Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Education Research International
Volume 2012, Article ID 702315, 11 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/702315
Research Article

Online Measurement Perspectives for Students’ Strategy Use: Tool Use within a Content Management System

Centre for Instructional Psychology and Technology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Dekenstraat 2, P.O. Box 3770, 3000 Leuven, Belgium

Received 6 December 2011; Revised 16 March 2012; Accepted 31 March 2012

Academic Editor: Eduardo Cascallar

Copyright © 2012 Griet Lust et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. A. Y. Chan, K. Chow, and W. Jia, “A Framework for evaluation of learning effectiveness in online courses.,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Web-based Learning (ICWL '05), R. W. Lau, Q. Li, and R. Cheung, Eds., pp. 383–395, Springer, 2003.
  2. N. Hoic-Bozic, V. Mornar, and I. Boticki, “A blended learning approach to course design and implementation,” IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 19–30, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. S. R. Malikowski, M. E. Thompson, and J. G. Theis, “A model for research into course management systems: bridging technology and learning theory,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 149–173, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. J. W. Nutta, “Course web sites: are they worth the effort?” NEA Higher Education Advocate, no. 3, pp. 5–8, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  5. L. Hammoud, S. Love, L. Baldwin, and S. Y. Chen, “Evaluating WebCT use in relation to students' attitude and performance,” International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 26–43, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. S. L. Hoskins and J. C. Van Hooff, “Motivation and ability: which students use online learning and what influence does it have on their achievement?” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 177–192, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. G. Huon, B. Spehar, P. Adam, and W. Rifkin, “Resource use and academic performance among first year psychology students,” Higher Education, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 1–27, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. M. Grabe and K. Christopherson, “Optional student use of online lecture resources: resource preferences, performance and lecture attendance: original article,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. G. Lust, M. Vandewaetere, E. Ceulemans, J. Elen, and G. Clarebout, “Tool-use in a blended undergraduate course: in Search of user profiles,” Computers and Education, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 2135–2144, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. D. Perkins, “The fingertip effect: how information-processing technology shapes thinking.,” Educational Researcher, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 11–17, 1985. View at Google Scholar
  11. P. H. Winne, “How software technologies can improve research on learning and bolster school reform,” Educational Psychologist, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 5–17, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. G. Lust, N. A. Juarez Collazo, J. Elen, and G. Clarebout, “Content Management Systems: enriched learning opportunities for all?” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 795–808, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  13. F. Marton and R Säljö, “On qualitative differences in learning: outcomes and process,” British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 46, pp. 4–11, 1976. View at Google Scholar
  14. J. D. Vermunt, “Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and strategies: a phenomenographic analysis,” Higher Education, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 25–50, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. J. D. Vermunt, “The regulation of constructive learning processes,” British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 149–171, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. Y. J. Vermetten, H. G. Lodewijks, and J. D. Vermunt, “Consistency and variability of learning strategies in different university courses,” Higher Education, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 1–21, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. V. V. Busato, F. J. Prins, J. J. Elshout, and C. Hamaker, “Learning styles: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study in higher education,” British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 427–441, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. J. Ferla, M. Valcke, and G. Schuyten, “Student models of learning and their impact on study strategies,” Studies in Higher Education, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 185–202, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. K. Lonka and S. Lindblom-Ylänne, “Epistemologies, conceptions of learning, and study practices in medicine and psychology,” Higher Education, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 5–24, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. R. F. A. Wierstra, G. Kanselaar, J. L. Van Der Linden, H. G. L. C. Lodewijks, and J. D. Vermunt, “The impact of the university context on European students' learning approaches and learning environment preferences,” Higher Education, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 503–523, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. J. Elen and G. Clarebout, “The use of instructional interventions: lean learning environments as a solution for a design problem,” in Handling Complexity in Learning Environments: Theory and Research, J. Elen and R. E. Clark, Eds., pp. 185–200, Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  22. D. Jamieson-Noel and P. H. Winne, “Exploring students' calibration of self reports about study tactics and achievement,” Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 551–572, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. Y. J. Nunnally, Psychometric Theory, McGraw Hill, New York, NY, USA, 1978.
  24. D. Steinley, “Local optima in K-means clustering: What you don’t know may hurt you,” Psychological Methods, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 294–304, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. R. Tibshirani, G. Walther, and T. Hastie, “Estimating the number of clusters in a data set via the gap statistic,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 411–423, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. G. Clarebout and J. Elen, “Tool use in computer-based learning environments: towards a research framework,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 389–411, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. N. E. Perry and P. H. Winne, “Learning from learning kits: study traces of students' self-regulated engagements with computerized content,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 211–228, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. P. H. Winne, D. L. Jamieson-Noel, and K. Muis, “Methodological issues and advances in researching tactics, strategies and self-regulated learning,” in Advances in Motivation and Achievement: New Directions in Measures and Methods, P. R. Pintrich and M. L. Maehr, Eds., vol. 12, pp. 121–155, JAJ Press, Greenwich, Conn, USA, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  29. A. F. Hadwin, P. H. Winne, D. B. Stockley, J. C. Nesbit, and C. Woszczyna, “Context moderates students' self-reports about how they study,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 477–487, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. W. Doyle, “Paradigms for research on teacher effectiveness,” Review of Research in Education, vol. 5, pp. 392–431, 1977. View at Google Scholar
  31. P. H. Winne and R. W. Marx, “Matching students' cognitive responses to teaching skills,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 257–264, 1980. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. P. H. Winne, “Minimizing the black box problem to enhance the validity of theories about instructional effects,” Instructional Science, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 13–28, 1982. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. P. H. Winne, “Why process-product research cannot explain process-product findings and a proposed remedy: the cognitive mediational paradigm,” Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 333–356, 1987. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. J. Lowyck, J. Elen, and G. Clarebout, “Instructional conceptions: analysis from an instructional design perspective,” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 429–444, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. J. Elen and J. Lowyck, “Instructional metacognitive knowledge: a qualitative study on conceptions of freshmen about instruction,” Journal of Curriculum Studies, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 421–444, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. J. Lowyck, E. Lehtinen, and J. Elen, “Students' perspectives on learning environments,” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 401–406, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. T. André, “Does answering higher-level questions while reading facilitate productive learning?” Review of Educational Research, vol. 49, pp. 280–319, 1979. View at Google Scholar
  38. G. Clarebout and J. Elen, “The complexity of tool use in computer-based learning environments,” Instructional Science, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 475–486, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. P. Marek, R. A. Griggs, and A. N. Christopher, “Pedagogical aids in textbooks: do college students' perceptions justify their prevalence?” Teaching of Psychology, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 11–18, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. F. Collopy, “Biases in retrospective self-reports of time use: an empirical study of computer users,” Management Science, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 758–767, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. D. Jamieson-Noel and P. H. Winne, “Comparing self-reports to traces of studying behavior as representations of students' studying and achievement,” Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, vol. 17, no. 3-4, pp. 159–171, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. D. Dunning, C. Heath, and J. M. Suls, “Flawed self-assessment implications for health, education, and the workplace,” Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 69–106, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. J. Lompscher, “Learning strategy research: some results, problems, and prospects.,” in Learning Strategies and Skill learning. Essays in Honour of Nils Sovik, A. Flem and R. Karlsdotteri, Eds., Den Kongelige Norske Videnskabers Selskap, Skrifter 4, pp. 13–32, Tapir Forlag, Trondheim, Norway, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  44. D. Goforth, “Learner control = decision making + information: a model and meta-analysis,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–26, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  45. M. D. Williams, “Steps towards cognitive achievements.,” Journal of Elementary School Journal, vol. 85, no. 5, pp. 673–693, 1996. View at Google Scholar