2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Enhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
112
1
8

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 183 publications
(159 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
8
112
1
8
Order By: Relevance
“…Learners need tools and scaffolds to report and reflect on their experiences (Berthold et al 2009;Hübner et al 2010;Kicken et al 2009). Prompts have been studied as scaffolds that aim to structure learners' reflections (Nückles et al 2009). Prompting learners to write for reflection can be a creative process contributing to change the writer's understanding of the topic (Bereiter and Scardamalia 2013).…”
Section: Scaffolding For Reflectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Learners need tools and scaffolds to report and reflect on their experiences (Berthold et al 2009;Hübner et al 2010;Kicken et al 2009). Prompts have been studied as scaffolds that aim to structure learners' reflections (Nückles et al 2009). Prompting learners to write for reflection can be a creative process contributing to change the writer's understanding of the topic (Bereiter and Scardamalia 2013).…”
Section: Scaffolding For Reflectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lifelong learning requires the capacity to regulate one's own learning through self-reflective metacognitive processes (Van den Boom et al 2007). During the apprenticeship period, reflective practice can be modeled and facilitated through learning journals (LJs) that prompt reflection on experiences made in the workplace or at school (Nückles et al 2009). Learning journals are used by learners to track their progress and support their reflections of workplace experiences (Mauroux et al 2015).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, over the past five decades, the research literature has detailed many successful cognitive and metacognitive instructional interventions, including advance organisers (Ausubel, 1960), metacognitive evaluation matrices (Schraw & Dennison, 1994), worked examples (Sweller, 2006), concept mapping and other diagrammatic supports (Novak, 1990), and self-reflective learning protocols (Berthold, Nückles, & Renkl, 2007;Nückles, Hübner, & Renkl, 2009). Hattie, Biggs and Purdie's (1996) early meta-analyses, the meta-analysis by Dignath and Büttner (2008), and Hattie's (2009) recent synthesis of over 800 metaanalyses, provide substantial support for the strong relationship between cognitive and metacognitive instructional interventions and improved learning outcomes for students.…”
Section: Students' Knowledge About How To Learnmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Berthold, Nückles and Renkl (2007) had suggested the use of prompted and supported learning protocols (guided reflective journals) to provoke students to engage reflectively with their cognitive and metacognitive strategy use (Berthold et al, 2007;Hübner, Nückles, & Renkl, 2010;Nückles et al, 2009). Such evocation of students' explicit awareness and reflection were key components of our intentions for the proposed instructional interventions.…”
Section: Studies 2 and 3: Classroom Instructional Interventionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Eliciting self-explanations from learners is acknowledged in the extant literature on prompting as an effective technique for promoting learning (Chi & Bassok, 1989;Chi et al, 1994;Conati & VanLehn, 2000;Atkinson et al, 2003 & Renkl's (2007) finding that students exposed to a videotaped lecture paired with mixed prompts scored significantly higher on measures of immediate comprehension and delayed retention. Hence, self-explanation was operationalized in the study as a series of mixed, cognitive and metacognitive (Berthold et al, 2007;Nückles et al, 2009), prompts for participants to respond to based on their exposure to information in the lesson. Participants assigned to these two conditions were required to respond to four mixed self-explanation prompts that were displayed throughout the lesson (Figure 3).…”
Section: Treatment Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 99%