Search

Contemporary theories of learning and instruction emphasise the importance of students knowing how to effectively regulate their learning. A large body of research indicates that effective regulation of learning is beneficial for achievement. Set against this research are findings showing that the promotion by teachers of strategies for the self-regulation of learning (SRL), and student use of these strategies, is less common than might be expected. We review this research on the promotion and use of SRL strategies and suggest that a range of beliefs about learning and SRL strategies limit the promotion of SRL learning strategies by teachers. This contributes in turn to the lack of knowledge and use of such strategies by students. These beliefs are represented as forming an interrelated system that needs to be made explicit and examined in order to increase the level of SRL strategy promotion and use. Each of the beliefs is described and the paper concludes with discussion of the implications of the review for teacher educators, teachers, students, school leaders, curriculum designers and researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spaced and interleaved practices have been identified as effective learning strategies which sometimes are conflated as a single strategy and at other times treated as distinct. Learning sessions in which studying information or practicing problems are spaced in time with rest-from-deliberate-learning periods between sessions generally result in better learning outcomes than massed practice without rest-from-deliberate-learning periods. Interleaved practice also consists of spaced sessions, but by interleaving topics rather than having rest-from-deliberate-learning periods. Interleaving is usually contrasted with blocking in which each learning topic is taught in a single block that provides an example of massed practice. The general finding that interleaved practice is more effective for learning than blocked practice is sometimes attributed to spacing. In the current paper, the presence of rest-from-deliberate-learning periods is used to distinguish between spaced and interleaved practice. We suggest that spaced practice is a cognitive load effect that can be explained by working memory resource depletion during cognitive effort with recovery during rest-from-deliberate-learning, while interleaved practice can be explained by the discriminative-contrast hypothesis positing that interleaving assists learners to discriminate between topic areas. A systematic review of the literature provides evidence for this suggestion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes how research into approaches to university teaching, from a relational perspective, has been used to develop an inventory to measure the key aspects of the variation in approaches to teaching. The Approaches to Teaching Inventory (ATI) is one of several that derive from the research perspective applied by Marton and colleagues in Europe (Marton, F., Hounsell, D., and Entwistle, N. (eds.) (1997). The Experience of Learning, 2nd edn., Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh) to student learning. A feature of these inventories is that they measure the response of a group to a particular context, rather than more general characteristics of individuals in that group. Studies using these inventories have consistently shown relations between students’ approaches to learning and the quality of their learning outcome. The question of interest to many university teachers is whether there are relations between the way teachers approach their teaching and ways their students approach their learning. This question was answered in a study published in 1999 that used the ATI to show that teacher-focused approaches to teaching were associated with students’ reproducing orientations. Subsequent research revealed that in subjects where teachers adopted more student-focused approaches to teaching, their students adopted a deeper approach to learning. Some recent research using the inventory is reviewed along with an analysis of the validity of the ATI. The current version of the inventory is reproduced in this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although summative testing is often maligned within educational communities, practice testing is one of the most well-established strategies for improving student learning. Despite the wealth of empirical evidence that testing can enhance learning, teachers and students underutilize practice testing as a learning strategy. Accordingly, a high-level goal of this paper is to advocate for increased use of practice testing as a means for improving student learning. To this end, we discuss prior research establishing the generality of test-enhanced learning as well as prior research that points to conditions under which practice testing is particularly effective. We then summarize some recent research that explores schedules of practice testing that will not only produce durable learning, but will do so most efficiently. To briefly foreshadow, a particularly effective schedule involves practicing retrieval until target information is correctly recalled once during initial learning and then relearned to one correct recall in three to four subsequent sessions. Finally, we argue that exploring both criteria-durability and efficiency-can be valuable for evaluating the utility of learning techniques, and we offer some basic prescriptive conclusions for students and educators as well as recommendations for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews the research conducted in the last decade on patterns in student learning, mostly in higher education. More specifically, the review focuses on a series of studies that have in common (a) the use of the Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS), an instrument aimed at measuring several components of student learning, namely, cognitive processing strategies, metacognitive regulation strategies, conceptions of learning, and learning orientations; and/or (b) an integrative learning theory focussing on the interplay between self-regulation and external regulation of learning processes as a theoretical framework. Aspects a and b are closely connected, because the development of the instrument was based on the theory. The review covers the following themes: The theoretical framework and conceptualization of student learning; a description of the instrument; the internal structure of learning strategies, conceptions, and orientations in different educational contexts; developments in learning patterns during the school career; consistency and variability in students’ use of learning strategies; dissonance in students’ regulation of learning processes; relations between learning patterns and personal and contextual factors; relations between learning patterns and learning outcomes; and process-oriented instruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we describe an undergraduate educational psychology course that utilizes self-regulated learning as the organizing principle. The course aims to facilitate students' development in self-regulated learning and to promote students' understanding of how to embed instruction for self-regulated learning strategies into classroom teaching. In the first section of the paper, we develop the rationale for this position and identify underlying assumptions we believe should guide the development and implementation of such a program. In the second section of the paper, we demonstrate how we have incorporated these assumptions in a basic educational psychology course. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do learners make sense of what they are learning? In this article, I present a new framework of sense-making based on research investigating the benefits and boundaries of generative learning activities (GLAs). The generative sense-making framework distinguishes among three primary sense-making modes—explaining, visualizing, and enacting—that each serve unique and complementary cognitive functions. Specifically, the framework assumes learners mentally organize and simulate the learning material (via the visualizing and enacting modes) to facilitate their ability to generalize the learning material (via the explaining mode). I present evidence from research on GLAs illustrating how visualizations and enactments (instructor-provided and/or learner-generated) can facilitate higher quality learner explanations and subsequent learning outcomes. I also discuss several barriers to sense-making that help explain when GLAs are not effective and describe possible ways to overcome these barriers by appropriately guiding and timing GLAs. Finally, I discuss implications of the generative sense-making framework for theory and practice and provide recommendations for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Desirable difficulties are learning conditions that are often experienced as effortful, but have a positive effect on learning results and transfer of knowledge and skills (Bjork & Bjork, 2011; Bjork, 1994). Learners often do not appreciate the beneficial effects of desirable difficulties, and the negative experiences of high effort and perceived low learning make them resistant to engage in desirable difficulties (Biwer et al., 2020a). This ultimately limits learning outcomes and academic achievement. With the increasing emphasis on self-regulation in education, characterized by higher learner agency and abundant choices in what, when, and how to study, the field of educational psychology is in need of theoretical and empirically testable assumptions that improve self-regulation in desirably difficult learning conditions with the aim to foster self-regulation abilities, learning outcomes, and academic achievement. Here, we present a framework that describes how to support self-regulation of effort when engaging in desirable difficulties: the “Start and Stick to Desirable Difficulties (S2D2)” framework. The framework builds on the Effort Monitoring and Regulation model (de Bruin et al., 2020). The aim of this framework is (1) to describe evidence for the central role of perceived effort and perceived learning in (dis)engagement in desirable difficulties, and (2) to review evidence on, and provide an agenda for research to improve learners’ self-regulated use of desirable difficulties to help them start and persist when learning feels tough, but is actually effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Generative learning theory posits that learners engage more deeply and produce better learning outcomes when they engage in selecting, organizing, and integrating processes during learning. The present experiments examine whether the generative learning activity of generating explanations can be extended to online multimedia lessons and whether prompts to engage in this generative learning activity work better than more passive instruction. Across three experiments, college students learned about greenhouse gasses from a 4-part online lesson involving captioned animations and subsequently took a posttest. After each part, learners were asked to generate an explanation (write-an-explanation), write an explanation using provided terms (write-a-focused-explanation), rewrite a provided explanation (rewrite-an-explanation), read a provided explanation (read-an-explanation), or simply move on to the next part (no-activity). Overall, students in the write-an-explanation group (Experiments 2 and 3), write-a-focused-explanation group (Experiment 2), and rewrite-an-explanation group (Experiment 3) performed significantly better on a delayed posttest than the no-activity group, but the groups did not differ significantly on an immediate posttest (Experiment 1). These results are consistent with generative learning theory and help identify generative learning strategies that improve online multimedia learning, thereby priming active learning with passive media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over a century of research has established practice testing as a highly robust learning strategy that promotes long-term retention. However, learners do not always appreciate the benefits of testing for memory and do not use it as effectively as they could during their own self-regulated learning. The goal of this review is to identify common themes from research focused on learners' metacognition about practice testing using the three components of metacognition (i.e., beliefs, monitoring, and control) as an organizational guide. To foreshadow the key findings from this research: (1) Without support, learners lack metacognitive awareness of testing as a tool to enhance memory but do recognize that testing can be used as a monitoring tool. (2) Learners can accurately monitor their learning while using practice testing when judgments are made in contexts that are representative of those encountered during a criterion test. (3) In educational contexts, learners report using less effective strategies equally or more often than practice testing. (4) Learners tend to test themselves only under conditions that encourage retrieval success, and rarely use a strategy involving repeated successful retrieval even when it would lead to improved retention. After reviewing research findings, I discuss various interventions that lead to learners using testing more often and more effectively in their own learning and offer recommendations for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Learning by drawing can be an effective strategy for supporting science text comprehension. However, drawing can also be cognitively demanding and time consuming, and students may not create quality drawings without sufficient guidance. Furthermore, evidence for drawing is often based on comparisons to weak control conditions, such as students who only read the text without provided illustrations. In this review, we synthesize past research to help draw boundary conditions for learning by drawing, focusing on the role of comparison conditions and drawing guidance. First, we analyze how drawing compares to each of four control conditions: reading only, text-focused strategies (e.g., summarizing), other model-focused strategies (e.g., imagining), or viewing instructor-provided illustrations. Next, we distinguish among four levels of drawing guidance: minimal guidance, drawing training, partially provided illustrations, and comparison to instructor-provided illustrations. Our findings indicate that when compared to only reading the text or using text-focused strategies, creating drawings is consistently more effective at fostering comprehension and transfer, regardless of the level of drawing guidance provided. However, when compared to other model-focused strategies or to viewing instructor-provided illustrations, effects of creating drawings are mixed and may depend on the level of drawing guidance provided, among other factors. We discuss the theoretical and practical considerations of our findings and suggest several directions for broadening research on drawing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this article is to review the state of the art of research and theory development on student learning patterns in higher education and beyond. First, the learning patterns perspective and the theoretical framework are introduced. Second, research published since 2004 on student learning patterns is systematically identified and reviewed. This part includes two main sections. In the first section, new evidence on internal and external relationships of learning patterns is reviewed. Four themes are covered here: the dimensionality and the internal relationships of learning patterns and relationships of learning patterns with personal, contextual, and outcome variables. In the second section, new directions in learning patterns research are examined. These include studies on learning patterns in new international contexts and populations, longitudinal development of learning patterns over time, methodological advances in learning patterns research, and studies on fostering the quality of students' learning patterns. Next, relationships with adjacent theories on student learning are discussed, the learning patterns perspective is critically examined, and pathways are derived to move the model forward. Finally, future conceptual and methodological directions for learning patterns research are derived. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Generative learning involves actively making sense of to-be-learned information by mentally reorganizing and integrating it with one's prior knowledge, thereby enabling learners to apply what they have learned to new situations. In this article, we present eight learning strategies intended to promote generative learning: summarizing, mapping, drawing, imagining, self-testing, self-explaining, teaching, and enacting. First, we provide an overview of generative learning theory, grounded in Wittrock's (1974) generative model of comprehension and reflected in more recent frameworks of active learning, such as Mayer's (2014) select-organize-integrate (SOI) framework. Next, for each of the eight generative learning strategies, we provide a description, review exemplary research studies, discuss potential boundary conditions, and provide practical recommendations for implementation. Finally, we discuss the implications of generative learning for the science of learning, and we suggest directions for further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Learning by observing and imitating others has long been recognized as constituting a powerful learning strategy for humans. Recent findings from neuroscience research, more specifically on the mirror neuron system, begin to provide insight into the neural bases of learning by observation and imitation. These findings are discussed here, along with their potential consequences for the design of instruction, focusing in particular on the effectiveness of dynamic vs. static visualizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to theories of students’ test preparation, students may optimize their test performance by paying special attention to important information and processing this information in ways that are appropriate to the type of questions included in the forthcoming test. However, research is unclear about the conditions under which students adapt study strategies to the demands of test preparation tasks. Moreover, little is known about the processes and abilities involved. In this article, we present a theoretical model that integrates various factors that seem relevant to strategy adaptation in test preparation, including the teacher’s intended task demands, students’ perceptions of these demands, students’ personal goals for studying, and their ability to adapt and implement strategies. The aim of our model is to stimulate further research on strategy adaptation, which may eventually provide evidence-based guidelines that could help teachers support the development of students’ strategy adaptability and use tests as learning tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we address four main questions, including: What is self-regulated learning for? What key strategies do students need to guide and direct their own learning process? What cues in the learning environment trigger self-regulation strategies? What can teachers do to help student to self-regulate their learning, motivation, and effort in the classroom? We illustrate that answers to these questions have changed over time and that changing conceptualizations of the self-regulation process have influenced the assessment tools that were used. We also point to changing classroom conditions as a factor that has affected the assessment of self-regulation. Finally, we formulate some questions that need to be tackled in research on self-regulation and introduce the articles and commentaries in the special issue that provide some cutting-edge work on the use of assessment to register self-regulation over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A conceptual framework for assessing student motivation and self-regulated learning in the college classroom is presented. The framework is based on a self-regulatory (SRL) perspective on student motivation and learning in contrast to a student approaches to learning (SAL) perspective. The differences between SRL and SAL approaches are discussed, as are the implications of the SRL conceptual framework for developing instruments to assess college student motivation and learning. The conceptual framework may be useful in guiding future research on college student motivation and learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]