Exploring the fluctuation of motivation and use of self-regulatory processes during learning with hypermedia

Instructional Science

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 203-231

  Moos, Daniel C ^a   Azevedo, Roger ^b  

^a GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS COLLEGE   (United States)

^b University of Memphis   (United States)

Author keywords

Hypermedia; Mixed methods; Motivation; Scaffold; Science; Self regulated learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 42149130869     PISSN: 00204277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11251-007-9028-3     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., & Koedinger, K. R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 167-207.
2. Azevedo, R. (2005). Computer environment as metacogntive tools for enhancing learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 193-197.
3. Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students' learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 523-535.
4. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004a). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students' ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344-370.
5. Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J. T., & Seibert, D. (2004b). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students' conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1), 87-111.
6. Azevedo, R., Winters, F. I., & Moos, D. C. (2004c). Can students collaboratively use hypermedia to lean about science? The dynamics of self- and other-regulatory processes in an ecology classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 215-245.
7. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., Winters, F. I., Moos, D. C., & Greene, J. A. (2005). Adaptive human scaffolding facilitates adolescents' self-regulated learning with hypermedia. Instructional Science, 33, 381-412.
8. Bandura, A. (1994). Regulative function of perceived self-efficacy. In M. G. Rumsey, C. B. Walker, & J. H. Harris (Eds.) Personnel selection and classification (pp. 261-271). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Bergin, D. A., Ford, M. E., & Hess, R. D. (1993). Patterns of motivation and social behavior associated with microcomputer use of young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 272-281.
10. Boekaerts, M. (2002). The on-line motivation questionnaire: A self-report instrument to assess students' context sensitivity. New Directions in Measures and Methods, 12, 77-120.
11. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.) (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
12. Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining: The dual processes of generating inference and repairing mental models. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology: Educational design and cognitive science (Vol. 5, pp. 161-238). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 161-199.
14. Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanation improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
15. Derry S., & Lajoie S. (Eds.) (1993). Computers as cognitive tools. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Protocol analysis and expert thought: Concurrent verbalizations of thinking during experts' performance on representative tasks. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, R. R. Hoffman, & P. J. Feltovich (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 223-242). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
17. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1994). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Gerjets, P., & Scheiter, K. (2003). Goal configurations and processing strategies as moderators between instructional design and cognitive load: Evidence from hypertext-based instruction. Edcuational Psychologist, 38(1), 33-41.
19. Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & VanLehn, K. (2005). Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through Point&Query, AutoTutor, and iStart. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 225-234.
20. Greene, S., & Ackerman, J. M. (1995). Expanding the constructivist metaphor: A rhetorical perspective on literacy research and practice. Review of Educational Research, 65, 383-420.
21. Greene, B., & Land, S. (2000). A qualitative analysis of scaffolding use in resource-based learning environments involving the world wide web. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(2), 151-179.
22. Hadwin, A. F., Boutara, L., & Knoetze, T. (2004). Cross-case study of self-regulated learning as a series of events. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(4-6), 365-417.
23. Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundation, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 115-140). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Hartley, J., & Sydes, M. (1997). Are structured abstracts easier to read than traditional ones? Journal of Research in Reading, 20(2), 122-136.
25. Hill, J. R., & Hannafin, M. (2001). Teaching and learning in digital environments: The resurgence of resource-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 37-52.
26. Holladay, C. L., & Quiñones, M. A. (2003). Practice variability and transfer of training: The role of self-efficacy generality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(6), 1094-1103.
27. Jacobson, M., & Archodidou, A. (2000). The design of hypermedia tools for learning: Fostering conceptual change and transfer of complex scientific knowledge. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 145-199.
28. Jonassen, D., Hartley, J., & Trueman, M. (1986). The effects of learner-generated versus text-provided headings on immediate and delayed recall and comprehension: An exploratory study. Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research & Application, 5(3), 139-150.
29. Jonassen, D., & Reeves, T. (1996). Learning with Technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 694-719). NY: Macmillan.
30. Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. G. (2005). The management of cognitive load during complex cognitive skill acquisition by means of computer-simulated problem solving. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(1), 71-85.
31. Koedinger, K. R. (2001). Cognitive tutors as modeling tools and instructional models. In K. D.Forbus, & P. J. Feltovich (Eds.). Smart machines in education: The coming revolution in educational technology (pp. 145-167). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
32. Lajoie S. P. (Ed.) (2000). Computers as cognitive tools: No more walls, Vol. II. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Lajoie, S. P. (2005). Cognitive tools for the mind: The promises of technology-cognitive amplifiers or bionic prosthetics? In R. Sternberg, & D. D. Preiss (Eds.), Intelligence and technology: The impact of tools on the nature and development of human abilities. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Lajoie, S. P., & Azevedo, R. (2006). Teaching and learning in technology-rich environments. In P. Alexander, & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
35. Land, S., & Greene, B. (2000). Project-based learning with the World Wide Web: A qualitative study of resource integration. Educational Technology Research & Development, 48(3), 61-78.
36. Lepper, M. R., Woolverton, M., Mumme, D. L., & Gutner, J. L. (1993). Motivational techniques of expert human tutors: Lessons for the design of computer-based tutors. In S. P. Lajoie, & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 75-105). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. Lepper, M., & Wolverton, M. (2004). The wisdom of practice: Lessons learned from the study of highly effective tutors. In J. Aranson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 135-158). New York, NY: Academic Press.
38. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (2000). Structure mapping in the comparison process. American Journal of Psychology, 113(4), 501-538.
39. Martin, V. L., & Pressley, M. (1991). Elaborative-interrogation effects depend on nature of question. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 113-119.
40. Mayer, R. E. (1994). Visual aids to knowledge construction: Building mental representations from pictures and words. In W. Schnotz, & R. W. Kulhavy (Eds.), Comprehension of graphics (pp. 125-138). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
41. Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning environments: The case for evidence-based practice and issue-driven research. Educational Psychologist, 40, 257-265.
42. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
43. McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Kambe, G. (2005). The effect of relevance instructions on reading time and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 88-102.
44. McDaniel, M. A., & Donnelly, C. M. (1996). Learning with analogy and elaborative interrogation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(3), 508-519.
45. Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2006). The role of goal structure in undergraduates' use of self-regulatory variables in two hypermedia learning tasks. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(1), 49-86.
46. Murphy, K. P., & Alexander, P. A. (2000). A motivated exploration of motivation terminology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 3-53.
47. Ozgungor, S., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Interactions among elaborative interrogation, knowledge, and interest in the process of constructing knowledge form text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 437-443.
48. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic domains. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.
49. Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 423-451.
50. Perry, N. E. (1998). Young children's self-regulated learning and contexts that support it. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 715-729.
51. Perry, N. E., VandeKamp, K. O., & Mercer, L. K. (2000). Investigating teacher-student interactions that foster self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 5-15.
52. Pintrich, P. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 452-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
53. Pintrich, P. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
54. Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1-12.
55. Seifert, T. L. (1993). Characteristics of ego- and task-orientated students: A comparison of two methodologies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 125-138.
56. Shapiro, A. (1999). The relevance of hierarchies to learning biology from hypertext. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(2), 215-243.
57. Shapiro, A. (2000). The effects of interactive overviews on the development of conceptual structure in novices learning from hypermedia. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(1), 57-78.
58. Sharp, J. G., Kuerbis, P., & Kelley, G. J. (2006). Children's ideas about the solar system and the chaos in learning sciences. Science Education, 90(1), 124-147.
59. Shute, V., & Psotka, J. (1996). Intelligent tutoring systems: Past, present, and future. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 570-600). NY: Macmillan.
60. Taylor, R. (1980). The computer in the school: Tutor, tool, tutee. NY: Teachers College Press.
61. White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (2005). A theoretical framework and approach for fostering metacognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 211-223.
62. Williams, M. (1996). Student control and instructional technologies. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 957-983). NY: Macmillan.
63. Willoughby, T., & Wood, E. (1994). Elaborative interrogation examined at encoding and retrieval. Learning and Instruction, 4(2), 139-149.
64. Winne, P. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In B. Zimmerman, & D. Schunk. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 153-189). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
65. Winne, P. H. (2005). Key issues in modeling and applying research on self-regulated learning. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 232-238.
66. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
67. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531-566). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
68. Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2003). Self-regulating studying by objectives for learning: Students' reports compared to a model. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(3), 259-276.
69. Wood, D., & Middleton, D. (1975). A study of assisted problem-solving. British Journal of Psychology, 66(2), 181-191.
70. Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89-102.
71. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 1-37). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
72. Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. Zimmerman, & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 1-37). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
73. Zimmerman, B., & Tsikalas, K. (2005). Computer-based learning environments (CBLEs) be used as self-regulatory tools to enhance learning? Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 267-271.