Cho, M. (2004). The effects of design strategies for promoting students' self-regulated learning skills on students' self-regulation and achievements in online learning environments. Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 27, 174-179.
What was/were the research question(s) in the article?
- Will students studying in learning environments, which are designed to forcefully encourage the practice of SRL skills, show a higher self-regulation than others studying in normal learning environments, which don't support SRL activities?
- Will students studying in learning environments, which are designed to forcefully encourage the practice of SRL skills, show a higher achievement than others studying in normal learning environments, which don't support SRL activities?
Was the literature review relevant to the research question(s)?
The author cites various articles about self-regulated learning in online environments, including Zimmerman, Bonner and Kovach's 1996 study that stated self-regulation can be taught and improved through the students' own efforts. They also stated that promoting students' self regulation is not easy, requires time and energy, and is only possible when students experience the benefits of self-regulation.
What was the methodology used and was it sound?
A 12-lesson course was designed and 30 Korean university students volunteered for the study for a one-month period. Two online learning sites were developed - one for the control group and one for the experimental group.
Students were asked to practice the following SRL skills:
-
Meta-cognitive activities: goal setting, self-evaluation, self-monitoring
-
Cognitive activities: rehearsal, elaboration, organization
-
Resource management activities: time management, help seeking, structuring learning environment
-
Affective activities: self-efficacy, volition
What were the results?
The results found no difference between the experimental group and the control group.
Were the conclusions consistent with the methodology and results?
Interviews were conducted with the students after the study and it helped to reaffirm the importance of what Zimmerman, Bonner and Kovach stated earlier: If students don't know how to effectively practice SRL skills, they will become annoyed and frustrated and therefore not experience the benefits of SRL skills. The interview data also indicated why this treatment was not effective to promote SRL skills.
What interested you most about the article? What questions did it raise?
There are a few ways to improve this study:
- Provide students with SRL strategies in the first month and then allow students to use SRL in the lessons in the following month.
- Conduct a pre-assessment of students before teaching the SRL strategies.
- Lengthen the study from one month to a semester or a full school year.
- Conduct the study with four experimental groups and one control group. Each experimental group would focus on only one SRL strategy.
Comments (1)
Chip Ingram said
at 2:20 pm on May 16, 2009
You could have spent some more time describing what this study was all about. Even so, you do have some good ideas about improving the study. I would have liked to have seen the justification for these, however. For example, with 1. what problems do you think that would overcome in the study? I assume the answer might focus on having people buy in to the need for SRL strategies and learning to do them well enough to make a difference. Other questions: what would you pre-assess, the SRL strategies or the content knowledge/skills? The last suggestion means a much larger study, of course, but wouldn't it miss some important issues--1. are the SRL strategies interrelated, so that you can get a bigger effect of using all of them then using them piecemeal and 2. might not people generate the strategies they were not taught on their own during the study?
You don't have permission to comment on this page.