Metacognitive instructional strategies: a study of e-learners self-regulation

1. Metacognitive instructional strategies: a study of e-learners self-regulation Liliana Cuesta Medina Lecturer-Researcher Department of Foreign Languages and Cultures Universidad de La Sabana Selected Plenary CALL conference “Motivation and Beyond” Antwerp, Belgium August 20, 2010

2. Overview • Background • Literature review • Methodology • Results • Conclusions The complete paper accompanying this plenary can be found in Cuesta, L (2010). (forthcoming). Self-regulation of online graduate learners through metacognitive instructional strategies.

3. Rationale • Behind “the study”. My own motivations... • Search for instructional models to use technology as a toolaccess,deliver knowledge • Strategies to foster learner autonomy (Palloff & Pratt, 2001; Salmon, 2002; Hauck, M. ,2005; Warschauer, 2006; Reinders and Lázaro, 2008).

4. Rationale • F2F and virtual scenarios. What to do? What to adjust? (Hampel & Stickler, 2005). • Where to go?: Warschauer (2004): new literacies, new genres, identities, pedagogies? • New tendencies: Virtual action learning (VAL) (Dickenson, Pedler, & Burgoyne, 2008, 2009), networked learning (Salmon, 2000), connectivism (Siemens, 2005), and virtual group working (McConnell, 2006).

5. This implies... • Learning by makinglearning by thinking. • Metacognition: John H. Flavell (1976), numerous disciplines: psychology, natural sciences, linguistics. (See Glaser, 1994; Martí, Pozo & Monereo, 1999; Hacker, Dunlosky & Greasser, 1998; Zimmerman, 1989; Mateos, 2001; Argüelles & Nagles, 2007; Campanario, Cuerva, Moya & Otero, 1997; Maturano, Soliveres & Macías, 2002; Oxford, 1990; O'Malley and Chamot, 1988; Chapelle, 2001; Rubin, 2001;Hampel, 2003; Hampel & Hauck, 2004).

6. Defining Metacognition Areas: Memory, attention, problem-solvingstrategies, languagelearning and learningitself. Flavell (1976)focused on defining metacognition as the domain and regulation that the individual has over his/her own cognition. He referred to metacognition on one hand, as "the knowledge concerning one's own cognitive processes and products or anything related to them" (p. 232).

7. Defining the term "Metacognition" is often simply defined as "thinking about thinking”. Metacognition refers to: higher order thinkingactive control over the cognitive processesplanning a learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating progress toward the completion of a task. (Livingston, 1997)

8. Once in history... Brown (1978) defined metacognition as "the deliberate conscious control of one's own cognitive activity” (p.35). In her later studies, (1981) she elaborated on the features of knowledge and regulation of metacognition, pointing out a major difference between expert and novice learners is the relative control they have over cognitive activity.

9. Metacognitionintervention?Scaffolding... Mateos (2001) argues that students should be led to gradual participation through growing competence levels until the instructor sees that they are able to build and progressively better control their own degree of autonomy; a process in which, according to Martí (1999), the activities regulated by the teacher and the gradual self-regulation of the student are modified.

10. Methods for metacognitive instruction according to the level of autonomy transferred to the learner (Mateos, 2001). Guided Practice Ratio of the activity´s control Shared by teachers and students Shared by group of students All by the learner All by the teacher Explicit Instruction Gradual transfer of control Cooperative Practice Independent Practice In the study, the intervention held during Weeks 1–8 used explicit instruction (cognitive modeling processes) and guided practice; Weeks 9-13 used guided, collaborative, and independent practice to implement selected metacognitive instructional strategies.

11. To highlight... The main responsibility for educators is to provide and scaffold guidance that enables students to assume control of their learning.

12. Metacognition+instruction+strategy=? For Martí (1999)metacognitive occurrences can be viewed from the perspective of the teacher and the student. Both may differ at some point; what is metacognitive for the teacher may not be so for the student. Modifications of activities are regulated by both teacher and learner (Martí, 1999), and the degree of involvement of each agent directly impacts learner performance. Metacognitive strategies: Chamot and O'Malley (1995):strategies that frames the thought or knowledge of the process of learning, Kuhn et al. (1988) refer to metacognitive strategies as skills; Wenden (1998) described them as the "general skills through which learners manage, direct, regulate, guide their learning” (p.519). Hauck “self-management strategies”.

13. So... Metacognitive instructional strategies are defined as the conscious processes (represented in actions)that allow teachers to model the learning activities systematically and influencestudents´ self-regulation. (Cuesta, 2009)

14. Self-regulation It includes knowledge of the task (the whats, whens and as hows of learning) as well as self-knowledge of personal skills, interests and attitudes. Self-regulated learning requires learners to have a solid knowledge of the requirements of the task, as well as of the personal qualities and strategies needed to develop the task (Schunk, 2004, p. 225).

15. Bandura´s self-regulation proposal Table 1. Subproccesses of self-regulation Source: Social foundations of thought and action, by Bandura, A. (1986).

16. Sub-process 1 Self-observation This is a stage similar to self-monitoring. Bandura (1986) considers two important criteria for self-monitoring: regularity and proximity. “Regularity means observing behaviour on a continual basis instead of intermittently=how often. Proximity means that behaviour is observed close in time of occurrence rather than long afterward”= how soon (Schunk, 2004, p. 67).

17. Sub-process 2 Self-judgment This refers to a comparison of present performance level with one´s goal. Self-judgments depend on the type of self-evaluative standards employed, the properties of the goal, and the importance of goal attainment and attributions (Schunk, 2004, p.124).

18. Sub-process 2 Schunk (1987) states that standards inform, motivate and enhance self-efficacy (understood as “the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations”(Bandura, 1995, p.2).

19. Sub-process 3 Self-reaction According to Bandura (1986), self-reactions to goal progress motivate behavior, and these reactions can be either positive or negative in nature.

20. Sub-process 3 • Self-motivating incentives may be tangible outcomes or self-evaluative reactions. • Tangible incentives are granted upon performanceattainment, and they “mobilize the effort to get things done”. E.g. recreational and relaxing free time activities (work breaks or new clothes). • The power of these two incentive systems (tangible and self-incentives) is determined partially by the degree of personal or external control that the individual may have.

21. What about VLE? Ávila and Bosco (2001), a virtual learning environment constitutes the physical space that favours the learning attainment through contents, experiences and pedagogic and communicational processes. Salmon (2000) and Hunter (2002) assert that in a virtual learning environment there is a mutual knowledge-building process taking place (p.96).

22. Methodology Participants • (N = 17) Students of second semester of the Master in English Teaching-Autonomous Learning Environments at the Universidad de La Sabana, Colombia. • Aged 25-35 years

23. Research question What is the effect of metacognitive instructional strategies in the process of self-regulation of learning of a group of graduate learners in a virtual learning environment?

24. Design • Qualitative, exploratory study • Action research • Data analysis followed a sequential exploratory design strategy and a concurrency triangulation strategy (Creswell, 2003).

25. Design Implementation and data collection lasted 13 weeks, with data emerging from 3028 messages posted in a Moodle™ platform, registered through observational protocols, surveys, and questionnaires for later coding.

26. Design For each of Bandura’s stages (1986), a specific method of instruction (derived from Mateos, 2001) was proposed and used along with a series of metacognitive strategies proposed by Cuesta (2009).

27. Matrix of the study (Cuesta, 2009) Table 2. Matrix of the study

28. Background course design Salmon (2000, 2002) 5 – Step model Applied in the VLECourse: Autonomy and Learning Environments(Core principles in Educational Technology applied to Language Teaching)

29. ANALYSIS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION ADDIE model Figure 2. ADDIE model

30. Keller ARCS model (1987) Figure 3. ARCS model

31. E-tivities Salmon (2000, 2002) Figure 4. Sample E-tivity in the course

32. Three basic steps... 1 2 3

33. Metacognitive instructional strategies (Cuesta, 2009) Sub-process 1: Self-Observation Directed Action (moderator)Qualitative Assessment (moderator)The Reflection Forum (all participants)Summaries (moderator+students)

34. Metacognitive instructional strategies (Cuesta, 2009) Sub-process 2: Self-judgement Self-comparison with absolute standards (set in the lesson) Using Checklist as a performance comparison standard Self-comparison performance with peer normative standards Self-comparison performance with moderator normative standards (post-feedback) General Abstraction Questioning strategies (higher order questioning: conceptsrelations (Biggs & Collins, 1982)

35. Checklist for Online Assessment Figure 5. Checklist for online performance

36. Metacognitive instructional strategies (Cuesta, 2009) Sub-process 2: Self-judgement Use of performance-based objectives Use of tangible motivators in moderator assessment (progress judgement): praising, future error-correction+ documentedreadings, encouragementtodevelop personal and professionalproducts.  Continuous moderator assessment

37. Metacognitive instructional strategies (Cuesta, 2009) Sub-process 3: Self-reaction Use of tangible motivators in moderator assessment (progress judgement): praising, suggestingfuture error-correction+ documentedreadings, encouragingsstodevelop personal and professionalproducts.  Time extensions

38. Results Self-observation stage: Self-monitoring leads to self-efficacy Explicit instruction provided through moderators’ directed actions influenced progress and achievement throughout the study. With regards to the criteria of regularity and proximity, the study showed that most participants visited the learning platform to evaluate their performance within 24–48 hours (proximity)after a given task set in the Course Forums. Participants read own+peer feedback. This seems to confirm that "[...] the immediate observation provides continuous information and therefore the best chance of self-assessing performance is to evaluate it while it is still being produced [...]” (Bandura, 1986, p. 363).

39. Results • Reasons to monitor their performance: 1. professional development immediate opportunities 2. indicators to self-motivate and self-commit 3. indicators on performance standards. 4. indicators of learning and improvement in a collaborative learning environment. 5. indicators of learning and teaching • Results also show that the most common type of regularity (how often) was Type B (within 24-48 hours after performance).

40. Results Legend Figure 6. Sample of Observational protocol

41. ResultsSelf-observation stage: Self-monitoring leads to self-efficacy The conversations are starting points for meaningful internalization and socialization processes, relationships which influence: (a) exchange of information, (b) expansion of the shared knowledge, (c) recognition and value of the other, and (d) externalisation of feelings.

42. Sample Re: W8 E-1 From: Student A – jueves, 23 de abril de 2009, 01:31 Dear XXX: (Can I call you like this?? XXX does... -In fact, XXXX seems to be very serious for me, lately...-) We agreed on the approach we chose. I also found out that my strategy perfectly fits into your Community-embedded learning. It is inside my workplace that I would like to implement my idea of a 'Virtual Teaching Club.' I especially want to highlight a sentence from your post "learning can be seen as a dialectic and social process raising from but especially affecting the community where it takes place." I want to emphasize the word 'dialectic' because it reminds me of great philosophers who took care of discourse to communicate their ideas. In this case, as you say, learning is not an isolated process. It arises from a given situation in a social context. As always, thanks a lot for your thought-provoking post!! DD Figure 7. Students´conversation #1

43. Results The directed action strategy provides explicit feedback over performance and enhances the moderator’s ability to promote academic discussion, interact and socialize with students. The use of non-verbal, represented language on mood icons (emoticons), can contribute to a congenial atmosphere in the virtual environment, which is bonded through personal and social relations. The use of emoticons, together with a professional and polite use of language (netiquette), sets effective models of communication and interaction worthy of imitation (Cuesta, 2010).

44. Results Re: W9 E-1 de CUESTA MEDINA LILIANA MARCELA - jueves, 30 de abril de 2009, 00:08 Nicely done. Hope the suggestions were helpful. P.S Add a Why not in #5. Sleep well. Time to go to bed! Best, L Re: W9 E-1 de XXXXXX - sábado, 2 de mayo de 2009, 18:33 Dear Liliana: Thanks for your suggestions and comments. It is nice to take advantage of this virtual tool to get your tutorial and opinions. Have a great weekend. XXXX. Figure 8. Students´conversation #2

45. Results The study showed that students observed and responded to the feedback from moderator between 12 and 24 hours (Type A). Students actions: (a) detailed reading of comments produced by moderator (b) comparison of feedback produced by moderator and second observation of student’s performance (recorded in the platform) (c) comparison of the performance standards required for the activity with the feedback of the moderator (d) dialogue with the moderator about feedback occurred (e) comparison of individual performance with one or various peers (f) self-evaluation of the quality and effort involved in the activity.

46. Results Table 3. Students´comments #1

47. Results Self-Judgement stage: Discovering oneself through “the other” Most students found self-observations and self-comparisons with known standards very beneficial. Categories of data included revealed that those stances were: (a) professional development opportunities, (b) indicators of self-motivation and self-commitment, (c) performance indicators over academic standards given by the instructor, and (d) learning improvement indicators in a collaborative learning environment.

48. Results Accordingly, self-performance can be evaluated by assessing performance of the other. “[…] A meaningful other reference point is a factual standard defined by the performance or attributes of another individual who is meaningful to the evaluator, either because of the relevance or appropriateness of the individual’s attributes for social comparison […]” (Bernstein & Crosby, 1980; Festinger, 1954 in Higgins & Sorrentino, 1986). Participants self-compared their performances with those of colleagues they considered similar to themselves or who (they believed) had slightly greater academic capacities. 62% of students reported a classmate as such a “meaningful other”; 10% identified the course instructor as a "meaningful other. Both “others” provided participants with motivational incentives and resources to improve performances and skills.

49. Sample Table 4. Students´comments # 2 Criterion: Normative standards set by peers

50. Results Self-Reaction stage: Achievements are self-rewards Evaluation standards are closely connected to learners’ beliefs about their progress (Schunk, 2004). When learners believe in their own progress, their motivation and confidence grows.