Self‐regulated learning from illustrated text: Eye movement modelling to support use and regulation of cognitive processes during learning from multimedia

Person-centred longitudinal findings presented patterns of learning transitions that different students experience during their first year at university. Stability/variability of students' strategy use was linked to the nature of initial subgroup membership. Findings also indicated strong connections between processing and regulation strategy changes across first-year university experiences. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulating approaches to learning: Testing learning strategy convergences across a year at university

Fryer

Vermunt

2017

“…Traces record information on which learners operatefor example, content highlighted or generated in notesand operations applied to informationfor example, metacognitively monitoring whether content is important or vague, or assembling content studied in a text with a personal example. Eye movement data like those analysed by Scheiter, Schubert, and Sch€ uler (2018) trace information to which learners attend. We have developed a software system called nStudy to gather trace data and return learning analytics as guides for learners' SRL (Winne et al, 2017a).…”

Section: Data About Levels Of Processing In Self-regulated Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theorizing and researching levels of processing in self‐regulated learning

Winne

2017

108

101

Self-regulated learning can be viewed through a lens of the levels construct, and operational definitions can be designed to research SRL with respect to levels. While information can be organized arbitrarily deeply, the levels construct may not be particularly useful for distinguishing among processes except in a sense that, because processes in SRL operate on information with depth, they epiphenomenally acquire characteristics of levels. Thus, SRL per se is not a deeper kind of processing. Instead, it is processing more complex - deeper - information about a different topic, namely processes for learning.

“…Scheiter, Schubert, and Schüler, also focused on the role of knowledge in strategic processing. These researchers wanted to determine whether a substantial amount of domain knowledge would override university students’ use of a particular technique shown to be effective with elementary students’ reading of multimedia texts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking down the road: Future directions for research on depth and regulation of strategic processing

Alexander

2018

Purpose. The primary goal of this commentary was to consider the future directions that researchers dealing with levels and regulation of strategies and with approaches to learning may wish to pursue in the years to come.Procedure. In order to accomplish this goal, the first step was to look for any common ground shared by authors contributing to this Special Issue. That common ground represented a convergence of evidence for these programmes of research; in effect, where they intersect. Next, theoretical, methodological, and data-analytic barriers that have long impeded progress within and across these research communities were identified.Outcome. Recommendations were offered that might serve to diminish or remove those existing barriers and, thus, open new avenues of inquiry.It is a privilege to serve as a commentator for this Special Issue that examines the complicated relation between depth and regulation of strategic processing, especially in the light of the international scholars chosen as contributors. According to the editors, the purpose of this issue is to consider how levels of cognitive strategy use among students relate to their metacognitive or self-regulatory behaviours (Dinsmore & Fryer, 2018). Contributors to the issue were to be guided by three overarching questions:1. What is the association between cognitive and metacognitive processing during academic performance in varied contexts (e.g., text, technology rich environments, university settings)? 2. How does the shifting developmental landscape change associations between depth of processing and monitoring and regulation of learning on academic performance? 3. Do individuals' competence help explain associations between monitoring, regulation, and strategic processing? (p. 2)To the credit of the editors, these are timely, important, and ambitious questions to be posed at this juncture when theory and research into strategic processing approach the half-century mark. Any issue that effectively addresses any one of these complex questions