Introduction
Introduction
Tentative Dissertation Title
THE EFFECTS OF SELF-REGULATION STRATEGY USE ON STUDENT GROUP PROCESS, ATTITUDES, ACHIEVEMENT IN THE COMPUTER-SUPPORTED COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
by Jy Wana Daphne Lin Hsiao
Introduction
An important goal of education is to teach students to be self-learners and independent thinkers. Research in several disciplines indicates that proficient learners are aware of their own cognition and know what and when to use strategies to enhance their own learning (Schmitt and Newby, 1986). Studies on the differences between experts and novices also confirm that a significant difference between experts and novices is their use of self-regulation strategies (Glaser, 1976). Experts tend to plan alternatives before action, and monitor and engage in strategic behaviors more than novices (Paris and Myers, 1981). Cognitive scientists M. Scardamalia and C. Bereiter advocate (1989, 1991, 1992, 1994) a Computer-Supported Intentional Learning Environment (CSILE) model. This learning model comes from research on intentional learning, information discourse and knowledge building. Intentional learning is characterized by individuals who are self-regulatedly and actively participating in learning process, with the belief that knowledge is an evolving entity. Intentional learners are goal-directed, approach learning with a plan and utilize strategies to solve problems at hand. Knowledge building is characterized as an open decentralized system with focus on collective knowledge. Scardamalia and Bereiter further explain that technology by itself cannot bring about the transformation of schools into knowledge-building communities. Teaching strategies can make a great difference in students' collaborative works in knowledge-building communities (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994 in press). These findings have impact for instructional design models. Instruction is heightened through the integration of metacognition strategies. The results on the learners will be positive in terms of motivation and performance.
Research on cooperative learning has a long-standing tradition. Recently, cooperative learning is being re-emphasized but in a computer mediated environment, that is the field of Computer Supported Cooperative Learning (CSCL). The cooperative aspect is magnified by providing computer supported tools that facilitate students solving the problems. Computer systems are viewed as partners or the cognitive tools that stimulate learners to make maximum use of their cognitive potential (Scardamalia et al., 1989). This is unlike most of software designs which try to off-load cognition from users and make the software as intelligent as possible. Educational programs, however, focus on developing the intelligence of the learners. Kintsch (1991), based on Vygotsky's (1978) notion of "Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)" launched the idea of "unintelligent tutoring." A tutor should not provide the intelligent guidance, instead it should let students do the monitoring and planning for their learning. It should only provide temporary support for students to allow them to perform just beyond their current level of ability, and gradually fade out the support. In line with these new concepts of computer-based learning, there is a clear shift toward designing a system that is less tutoring but more coaching. A system that allows students to manage and control their own learning, and a system that integrates tools and strategies in computer-supported environment (De Corte et al., 1992).
Distributed cognition, a new school of thought that explains the cooperation between human and machine, was formulated through the collaboration of David Perkins, Roy Pea, and Gavriel Salomon (1993). They imply the notion that knowledge is not an independent phenomenon, but that it is distributed in our head, in the heads of others, and in the environment. Distributed cognition is viewed as a system that involves both individual and her surroundings, a new unit of analysis. Applying to the computer supported cooperative learning environment, new technology is not just an added-on to the existing environment, it blends with the environment as part of teaching-learning process. This kind of environment aims at eliciting knowledge construction process, as well as promoting interaction and cooperative learning among peers, tools, and environment.
The purpose of building a computer supported cooperative learning system is not about replacing human interaction with technology. The system is about using the technology to minimize the information process losses during human face-to-face interaction, and it is about helping humans learn or do things better than they could before. Cooperative learning is not a new field, but computer supported learning is. In a related new field, there are research topics worth exploring and analyzing. A series of CSILE research conducted by Scardamalia, Bereiter and their colleagues, contributed greatly to the current understanding of the effectiveness of cooperative learning in network-based environment. However, there exits a major flaw in CSILE studies, that is the lack of a valid and reliable instrument (Shell et al., 1996). Shell et al. (1996) develops a "Student Perceptions of Classroom Knowledge-Building (SPOCK)" instrument and tests on CSCL environment. This instrument is part of Project CIRCLE, directed by Dr. Paul Resta. A collaborative project between The University of Texas at Austin College of Education and two central Texas high schools. Four aspects of students' perceptions of knowledge building and intentional learning behaviors are measured by this instrument: knowledge building, question asking, lack of initiative, and self-regulation. The results show that self-regulation, question asking and perceptions of cooperative learning are positively related to achievement and knowledge-building. They further identify that self-regulation strategies can be used either in cognitive or constructive approach learning environments.
As an instructional technologist, I constantly asked myself what can we (instructional technologists) do to help people of all ages to learn more effectively. As we know technology is just a tool, but it certainly can be an effective one if we can promote learning on the part of the learner. We should thus focus on assessing the needs of the learners; and utilizing technology to advance learners to higher-order thinking. As research evidence indicates the strategy used is what makes difference between a poor learner and a good learner. Identifying and promoting the strategies used are in the hands of researchers and technologists. An idea instructional technologist should know what cognitive strategies to use, in which content area, and when to introduce in the content. She should use these strategies in at least three ways: 1. use strategies to convey content, or activate internal processing necessary for learning, 2. activate learners' own strategies, 3. teach strategies along with the content (Rosenshine, 1995). However, learning is a complex phenomenon, and new learning situations occur all the time. Often, new and more effective strategies may be developed in a new learning situation, particularly in computer-mediated environment. Researchers are responsible not only to find out what kind of strategies are being developed and adopted in the new learning environments, but also to find out the best use of these strategies in design learning environment that promotes learning.
I believe that learning theories are the foundation of instructional system design. The future of instructional system design will be based on how solid the foundations are in theory and research. Thus, I would like to advocate that traditional systematic design of instruction should be extended to incorporate strategies usage: knowing what strategies to use (declarative knowledge), how to use it (procedure knowledge), and when and why (conditional knowledge) it is appropriate to introduce to learners. Furthermore, learners need to learn task-relevant strategies for planning, monitoring, and revising. In other words, learners need to develop metacognitive awareness. That is learners need to be aware of their mental processes and strategies required for the performance of any cognitive endeavor.
Another important factor that will affect learning is environment. Various theories, namely, Vygotsky's social cognition (1978), cognitive apprenticeship (Collins et al, 1989), situated learning (Lave and Wenger, 1991), and everyday cognition (Lave,1988) have all stressed the importance of social interaction to learning. Pea (1993) and other contemporary researchers advocate that humans plus computers can achieve cognition advancement that is not achievable alone. The available research shows that authentic and meaningful classroom activities that are relevant to real-life situation are likely to engender students' cognitive acquisition and conceptual change (transfer). Scaffolding*, multiple perspective, modeling, and teaching appropriate strategies are believed to have positive impact on increasing students' efficacy. Less-able learners can be benefit from reciprocal teaching through the process of modeling, guiding, and cooperative learning.
Background
Research from a variety of perspectives has attempted to discovery the factors which account for the effectiveness of academic learning. Self-regulation learning is one of the most prominent areas aimed at enhancing student learning. McCrindle and Christensen (1995) propose an effective learning model, which includes conception of learning, metacognition, and cognitive strategies to explain effective learning. I plan to base my research on their model and modify it as follow.
The literature indicates that effective learning is an active and dynamic process, depending on a person's beliefs and motivation about learning, self-regulation and management of cognitive processes, and involvement of the learning process. Essentially, effective learning has to do with all aspects of self-regulated learning (skill, will, and executive control). Schunk (1991) defines self-regulated learning as the process whereby an individual learner activates and sustains behavior and cognition systematically orientated toward the attainment of learning goals. Zimmerman (1989) states that students can be identified as self-regulated to the degree that they are motivationally, metacognitively, and behaviorally active participants in their own learning process. Social cognitive theory views self-regulation as comprising self-observation, self-judgment, and self-reaction (Bandura, 1986). In information processing theory, self-regulation is perceived as somewhat analogous as metacognition. The basic unit of self-regulation is a problem solving agent, in which the problem is to reach the goal, to apply appropriate strategies to monitor each step, and to ensure the goal attainment.
By definition, Self-regulated learning is assumed to be nonsocial and an internal process. Can self-regulated strategies facilitate students learning collaboratively in a group setting? The answer is "yes." Social learning theories demonstrate that self-observation and self-reinforcement (self-regulated strategies) can be acquired through observing models (Bandura, 1986). The results of Zimmerman and Pon's (1986) study also show that high achieving students relied significant social sources of assistance (teachers, peers, and adults) than lower achieving students to accomplish academic tasks. Their study reveals that a student's use of self-regulated learning strategies yields a substantial increase in academic achievement. Paris and Ayres (1994) identify seven characteristics of self-regulation learning. Collaboration, learner-controlled learning, construction of meaning, the consequences of authentic classroom activities, and intrinsic motivation are critical aspects of self-regulated learning. These features are highly emphasized in collaborative learning as well.
Computer supported collaborative learning is a related new field, which has grown out of wider research into computer-supported collaborative work (CSCW) and collaborative learning. CSCW is defined as a computer-based network system that supports group work in a common task and provides a shared interface for groups to work with (Ellis et al. 1991). Collaborative learning is defined as groups working together for a common purpose (Resta, 1995). The differences between CSCW and CSCL are that CSCW tends to focus on communication techniques themselves, CSCL focuses on what is being communicated; and CSCW is used mainly in the business setting, CSCL is used in the educational setting. Henri (1991) identifies five dimensions of learning in this computer mediated environment, self-regulation learning is one of them. Koschmann (1993, 1994) claims that theoretically, intentional learning (self-regulated approach learning) and knowledge construction are believed to be facilitated in computer supported collaborative learning environments. I would like to extend his claim and advocate that self-regulation strategies and CSCL have a mutually benefitial relationship. That is, self-regulatory strategy adoption can foster effective learning in CSCL environments. Perkins (1993) claims that in a complex group problem solving situation, learners do not automatically know how to handle distributed executive control, for examples, which problems should be solved first, whether they are on the right track, what strategies to use, and when and how to use the strategies. In traditional teacher-led education, teachers and the school typically maintain executive control functions, students are not prepared to make decisions on what problems to solve, in what order. In computer supported collaborative learning environments, student-centered curriculum is promoted, students are expected to make executive decisions, self-regulated abilities become needed skills. Salomon based on Bereiter and Scardamalia's (1987) "psychology of composition writing." Salomon is currently conducting an experimental study that provides continuous on-line metacognitive guidance during students' writing process. He predicts that students may move from "knowledge telling" to "knowledge transforming," and by coping with a computer, they are expected to become better writers. Furthermore, the metacognitive strategies may eventually become internalized, so that individuals can be independent of the tools. Perkins (1993) indicates that investing the learners with needed self-regulated strategies is an essential but neglected educational research issue. Thus the proposed dissertation study will investigate this emerging research agenda and examine the roles that self-regulated strategies play in the CSCL environments.
Statement of the Problem
What effects will the use of self-regulated learning strategies have on students' group works in either the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) or the Face-to-Face (F-F) environments?
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of self-regulated strategy use on a student's performance and attitudes toward working in groups in either the computer supported group learning or the face-to-face environments. Building on research on self-regulated learning, self regulated learning is identified as skill, will, and executive control. In particular, the study will focus on use self-regulated cognitive strategies within computer supported collaborative learning environments. Three objectives are proposed for the study:
¥ To identify the self-regulated strategies that are adopted by individuals working in group projects.
¥ To examine underlying differences in self-regulated strategies between groups working in CSCL environments and F-F environments.
¥ To investigate how self-regulatory characteristics of individuals will influence each other within group settings (CSCL vs. F-F).
Research Questions
There are five research questions that need to be resolved:
¥ What kinds of self-regulated strategies are used by high school students (or college students) in performing learning tasks in groups in the computer supported collaborative learning(CSCL) and the Face-to-Face (F-F) environments?
¥ Are there any differences in terms of strategy use between working in the CSCL and the F-F environments?
¥ Are they any changes in using self-regulated strategies between group members in the CSCL and the F-F environments? In other words, can an individual improve or gain this kind of strategic knowledge while working in group projects either in the CSCL or the F-F environments?
¥ What are the relationships between self-regulated strategy use and their performance?
¥ What are the students' attitudes toward working in the CSCL and F-F environments?
¥ What types of students (i.e., high vs. low self-regulated learners, prefer communication styles, experience with computer, knowledge of subject matter, and gender) will benefit most in the environments,CSCL and F-F?
Importance of the Study
The importance of the study is twofold. First, this study is an attempt to advance our understanding of a related new field, the field of computer-supported collaborative learning(CSCL), from a theoretical perspective. The present study focuses on developing an increased understanding of self-regulated strategies in computer supported collaborative learning environments. Self-regulated learning strategies have been identified as important elements in collaborative learning settings. However, very little is known about individual strategy use in non-computer supported environments nevertheless in CSCL environments. Ridley (1992) suggests future research should focus not only on the self-regulatory characteristics of individual students, but should also focus on the self-regulatory characteristics of the teacher, groups of students, and teacher alternative (i.e., computer-supported tools), with particular emphasis on how the self-regulatory characteristics of these entities influence each other within classroom. The proposed study will extend our understanding of the effects of computer-supported collaborative learning environments on individual self-regulatory strategy use.
Second, this study will provide information concerning the underlying nature of self-regulated strategies in computer supported collaborative learning and Face-to-Face environments. With an attempt that by examining and evaluating current educational practice, the identifying opportunities can be integrated for technological enhancement. That is, based on the data obtained in this study, educational technologists can further incorporate these identified students' self-regulated strategies into computer- supported systems to scaffold and guide individuals in complex group problem solving tasks.
Defining Terms:
Distributed Cognition: Intelligence is not a quality of the mind alone, but a product of the relation between mental structures and the tools of the intellect provided by culture (Pea, 1985). http://el.www.media.mit.edu/groups/el/Papers/mres/Distrib-Construc/Distrib-Construc.html
Effects with technology: Emphasizes human plus computers can achieve in synergy, expected to achieve more than anyone do it alone (Salomon, Perkins, & Globerson, 1991). http://wwwcscl95.indiana.edu/cscl95/outlook/62_Salomon.html.
Effects of technology: Studies how the learners are changed by experiencing technology, in other word, how learning occurs (Salomon, Perkins, & Globerson, 1991). http://wwwcscl95.indiana.edu/cscl95/outlook/62_Salomon.html.
Self-Regulated Learning (SRL): The process whereby learners personally activate and sustain behaviors and cognition systematically oriented toward the attainment of learning goals (Schunk, 1991, Learning Theories). Self-regulated learning strategy, Zimmerman and Pons (1986) defines it as actions directed at acquiring information or skill that involve agency, purpose (goals), and instrumentality self-perceptions by learner.
Self-regulated Learner: Individual who is willing to accept responsibility for and take charge of her/his own learning. In other word, s/he activates and directs learning activities systematically oriented toward the attainment of her/his personal learning goals.
Executive Control: Higher-order skills designated to coordinate and orchestrate one's self-regulatory processes.
Scaffolding: Scaffolding is an educational term which refers to providing support for learners while they are engaged in activities that are normal out of their reach. When scaffolding the task, we should be aware of the growth of the learners. To address the diversity of learners, we should provide support to accommodate different learning styles and levels of expertise (Soloway, et al., 1995).
Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD): A zone of proximal development defines as the region of activity that learners can navigate with the help of other persons and artifacts (Vygotsky,1978). It embodies a concept of readiness to learn that emphasizes upper levels of competence. The upper boundaries are constantly changing as the learners' continuous improvement and increasing their competence levels. http://forum.swarthmore.edu/mathed/vygotsky.html
Computer Supported Cooperative Learning (CSCL): A computer-based network system that provides a shared space for groups working together for a common goal. The purpose of CSCL system is to elicit learning on the part of the learners. It is different from computer supported collaborative work (CSCW), in that it is used mainly in education setting than business setting and it focuses mainly in what is being communicated instead of the technologies themselves.
Computer-Supported Intentional Learning Environment (CSILE): An educational knowledge media system, developed by Scardamalia & Bereiter at Ontario Institute. This system is designed to support students in purposeful and intentional learning, in a local network, where students can select different communication modes (text, video, audio, animation) to enter into and retrieve information, or comments on the common database. This knowledge-based database is a collective thoughts of students. http://www.ed.gov/pubs/EdReformStudies/EdTech/csile.html
Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC): The process which people communicate, exchange ideas through networked telecommunications systems. This networked systems can facilitate encoding, transmitting, and decoding information. Studies of CMC can view this process from various perspectives, people, technology, processes, or effects. Some of these interdisciplinary theoretical perspectives include information system studies, human-computer interaction, computer sciences, social, cognitive psychology, media studies, cultural and political perspectives. (John December (john@december.com)/ 08 Oct. 1995).
Computer Supported Cooperative Work(CSCW): Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW) systems are defined as "computer-based systems that support groups of people engaged in a common task (goal) and that provide an interface to a shared environment." (Ellis et al., 1991). It emphasizes on computer system that enhance interpersonal communication (e.g., e-mail, remote conferencing, shared white-boards). CSCW research tends to focus on communication techniques themselves instead of what is being communicated.
By Jy wana Daphne Lin Hsiao
Please send comments or suggestions to
jywana@mail.utexas.edu