Learning Strategies Assessed by Journal Writing: Prediction of Learning Outcomes by Quantity, Quality, and Combinations of Learning Strategies

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 104, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 452-468

  Glogger, Inga ^a   Schwonke, Rolf ^a   Holzäpfel, Lars ^a   Nückles, Matthias ^a   Renkl, Alexander ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Formative assessment; Journal writing; Quality of learning strategies; Self regulated learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874390035     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0026683     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Artelt, C. (2000). Wie prädiktiv sind retrospektive Selbstberichte über den Gebrauch von Lernstrategien für strategisches Lernen? [How predictive are self-reported learning strategies for their actual use?] Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie/German Journal of Educational Psychology, 14, 72-84.
2. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Hurley, M. M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004). The effects of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74, 29-58. doi:10.3102/00346543074001029
3. Berthold, K., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17, 564-577. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.007
4. Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York, NY: Academic Press.
5. Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology, 54, 199-231. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00205.x
6. Borasi, R., & Rose, B. J. (1989). Journal writing and mathematics instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20, 347-365. doi:10.1007/ BF00315606
7. Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2003). A longitudinal think-aloud study of spontaneous strategic processing during the reading of multiple expository texts. Reading and Writing, 16, 195-218. doi:10.1023/A: 1022895207490
8. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182. doi: 10.1016/0364-0213(89)90002-5
9. Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M.-H., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Erlbaum.
11. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Connolly, P., & Vilardi, T. (Eds.). (1989). Writing to learn mathematics and science. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
13. Coté, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, F. U. (1998). Student making sense of informational text: Relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25, 1-53. doi:10.1080/01638539809545019
14. De Jong, T., Van Gog, T., Jenks, K., Manlove, S., Van Hell, J. G., Jolles, J.,... Boschloo, A. (2009). Explorations in learning and the brain: On the potential of cognitive neuroscience for educational science. New York, NY: Springer.
15. Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83-87. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.01235
16. Foltz, P. W., Kintsch, W., & Landauer, T. K. (1998). The measurement of textual coherence with latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 285-307. doi:10.1080/01638539809545029
17. Glogger, I., Kappich, J., Schwonke, R., Holzäpfel, L., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2010). Inventing prepares learning not only cognitively, but also motivationally. In M. Hopp & F. Wagner (Eds.), Instructional design for motivated and competent learning in a digital world- Proceedings of the EARLI SIG 6/7 (pp. 41-43). Ulm, Germany: University of Ulm.
18. Glogger, I., Schwonke, R., Holzäpfel, L., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2009). Activation of learning strategies in writing learning journals: The specificity of prompts matters. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie/ German Journal of Educational Psychology, 23, 95-104.
19. Hox, J. J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Hübner, S., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2010). Writing learning journals: Instructional support to overcome learning-strategy deficits. Learning and Instruction, 20, 18-29. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.12.001
21. Leutner, D., Leopold, C., & den Elzen-Rump, V. (2007). Self-regulated learning with a text-highlighting strategy: A training experiment. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 215, 174-182. doi: 10.1027/0044-3409.215.3.174
22. Magliano, J. P., & Millis, K. K. (2003). Assessing reading skill with a think-aloud procedure. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 251-283. doi: 10.1207/S1532690XCI2103_02
23. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1984). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 36- 55). Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish Academic Press.
24. Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text: The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 357-371. doi:10.1007/BF01463939
25. McCrindle, A., & Christensen, C. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performances. Learning and Instruction, 5, 167-185. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(95)00010-Z
26. McNamara, D. S. (Ed.). (2007). Reading comprehension strategies: Theory, interventions, and technologies. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Millis, K. K., Magliano, J. P., & Todaro, S. (2006). Measuring discourse-level processes with verbal protocols and latent semantic analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 251-283. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_2
28. Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., & Almond, R. G. (2003). On the structure of educational assessments. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives,1,3-67. doi:10.1207/S15366359MEA0101_02
29. Nelson, T., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1-25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30. Nückles, M., Hübner, S., & Renkl, A. (2009). Enhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols. Learning and Instruction, 19, 259-271. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.002
31. Nückles, M., Schwonke, R., Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2004). The use of public learning diaries in blended learning. Journal of Educational Media, 29, 49-66. doi:10.1080/1358165042000186271
32. Pellegrino, J. W. (2003). The challenge of knowing what students know. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 1, e7-e11. Retrieved from http://bearcenter.berkeley.edu/measurement/docs/Pellegrino_1_1.pdf
33. Perry, N. (1998). Young children's self-regulated learning and contexts that support it. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 715-729. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.90.4.715
34. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
35. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R., & Boyle, R. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63(2), 167-199. doi:10.2307/1170472
36. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. Pressley, M., Johnson, C. J., Symons, S., McGoldrick, J. A., & Kurita, J. A. (1989). Strategies that improve children's memory and comprehension of text. Elementary School Journal, 90, 3-32. doi:10.1086/461599
38. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., & Congdon, R. (2008). Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling (Version 6.06) [Computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
40. Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21, 1-29. doi:10.1016/S03640213(99)80017-2
41. Sadler, R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education, 5, 77-84. doi:10.1080/0969595980050104
42. Schmitz, B., & Wiese, B. S. (2006). New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: Time series analyses of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 64-96. doi:10.1016/ j.cedpsych.2005.02.002
43. Schwamborn, A., Mayer, R. E., Thillmann, H., Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2010). Drawing as a generative activity and drawing as a prognostic activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 872-879. doi: 10.1037/a0019640
44. Schwonke, R., Hauser, S., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2006). Enhancing computer-supported writing of learning protocols by adaptive prompts. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 77-92. doi:10.1016/j.chb. 2005.01.002
45. Scruggs, T. E., & Cohn, S. J. (1983). Learning characteristics of verbally gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 27, 169-172. doi:10.1177/001698628302700405
46. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14. doi:10.3102/0013189X029007004
47. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189. doi:10.3102/0034654307313795
48. Slotte, V., Lonka, K., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2001). Study-strategy use in learning from text. Does gender make any difference? Instructional Science, 29, 255-272. doi:10.1023/A:1017574300304
49. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1994). Modeled variance in two-level models. Sociological Methods and Research, 22, 342-363. doi:10.1177/0049124194022003004
50. Spinath, B., Stiensmeier-Pelster, J., Schöne, C., & Dickhäuser, O. (2002). Skalen zur Erfassung der Lernund Leistungsmotivation (SELLMO) [Scales for the Assessment of Learning and Performance Motivation]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
51. Spörer, N., & Brunstein, J. C. (2006). Erfassung selbstregulierten Lernens mit Selbstberichtsverfahren: Ein überblick zum Stand der Forschung [Assessing self-regulated learning with self-report measures: Review the state of research]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie/German Journal of Educational Psychology, 20, 147-160. doi:10.1024/10100652.20.3.147
52. Stern, E. (1997). Mathematik [Mathematics]. In F. Weinert (Ed.), Psychologie des Unterrichts und der Schule, Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, Themenbereich D, Praxisgebiete, I, Pädagogische Psychologie, B.3 [Psychology of classroom instruction and of school, encyclopedia of psychology, content area D, areas of practice, 1, educational psychology, Vol. 3] (pp. 397-426). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
53. Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2003). Students' strategic use of multiple sources during expository text reading: A longitudinal think-aloud study. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 113-147. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2102_01
54. Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In C. M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research in teaching (pp. 315-327). New York, NY: Macmillan.
55. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of selfregulation (pp. 531-566). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
56. Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical backgrounds, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 166-183. doi: 10.3102/0002831207312909
57. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to selfefficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51-59. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.51