- Page 1 and 2: The role of metacognitive skills in
- Page 3: The role of metacognitive skills in
- Page 7: Contents ix 6. STUDY III: ADDED VAL
- Page 10 and 11: xii Rienke Schutte, zonder de medew
- Page 12 and 13: 2 in realistic settings and everyda
- Page 14 and 15: 4 use a trade-off between efforts i
- Page 16 and 17: 6 of this thesis are described. In
- Page 18 and 19: 8 First an overview of relevant lit
- Page 20 and 21: 10 In research concerning reading a
- Page 22 and 23: 12 problem has actually been found
- Page 24 and 25: 14 or whether domain specific metac
- Page 26 and 27: 16 learners should be able to artic
- Page 28 and 29: 18 piece of origami paper. Both mat
- Page 30 and 31: 20 tion given to the problem solver
- Page 32 and 33: 22 is rather directive. It does not
- Page 34 and 35: 24 The problem solver has declarati
- Page 36 and 37: 26 problem and the fact that studen
- Page 38 and 39: 28 learn from them. In terms of Jan
- Page 40 and 41: 30 This model is called DORMOBILE (
- Page 42 and 43: 32 Second, the meta-level in proble
- Page 44 and 45: 34 Figure 2.8. Theoretical model of
- Page 46 and 47: 36 task-level. In order to keep the
- Page 49 and 50: Chapter 3 KM QUEST The goal of this
- Page 51 and 52: KM Quest 41 Figure 3.1. The Knowled
- Page 53 and 54: KM Quest 43 the fact that some plan
- Page 55 and 56:
KM Quest 45 a dynamic simulation-ga
- Page 57 and 58:
KM Quest 47 Quest. They are visuali
- Page 59 and 60:
KM Quest 49 cesses in Coltec. For e
- Page 61 and 62:
KM Quest 51 Figure 3.5. The Knowled
- Page 63 and 64:
KM Quest 53 3.3.1.3 The IMPLEMENT p
- Page 65 and 66:
KM Quest 55 process in an electroni
- Page 67 and 68:
Chapter 4 STUDY I: PILOT This chapt
- Page 69 and 70:
Study I: Pilot 59 the spontaneous o
- Page 71 and 72:
Study I: Pilot 61 Also, the questio
- Page 73 and 74:
Study I: Pilot 63 however, to what
- Page 75 and 76:
Study I: Pilot 65 ceived 12 questio
- Page 77 and 78:
Study I: Pilot 67 objective, a seco
- Page 79 and 80:
Study I: Pilot 69 other. It also ex
- Page 81 and 82:
Study I: Pilot 71 In conclusion, th
- Page 83 and 84:
Study I: Pilot 73 Finally, the othe
- Page 85 and 86:
Study I: Pilot 75 Figure 4.2. Scree
- Page 87 and 88:
Study I: Pilot 77 Figure 4.4. Scree
- Page 89 and 90:
Study I: Pilot 79 Figure 4.5. Scree
- Page 91 and 92:
Study I: Pilot 81 Figure 4.7. Scree
- Page 93:
Study I: Pilot 83 alizations of the
- Page 96 and 97:
86 of meaningful learning which can
- Page 98 and 99:
88 opportunity events (instead of t
- Page 100 and 101:
90 different occasions or settings.
- Page 102 and 103:
92 conceptual correctness (54) the
- Page 104 and 105:
94 The score on KMQUESTions indicat
- Page 106 and 107:
96 is a variable that influences th
- Page 108 and 109:
98 5.4 Discussion The hypothesis fo
- Page 110 and 111:
100 mal company results. In the fol
- Page 112 and 113:
102 more inclined to regulate domai
- Page 114 and 115:
104 these skills in order to solve
- Page 116 and 117:
106 Hypothesis 1: students acquire
- Page 118 and 119:
108 KMQUESTions of study II was per
- Page 120 and 121:
110 The second measurement of game
- Page 122 and 123:
112 T-PROS because they did not occ
- Page 124 and 125:
114 Category Rule Example Task Indi
- Page 126 and 127:
116 vised by one experimenter in or
- Page 128 and 129:
118 6.3 Results 6.3.1 Game results
- Page 130 and 131:
120 to Coltec. Only threats have a
- Page 132 and 133:
122 6.3.2.1 Effects of learning and
- Page 134 and 135:
124 Prospective Pre-test Post-test
- Page 136 and 137:
126 Distribution Frequency 1 high 2
- Page 138 and 139:
128 No − model Model Retrospectiv
- Page 140 and 141:
130 model condition. Perhaps, perfo
- Page 142 and 143:
132 Cog Tas Meta Total No-model con
- Page 144 and 145:
134 Condition * Metacognition G MET
- Page 146 and 147:
136 Figure 6.5. Relations between m
- Page 148 and 149:
138 in the model condition: Visuali
- Page 150 and 151:
140 Figure 6.7. Overview of relatio
- Page 152 and 153:
142 ‘monitoring’. Prospective s
- Page 154 and 155:
144 learning. Finally, in the no-mo
- Page 156 and 157:
146 inclusion of a task model speci
- Page 158 and 159:
148 interpreting the results on met
- Page 160 and 161:
150 When no task model is available
- Page 162 and 163:
152 Another perhaps more valid expl
- Page 164 and 165:
154 havioural measures prove to be
- Page 167 and 168:
Appendix A Solving a problem in KM
- Page 169 and 170:
APPENDIX A: Solving a problem in KM
- Page 171:
APPENDIX A: Solving a problem in KM
- Page 174 and 175:
164 to learning to solve problems.
- Page 176 and 177:
166 cognition in a constructivist l
- Page 178 and 179:
168 forward. The most important one
- Page 181 and 182:
Chapter 9 SAMENVATTING Het huidige
- Page 183 and 184:
Samenvatting 173 De aanwezigheid va
- Page 185 and 186:
Samenvatting 175 gebruik van metaco
- Page 187 and 188:
Samenvatting 177 nificant leereffec
- Page 189 and 190:
References Akhras, F. and Self, J.
- Page 191 and 192:
REFERENCES 181 Duffy, T. and Cunnin
- Page 193 and 194:
REFERENCES 183 Nelson, T. (1999). C
- Page 195:
REFERENCES 185 van Harmelen, F., Wi
- Page 198 and 199:
Prototyping of CMS Storage Manageme
- Page 200 and 201:
Human-Computer Interaction and Pres
- Page 202:
A Model-driven Approach for Buildin