The role of metacognitive skills in learning to solve problems

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$Learning LATEX by Doing$

66 4.2.4 Procedure Students started with the institutional KM course at the beginning of September 2002. They followed lectures, completed assignments and studied a case as part of the institutional course requirements. All this was done before KM Quest had started. The course was based on different theories of KM than KM Quest. KM Quest was played towards the end of this institutional course (mid-October 2002). In order to introduce the game, the experimenter gave an introductory lecture concerning KM Quest. This lecture took two hours. Part of this lecture consisted of completing the pre-test of HollandSky. In order to increase motivation and effort of players a contest was organised. The winner of the game was the team that reached the highest game result. During a subsequent training session, students were given hands-on experience with KM Quest and two example events were played individually in order to practise the game. Then, for approximately four weeks until mid-November, students played the game at their own pace. Teams were strongly requested to communicate solely through the chat functionality in the game. However, face-to-face communication was allowed since it concerned a prototype with chat refresh problems. At the end of this period teams had to reach the 7th quarter in the game. Blackboard was used in order to maintain contact with the students. This is an electronic course management system. In the final debriefing lecture the post-test of HollandSky and the MSLQ were administered. Additionally, some preliminary results were discussed and students were asked their opinion concerning the game. Finally, players of the winning team were awarded their prize (a PDA). 4.3 Results 4.3.1 Participants Forty-one students participated in this study. Only 27 reached the 7th quarter in the game. Those who did not reach the 7th quarter were discarded. The average age of the participants was 22.96 years (SD = 1.72) years. Fifteen students were male and 12 female. These students had a lot of experience with chat tools and collaborative work spaces. This originated from their use of Blackboard which is commonly used by the Hogeschool Zuyd. These students did not use electronic voting frequently. 4.3.2 Learning results The results of students on the HollandSky test were marked by the experimenter. In order to verify whether the experimenter was sufficiently
Study I: Pilot 67 objective, a second person was assigned in order to judge the inter- ‘observer’ reliability. For this, four cases (15 percent of the data, randomly chosen) were marked by both persons and the agreement in terms of a correlation coefficient was calculated (Van den Brink & Mellenbergh, 1998). The correlation between the two sets of data is significant (r = 0.89, p < 0.01). Thus the marking performed by the experimenter was sufficiently objectively. In order to judge test reliability, Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for both test versions. In table 4.1 the results are displayed. All 27 students completed the pre-test, during the post-test two students were missing. The reliability is calculated for each version. Pre- and post-test scores can be taken together since the objective is to judge one test which was administrated two times. The results indicate that test versions are highly reliable even with only 11 question items (2 for declarative and 9 for procedural knowledge). And even although it seems that version B is possibly easier, a Mann-Whitney test reveals no significant differences between both mean scores of the pre-test (see table 4.2). In conclusion, the reliability of the HollandSky test is sufficient. Furthermore, the results indicate that the different test versions are comparable in terms of difficulty. Alpha N Version A (11 items) .80 27 Version B (11 items) .89 25 Table 4.1. Cronbach’s alpha, number of cases and number of question items for both test versions. In table 4.2 the mean and standard deviation of the HollandSky test results (pre- and post-) and institutional course grade for both groups of students are shown. Group AB received the A version of HollandSky during the pre-test and subsequently the B version during the post-test, and vice versa for the other group. A Wilcoxon signed-ranks test was used in order to compare the scores on pre- and post-test. This nonparametric test can be used when comparing paired scores when one cannot comply with the conditions for a parametric test (e.g. at least thirty cases and normality of test scores in terms of kurtosis and skewness of the distribution). Although the scores on the pre- and post-test are distributed normally, because of the rather low number of cases a nonparametric test is preferable. A small increase in mean test scores exists, but no significant differences
Page 1 and 2:
The role of metacognitive skills in
Page 3 and 4:
The role of metacognitive skills in
Page 5 and 6:
Contents 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. THEOR
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: Study I: Pilot 65 ceived 12 questio
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 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
show all

The role of metacognitive skills in learning to solve problems

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?