Note-taking within MetaTutor: interactions between an intelligent tutoring system and prior knowledge on note-taking and learning

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 62, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 507-528

  Trevors, Gregory ^a   Duffy, Melissa ^a   Azevedo, Roger ^b  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Hypermedia; Intelligent tutoring systems; Mixed method design; Note taking; Self regulated learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939883451     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-014-9343-8     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Azevedo, R. (2005). Computers as metacognitive tools for enhancing learning. Educational Psychologist,40, 193–197.
2. Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology,96, 523–535.
3. 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.
4. Azevedo, R., Feyzi-Behnagh, R., Duffy, M., Harley, J., & Trevors, G. (2012). Metacognition and self-regulated learning in student-centered learning environments. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments. NY: Routledge.
5. Azevedo, R., Greene, J. A., & Moos, D. C. (2007). The effect of a human agent’s external regulation upon college students’ hypermedia learning. Metacognition and Learning,2(2/3), 67–87.
6. 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, 87–111.
7. Azevedo, R., Harley, J., Trevors, G., Duffy, M., Feyzi-Behnagh, R., Bouchet, F., et al. (2013). Using trace data to examine the complex roles of cognitive, metacognitive, and emotional self-regulatory processes during learning with multi-agents systems. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 427–449). Amsterdam: Springer.
8. Azevedo, R., Johnson, A., Chauncey, A., & Burkett, C. (2010). Self-regulated learning with MetaTutor: Advancing the science of learning with MetaCognitive tools. In M. S. Khine & I. M. Saleh (Eds.), New science of learning: Computers, cognition, and collaboration in education (pp. 225–247). NY: Springer.
9. Azevedo, R., Johnson, A., Chauncey, A., & Graesser, A. (2011). Use of hypermedia to convey and assess self-regulated learning. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 102–121). NY: Routledge.
10. nded.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
11. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. G. (2008). Why is externally-regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educational Technology Research and Development,56, 45–72.
12. Azevedo, R., Witherspoon, A., Chauncey, A., Burkett, C., & Fike, A. (2009). MetaTutor: A MetaCognitive tool for enhancing self-regulated learning. In R. Pirrone, R. Azevedo, & G. Biswas (Eds.), Proceedings of the AAAI Fall Symposium on Cognitive and Metacognitive Educational Systems (pp. 14–19). Menlo Park, CA: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Press.
13. Bannert, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2013). Scaffolding through metacognitive prompts. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 171–186). Amsterdam: Springer.
14. Biswas, G., Jeong, H., Kinnebrew, J., Sulcer, B., & Roscoe, R. (2010). Measuring self-regulated learning skills through social interactions in a teachable agent environment. Research and Practice in Technology-Enhanced Learning,5, 123–152.
15. Bonner, J. M., & Holliday, W. G. (2006). How college science students engage in note-taking strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,43, 786–818.
16. Boyer, K., Phillips, R., Wallis, M., Vouk, M., & Lester, J. (2008). Balancing Cognitive and Motivational Scaffolding in Tutorial Dialogue. In B. Woolf, E. Aïmeur, R. Nkambou, & S. Lajoie (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems (Vol. 5091, pp. 239–249). Berlin, Heidelberg:Springer.
17. Bui, D. C., Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (2013). Note-taking with computers: Exploring alternative strategies for improved recall. Journal of Educational Psychology,105, 299–309.
18. Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences,6, 271–315.
19. Divesta, F. J., & Gray, S. G. (1972). Listening and notetaking. Journal of Educational Psychology,64, 278–287.
20. Entwistle, N. J. (2000). Approaches to studying and levels of understanding: The influences of teaching and assessment. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 15, pp. 156–218). New York: Agathon Press.
21. Entwistle, N. J., & Peterson, E. R. (2004). Conceptions of learning and knowledge in higher education: Relationships with study behaviour and influences of learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research,41, 407–428.
22. Faw, H. W., & Waller, T. G. (1976). Mathemagenic behaviors and efficiency in learning from prose materials: Review, critique, and recommendations. Review of Educational Research,46, 691–720.
23. Graesser, A. C., D’Mello, S., & Pearson, N. K. (2009). Metaknowledge in tutoring. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 361–382). Mahwah, NJ: Taylor & Francis.
24. Graesser, A. C., Jeon, M., & Dufty, D. (2008). Agent technologies designed to facilitate interactive knowledge construction. Discourse Processes,45, 298–322.
25. Graesser, A. C., & McNamara, D. (2010). Self-regulated learning in learning environments with pedagogical agents that interact in natural language. Educational Psychologist,45, 234–244.
26. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2009). A macro-level analysis of SRL processes and their relations to the acquisition of sophisticated mental models. Contemporary Educational Psychology,34, 18–29.
27. Greene, B. A., & Miller, R. B. (1996). Influences on course performance: Goals, perceived ability, and self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology,21, 181–192.
28. Greene, J. A., Moos, D. C., Azevedo, R., & Winters, F. I. (2008). Exploring differences between gifted and grade-level student’s use of self-regulatory learning processes with hypermedia. Computers and Education,50, 1069–1083.
29. Guthrie, J., & Anderson, E. (1999). Engagement in reading: Processes of motivated, strategic, knowledgeable, social readers. In J. Guthrie & D. Alvermann (Eds.), Engaged reading: Processes, practices, and policy implications (pp. 17–46). New York: Teachers College Press.
30. Heidig, S., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Do pedagogical agents make a difference to student motivation and learning? Educational Research Review,6, 27–54.
31. Jacobson, M. J., & Azevedo, R. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: Theoretical, empirical, and design issues. Educational Technology Research and Development,56(1), 1–3.
32. Kiewra, K. A. (1985). Investigating note taking and review: a depth of processing alternative. Educational Psychologist,20, 23–32.
33. Kiewra, K., & Benton, S. L. (1988). The relationship between information-processing ability and notetaking. Contemporary Educational Psychologist,13, 33–44.
34. Kinnebrew, J., Biswas, G., Sulcer, B., & Taylor, R. (2013). Investigating Self-Regulated Learning in Teachable Agent Environments. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies (Vol. 26, pp. 451–470). New York: Springer.
35. Lester, J., Mott, B., Robison, J., Rowe, J., & Shores, L. (2013). Supporting self-regulated science learning in narrative-centered learning environments. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies (Vol. 26, pp. 471–483). New York: Springer.
36. Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., & Simons, R. (2002). University student’s perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education,27, 27–52.
37. Moos, D. C. (2009). Note-taking while learning with hypermedia: Cognitive and motivational considerations. Computers in Human Behavior,25, 1120–1128.
38. Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2008). Self-regulated learning with hypermedia: The role of prior domain knowledge. Contemporary Educational Psychology,33, 270–298.
39. Ogle, D., & Blachowicz, C. L. Z. (2002). Beyond literature circles: Helping students comprehend informational text. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 259–274). New York: Guilford.
40. Opfermann, M., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Schmeck, A. (2013). Hypermedia and self-regulation: An interplay in both directions. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 129–141). Amsterdam: Springer.
41. Piolat, A., Olive, T., & Kellogg, R. T. (2005). Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology,19, 291–312.
42. Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn-of-the-century status report. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 11–27). New York: Guilford.
43. Pressley, M., & McCormick, C. (1995). Cognition, teaching, and assessment. New York: HarperCollins.
44. Ranellucci, J., Muis, K. R., Wang, X., Duffy, M., & Franco, G. M. (2012). To master or perform? Exploring relations between achievement goals and conceptual change learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology,83, 431–451.
45. Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,138, 353–387.
46. Shapiro, A. M. (2008). Hypermedia design as learner scaffolding. Educational Technology Research and Development,56, 29–44.
47. Simons, P. R. J. (1983). How we should control time on task – Or should we? Instructional Science,11, 357–372.
48. Techsmith. (2006). TechSmith Camtasia Studio 4.0 [Computer software]. Okemos, MI.
49. Thillmann, H., Gößling, J., Marschner, J., Wirth, J. & Leutner, D. (2013). Metacognitive knowledge about and metacognitive regulation of strategy use in self-regulated scientific discovery learning: New methods of assessment in computer-based learning environments. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 575–588). New York, NY: Springer.
50. Vacca, R. T., & Vacca, J. L. (2002). Content area reading: Literacy and learning across the curriculum. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
51. Van Meter, P., Yokoi, L., & Pressley, M. (1994). College student’s theory of note-taking derived from their perceptions of note-taking. Journal of Educational Psychology,86, 323–338.
52. Weiss, I. R. (2002). A national convocation on professional development for mathematics and science teachers, K–12.Washington, DC: Horizon Research.
53. Winne, P. H. (2011). A cognitive and metacognitive analysis of self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 15–32). New York: Routledge.
54. nded.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
55. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker & J. Dunlosky (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice: The educational psychology series. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
56. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (2008). The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 297–314). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
57. Witherspoon, A., Azevedo, R., & D’Mello, S. (2008). The dynamics of self-regulatory processes within self- and externally-regulated learning episodes during complex science learning with hypermedia. In B. P. Woolf, E. Aïmeur, R. Nkambou, & S. Lajoie (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 260–269). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.