp. 297–314. Taylor & Francis, NY (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang, L., VanLehn, K., Girard, S., Burleson, W., Chavez-Echeagaray, M.E., Gonzalez-Sanchez, J., Hidalgo-Pontet, Y.: Evaluation of a meta-tutor for constructing models of dynamic systems. Computers & Education 75, 196–217 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zimmerman, B.: Self-regulating academic learning and achievement: The emergence of a social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychology Review 2(2), 173–201 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EECS and ISISVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations