Effects of planning on task load, knowledge, and tool preference: A comparison of two tools

Interactive Learning Environments

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 141-153

  Bonestroo, Wilco J ^a   de Jong, Ton ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

active learning; cognitive tools; graphical overviews; learning strategies; self regulated learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859491356     PISSN: 10494820     EISSN: 17445191     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10494820.2010.484253     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D. and Hanesian, H. 1978. Educational psychology: A cognitive view, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
2. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I. and Cromley, J. G. 2008. Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia?. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56: 45-72.
3. Bell, B. S. and Kozlowski, S. W.J. 2002. Adaptive guidance: Enhancing self-regulation, knowledge, and performance in technology-based training. Personnel Psychology, 55: 267-306.
4. Bowker, A. H. 1948. A test for symmetry in contingency tables. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 43: 572-574.
5. Bransford, J. D. 2000. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
6. Brusilovsky, P. 2001. Adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 11: 87-110.
7. Chen, C. and Rada, R. 1996. Interacting with hypertext: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Human-Computer Interactions, 11: 125-156.
8. Coffey, J. 2005. Leo: A concept map based course visualization tool for instructors and students. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3426: 285-301.
9. de Jong, T. and van der Hulst, A. 2002. The effects of graphical overviews on knowledge acquisition in hypertext. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18: 219-231.
10. Dicheva, D. and Dichev, C. 2006. TM4L: Creating and browsing educational topic maps. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37: 391-404.
11. Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A. and Loughlin, S. M. 2008. Focusing the conceptual lens on metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20: 391-409.
12. Ellis, H. J.C. 2007. An assessment of a self-directed learning approach in a graduate web application design and development course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 50: 55-60.
13. Greiner, J. M. and Karoly, P. 1976. Effects of self-control training on study activity and academic performance: An analysis of self-monitoring, self-reward, and systematic-planning components. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 23: 495-502.
14. Hart, S. G. and Staveland, L. E. 1988. "Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research". In Human mental workload, Edited by: Hancock, P. A. and Meshkati, N. 139-183. Amsterdam: North Holland Press.
15. Hattie, J. 2009. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement, New York, NY: Routledge.
16. Hubscher, R. What's in a prerequisite. Paper presented at the International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT).
17. Jonassen, D. H. 2000. Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48: 63-86.
18. Kennedy, G., Petrovic, T., Judd, T., Lawrence, J., Dodds, A.Delbridge, L. The personal learning planner: A software support tool for self directed learning. Paper presented at the Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE). 2000.
19. Loyens, S. M.M., Magda, J. and Rikers, R. M.J.P. 2008. Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and its relationships with self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20: 411-427.
20. Mayer, R. E. 2004. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59: 14-19.
21. McDonald, S. and Stevenson, R. J. 1998. Navigation in hyperspace: An evaluation of the effects of navigational tools and subject matter expertise on browsing and information retrieval in hypertext. Interacting with Computers, 10: 129-142.
22. Nesbit, J. C. and Adesope, O. O. 2006. Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76: 413-448.
23. Novak, J. D. and Cañas, A. J. 2006. The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them, Pensacola, FL: Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition (IHMC).
24. O'Donnell, A. M., Dansereau, D. F. and Hall, R. H. 2002. Knowledge maps as scaffolds for cognitive processing. Educational Psychology Review, 14: 71-86.
25. Puustinen, M. and Pulkkinnen, L. 2001. Models of self-regulated learning: A review. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 45: 269-286.
26. Quillian, M. R. 1967. Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behavioral Science, 12: 410-430.
27. Rosenthal, R. 1991. Meta-analytic procedures for social research, London: Sage.
28. Scheiter, K. and Gerjets, P. 2007. Learner control in hypermedia environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19: 285-307.
29. Shapiro, A. 2008. Hypermedia design as learner scaffolding. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56: 29-44.
30. Vekiri, I. 2002. What is the value of graphical displays in learning?. Educational Psychology Review, 14: 261-312.
31. Winn, W. 1991. Learning from maps and diagrams. Educational Psychology Review, 3: 211-247.
32. Winters, F. I., Greene, J. A. and Costich, C. M. 2008. Self-regulation of learning within computer-based learning environments: A critical analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 20: 429-444.
33. Zimmerman, B. J. 2002. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41: 64-70.
34. Zimmerman, B. J. 2008. Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45: 166-183.