Helping students soar to success on computers: An investigation of the SOAR study method for computer-based learning.

Abstract

This study used self-report and observation techniques to investigate how students study computer-based materials. In addition, it examined if a study method called SOAR can facilitate computer-based learning. SOAR is an acronym that stands for the method's 4 theoretically driven and empirically supported components: select (S), organize (O), associate (A), and regulate (R). There were 2 experiments. In Experiment 1, 114 undergraduates completed a questionnaire about how they study computer-based materials. Students reported using more ineffective study strategies than effective SOAR strategies. In Experiment 2, 108 different undergraduates read an online text about wildcats and then created materials that reflected their preferred study method, the full SOAR method, or parts of the SOAR method. Specifically, the control group created their preferred study notes; the S group created a complete set of linear notes; the SO group created graphically organized matrix notes; the SOA group created a matrix and associations; and the SOAR group created a matrix, associations, and practice questions that aid self-regulation. The SOAR materials were also created in line with four theoretical principles for technology design (Mayer, 2009). Students studied their materials in preparation for fact and relationship tests. Results from both tests showed that those using the full SOAR method outscored the control group and most other groups using parts of the SOAR method. In addition, observations of students' preferred study methods confirmed the Experiment 1 self-reports that unaided students use ineffective study strategies. Study limitations, suggestions for future research, and instructional implications are presented.

Self‐regulation as a function of perceived leadership and cohesion in small group online collaborative learning

“…In addition to their links to academic motivation and achievement in a variety of classroom‐based settings (Albaili, ), cognitive strategies provide direct academic benefits in online settings. For instance, the use of effective cognitive strategies when studying computer‐based materials has been shown to relate to high performance on comprehension and recall tests (Jairam & Kiewra, ).…”

Spontaneous spatial strategy use in learning from scientific text

“…A related form of mapping is to create or fill in a graphic organizer or matrix to spatially represent one's notes, such as to represent a compare-and-contrast structure (e.g., Kiewra et al, 1991;Robinson & Kiewra, 1995). For example, in a study by Jairam and Kiewra (2010), college students read a text lesson presented on a computer about different types of wildcats. Students were either asked to take linear notes using a window on the screen or to fill in an onscreen matrix that helped students organize different characteristics attributed to each type of wildcat.…”

Gender differences in online reading engagement, metacognitive strategies, navigation skills and reading literacy

“…The importance of metacognitive strategies is also evident in the digital reading environment (Akyel & Erçetin, 2009;Stadtler & Bromme, 2007). For example, Jairam and Kiewra (2010) found that students who used the full SOAR (select, organize, associate and regulate) strategies had better online reading scores than those in the control or partialstrategy groups. In addition, skilled readers performed better in monitoring their comprehension of questions and information searching during online task-oriented reading assignments (Vidal-Abarca, Mañá, & Gil, 2010).…”