Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Self-regulated Learning with MetaTutor: Advancing the Science of Learning with MetaCognitive Tools

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Science of Learning

Abstract

The key to understanding complex learning with advanced learning technologies (e.g., hypermedia) lies in our ability to comprehend the temporal deployment of students’ cognitive, metacognitive, motivational, and affective processes. Our chapter will focus on critically analyzing the use of mixed-method approaches to analyze the complex nature of self-regulated learning (SRL) during hypermedia learning. We will use examples from our own research (e.g., Azevedo 2008, Recent innovations in educational technology that facilitate student learning (pp. 127–156); Azevedo & Witherspoon, in press, Handbook of metacognition in education) and that of others (e.g., Biswas et al., 2005; Schwartz et al., in press; Winne & Nesbitt, in press, Handbook of metacognition in education) to present and discuss the strengths and weaknesses in using mixed methods to capture, model, trace, and infer the unfolding SRL processes during learning with nonlinear, multirepresentational computerized environments. The chapter will focus on the methods, and quantitative and qualitative analyses used to converge product data (e.g., learning outcomes), process data (e.g., think-aloud data), and log-file data collected during learning, develop coding schemes to categorize and infer the deployment of SRL processes, and the use of computational tools to examine learners’ behaviors and navigation paths. Lastly, we will present a theoretical model that integrates the various topics presented in this chapter that will guide future research and educational practices for fostering students’ SRL with hypermedia environments.

To appear in: In M. S. Khine & I.M. Saleh (Eds.), New Science of Learning: Computers, Cognition, and Collaboration in Education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    To appear in: In M. S. Khine & I.M. Saleh (Eds.), New Science of Learning: Computers, Cognition, and Collaboration in Education.

References

  • Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16, 183–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aleven, V., Stahl, E., Schworm, S., Fischer, F., & Wallace, R. M. (2003). Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Review of Educational Research, 73(2), 277–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2002). Beyond intelligent tutoring systems: Computers as MetaCognitive tools to enhance learning? Instructional Science, 30(1), 31–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2005a). Computers as metacognitive tools for enhancing learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 193–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2005b). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist. Special Issue: Computers as Metacognitive Tools for Enhancing Student Learning, 40(4), 199–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2007). Understanding the complex nature of self-regulatory processes in learning with computer-based learning environments: An introduction. Metacognition and Learning, 2(2/3), 57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2008). The role of self-regulation in learning about science with hypermedia. In D. Robinson & G. Schraw (Eds.), Recent innovations in educational technology that facilitate student learning (pp. 127–156). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2009). Theoretical, methodological, and analytical challenges in the research on metacognition and self-regulation: A commentary. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 87–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition: Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33, 367–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., & Jacobson, M. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: A summary and critical analysis. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56 (1), 93–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., Winters, F. I., Moos, D. C., & Greene, J. A. (2006). Using computers as metacognitive tools to foster students’ self-regulated learning. Technology, Instruction, Cognition, and Learning Journal, 3, 97–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., Witherspoon, A., Chauncey, A., Burkett, C., & Fike, A. (2009). MetaTutor: A MetaCognitive tool for enhancing self-regulated learning. In R. Pirrone, R. Azevedo, & G. Biswas (Eds.), Proceedings of the AAAI Fall Symposium on Cognitive and Metacognitive Educational Systems (pp. 14–19). Menlo Park, CA: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., Witherspoon, A. M., Graesser, A., McNamara, D., Rus, V., Cai, Z., et al. (2008). MetaTutor: An adaptive hypermedia system for training and fostering self-regulated learning about complex science topics. Paper to be presented at a Symposium on ITSs with Agents at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Computers in Psychology, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L., & Cerro, L. (2000). Assessing metacognition in children and adults. In G. Schraw & J. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 99–145). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biswas, G., Leelawong, K., Schwartz, D., & the Teachable Agents Group at Vanderbilt. (2005). Learning by teaching: A new agent paradigm for educational software. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19, 363–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borkowski, J., Chan, L., & Muthukrishna, N. (2000). A process-oriented model of metacognition: Links between motivation and executive functioning. In G. Schraw & J. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 1–42). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brusilovsky, P. (2001). Adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 11, 87–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 161–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S., & Jeong, H. (2004). Can tutors monitor students’ understanding accurately? Cognition and Instruction, 22, 363–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, R. (1999). Representation construction, externalized cognition and individual differences. Learning and Instruction, 9, 343–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derry, S. J., & Lajoie, S. P. (1993). Computers as cognitive tools. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Bjork, R. (Eds.) (2008). Handbook of metamemory and memory. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., Hertzog, C., Kennedy, M., & Thiede, K. (2005). The self-monitoring approach for effective learning. Cognitive Technology, 9, 4–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., & McDonald, S. L. (2002). Influence of practice tests on the accuracy of predicting memory performance for paired associates, sentences, and text material. In T. J. Perfect & B. L. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 68–92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., & Middleton, E. L. (2005). What constrains the accuracy of metacomprehension judgments? Testing the transfer-appropriate-monitoring and accessibility hypotheses. Journal of Memory and Language. Special Issue: Metamemory, 52, 551–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S. (2003). Learning in complex domains: When and why do multiple representations help? Learning and Instruction, 13, 239–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Jeon, M., & Dufty, D. (2008). Agent technologies designed to facilitate interactive knowledge construction. Discourse Processes, 45, 298–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.) (1998). Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, D., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. (2009) (Eds.), Handbook of Metacognition in Education. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, M. (2008). A design framework for educational hypermedia systems: Theory, research, and learning emerging scientific conceptual perspectives. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56, 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (2000). Theoretical foundations of learning environments. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D., & Reeves, T. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 694–719). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koedinger, K., & Corbett, A. (2006). Cognitive tutors: Technology bringing learning sciences to the classroom. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 61–77). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lajoie, S. P. (1993). Computer environments as cognitive tools for enhancing learning. In S. Derry & S. P. Lajoie (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 261–288). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lajoie, S. P. (Ed.) (2000). Computers as cognitive tools II: No more walls: Theory change, paradigm shifts and their influence on the use of computers for instructional purposes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leelawong, K., & Biswas, G. (2008). Designing learning by teaching agents: The Betty’s Brain system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18(3), 181–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockl, K., & Schneider, W. (2002). Developmental trends in children’s feeling-of-knowing judgments. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26, 327–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31–48). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognitive judgments and control of study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 159–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, R. S. (2002). What do I need to do to succeed … When I don’t understand what I’m doing!?: Developmental influences on students’ adaptive help seeking. In A. Wigfield & J. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 285–306). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Niederhauser, D. (2008). Educational hypertext. In M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. van Merriënboer, & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 199–209). New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pashler, H., Bain, P., Bottge, B., Graesser, A., Koedinger, K., McDaniel, M., et al. (2007). Organizing Instruction and Study to Improve Student Learning. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. NCER 2007-2004. Retrieved September 10, 2008, from http://ncer.ed.gov.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. D. (1985). Beyond amplification: Using the computer to reorganize mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20, 167–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N. (1985). Postprimary education has little impact on informal reasoning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(5), 562–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (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, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P., Wolters, C., & Baxter, G. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning. In G. Schraw & J. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 43–97). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P., & Zusho, A. (2002). The development of academic self-regulation: The role of cognitive and motivational factors. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 249–284). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M. (2000). Development of grounded theories of complex cognitive processing: Exhaustive within- and between study analyses of think-aloud data. In G. Schraw & J. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 261–296). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., & Hilden, K. (2006). Cognitive strategies. In D. Kuhn & R. S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Volume 2: Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed., pp. 511–556). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar, S., & Hübscher, 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B., & Koedinger, K. (2007). Designing for metacognition—Applying cognitive tutor principles to metacognitive tutoring. Metacognition and Learning, 2(2–3), 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rus, V., Lintean, M., & Azevedo, R. (2009). Automatic detection of student models during prior knowledge activation with MetaTutor. Paper submitted for presentation at the Biennial Meeting on Artificial Intelligence and Education, Brighton, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., & Lockl, K. (2002). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adolescents. In T. J. Perfect & L. B. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 224–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., & Lockl, K. (2008). Procedural metacognition in children: Evidence for developmental trends. In J. Dunlosky & R. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 391–409). New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 49–69). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (2006). Knowledge: Structures and processes. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 245–263). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 351–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. (2005). Self-regulated learning: The educational legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 85–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. (2008). Attributions as motivators of self-regulated learning. In D. Schunk & B. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 245–266). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D., & Zimmerman, B. (2006). Competence and control beliefs: Distinguishing the means and ends. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D., & Zimmerman, B. (2008). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. L., Chase, C., Wagster, J., Okita, S., Roscoe, R., Chin, D., & Biswas, G. (2009). Interactive metacognition: Monitoring and regulating a teachable agent. In D. J.Hacker, J.Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 340–359). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seufert, T., Janen, I., & Brünken, R. (2007). The impact of intrinsic cognitive load on the effectiveness of graphical help for coherence formation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1055–1071.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, A. (2008). Hypermedia design as learner scaffolding. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56(1), 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V., & Psotka, J. (1996). Intelligent tutoring systems: Past, present, and future. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 570–600). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V. J., & Zapata-Rivera, D. (2008). Adaptive technologies. In J. M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. van Merriënboer, & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 277–294). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegler, R. S. (2005). Children’s learning. American Psychologist, 60, 769–778.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2006). The worked example effect and human cognition. Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 165–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawing: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 285–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C. P. (2007). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive Science, 31(1), 3–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M., Van Hout-Wolters, B., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., Eccles, J., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R., & Davis-Kean, P. (2006). Development of achievement motivation. In W. Damon, R. Lerner, & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (vol. 3). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 153–189). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. (2005). Key issues on modeling and applying research on self-regulated learning. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 232–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H., & Nesbit, J. C. (2009). Supporting self-regulated learning with cognitive tools. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education. (pp. 259–277). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witherspoon, A., Azevedo, R., & D’Mello, S. (2008). The dynamics of self-regulatory processes within self- and externally-regulated learning episodes. In B. Woolf, E. Aimeur, R. Nkambou, & S. Lajoie (Eds.), Proceedings of the International conference on intelligent tutoring systems: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS 5091, pp. 260–269). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witherspoon, A., Azevedo, R., & Cai, Z. (2009). Learners’ exploratory behavior within MetaTutor. Poster presented at the 14th international conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Brighton, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolf, B. (2009). Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student-centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. (2006). Development and adaptation of expertise: The role of self-regulatory processes and beliefs. In K. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 705–722). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B., & Schunk, D. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. & Schunk, D. (Eds.) (in press). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research presented in this paper has been supported by funding from the National Science Foundation (Early Career Grant DRL 0133346, DRL 0633918, DRL 0731828, HCC 0841835) awarded to the first author. The authors thank M. Cox, A. Fike, and R. Anderson for collection of data, transcribing, and data scoring. The authors would also like to thank M. Lintean, Z. Cai, V. Rus, A. Graesser, and D. McNamara for design and development of MetaTutor.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cognition and Technology Research Lab, Department of Psychology, Institute for Intelligent Systems, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA

    Roger Azevedo, Amy Johnson, Amber Chauncey & Candice Burkett

Authors
  1. Roger Azevedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amy Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amber Chauncey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Candice Burkett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roger Azevedo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Emirates College for Advanced Education, Abu Dhabi, POBox 1266, Utd.Arab.Emir.

    Myint Swe Khine

  2. Emirates College for Advanced Education, Abu Dhabi, PO Box 126, Utd.Arab.Emir.

    Issa M. Saleh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Azevedo, R., Johnson, A., Chauncey, A., Burkett, C. (2010). Self-regulated Learning with MetaTutor: Advancing the Science of Learning with MetaCognitive Tools. In: Khine, M., Saleh, I. (eds) New Science of Learning. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5716-0_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation