The effect of motivational scaffolding on procrastinators’ distance learning outcomes

Tuckman, Bruce W.

doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.002

Cited by 101 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Azevedo (2005) pointed out that in online learning environments, the system design should allow self-controlled learning, such as planning the learning session and creating subgoals. Tuckman (2007) indicated that although distance courses are designed according to a specific learning process and set of objectives, students frequently procrastinate because of the lack of supervision by teachers and peers. For students who are inclined to procrastinate, selflearning through distance course materials that do not provide external support (e.g., time management and online group discussion) results in poor learning performance (Tuckman, 2007).…”

Section: Learning Achievement and Teacher-student Interactions Under mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Learning Achievement and Teacher–Student Interactions in Flipped and Conventional Classrooms

Sun

2016

IRRODL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of two different teaching methods on learning effectiveness. OpenCourseWare was integrated into the flipped classroom model (experimental group) and distance learning (control group). Learning effectiveness encompassed learning achievement, teacher-student interactions, and learning satisfaction. The experimental method was supplemented with qualitative interviews. Overall, 181 freshmen taking a course on physics were allowed to choose their own class based on their preferred teaching method (experimental or control group). The findings indicated that learners in the experimental group scored higher for learning achievement. When selecting a teaching method, if sufficient resources are available, it is suggested that teachers provide learners with the combination of OCW and flipped classroom. Although there was no significant between-group difference in terms of teacher-student interactions and learning satisfaction, the interactions in the flipped classroom had positive effect on students’ learning achievement. The use of the flipped classroom model allows for adequate teacher-student interactions, as teachers can provide guidance and assistance to students in person, while there are greater opportunities for collaborative learning among learners. In addition, since the flipped classroom model emphasizes the process of learning rather than its outcomes, information technology tools should be used to keep detailed records and follow the learning process in order to assess various aspects of the learners’ growth. The results of this study can serve as a reference for future studies on the flipped classroom model and OpenCourseWare, as well as for teachers and researchers in related fields.

show abstract

Section: Learning Achievement and Teacher-student Interactions Under mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Learning Achievement and Teacher–Student Interactions in Flipped and Conventional Classrooms

Sun

2016

IRRODL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Motivation scaffolds primarily aim to enhance students' academic motivation toward the target content, defined as their willingness to deploy effort to carry out learning tasks (Tuckman, 2007;Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). This can be done through one of the following processes or a combination thereof: enhancing students' (a) expectancies for success, (b) perceptions of value in the completion of the target task, (c) perceptions of self-determination of behavior, (d) perceptions of mastery goals, (e) abilities to regulate academic emotions, and (f) perceptions of belongingness (Belland, Kim, et al, 2013).…”

Section: Motivation Scaffoldingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer-Based Scaffolding Strategy

Belland

2016

Instructional Scaffolding in STEM Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter covers variations in scaffolding strategies along the following characteristics-scaffolding function (e.g., strategic and conceptual), context specificity (i.e., generic or context-specific), customization (e.g., fading and fading/ adding), and customization schedule (e.g., self-selected and performance-based). These variations and the theoretical basis for these are explained. Then, results from the meta-analysis are shared, which indicate that there are no differences in cognitive outcomes according to scaffolding function, context specificity, and customization. These results are then discussed.

show abstract

“…Scaffolding features have been applied widely in general education, such as direction maintenance, marking of critical features, demonstration (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976), step-by-step directions, sortation of information (McKenzie, 2000), alignment, experiential value, collaboration, multiplicity (McLoughlin, 2002), channeling and focusing, modeling (Pea, 2004), occurrences in a collaborative context (Tuckman, 2007), and heuristic modelling (Radford, Bosanquet, Webster, Blatchford, & Rubie-Davies, 2014). With a view to pinpointing features which facilitate developing instructional interaction, this paper highlights the features of continuity (see McKenzie, 2000;McLoughlin, 2002), contextual support (see McLoughlin, 2002), collaboration (see McLoughlin, 2002;Tuckman, 2007), modeling (see Wood et al, 1976;Pea, 2004), channeling and focusing (see Pea, 2004), and multiplicity (see McLoughlin, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With a view to pinpointing features which facilitate developing instructional interaction, this paper highlights the features of continuity (see McKenzie, 2000;McLoughlin, 2002), contextual support (see McLoughlin, 2002), collaboration (see McLoughlin, 2002;Tuckman, 2007), modeling (see Wood et al, 1976;Pea, 2004), channeling and focusing (see Pea, 2004), and multiplicity (see McLoughlin, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%