2002/7/8 Luo.H.C

Lin,W.Y. (1996).The effects of self-monitoring on students’ courseperformance, useof learning strategies, attitude, self-judgment ability, and knowledge representation.Journal of Experimental Education, 64(2), 101-115.

◆Related researches

  1. Self-regulation

(1)Definition: students’ self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions, which are systematically oriented toward attainment of their goals (Schunk and Zimmerman, 1994)

(2)Related variables: intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, self-awareness

  1. Self-monitoring

(1)Definition: deliberate attention to some aspect of one’s behavior. (Schunk, 1991) .

(2)Definition: an executive process, activating and deactivating other processes, as a function of on-line evaluation of thought processes and products as they occur. (Pressley and Ghata-la,1990)

(3)Self-monitoring is the initial and sometimes the sole process of self- regulation in a learning situation.

(4)Self-monitoring was manipulated by having students monitor the number of errors in their performance (McCurdy and Shapiro,1992)

(5)Asking students to monitor their problem-solving strategies in a computer based logic task. Students in the self-monitoring condition were able to solve more complex problems in less time than were those who didn’t monitor their problem-solving strategies.

◆Method

  1. Sample: 72 graduate students (25 self-monitoring group, 28 instructor- monitoring group, 19 control group)
  2. Period: the statistics class met twice a week for 1.5 hr per session for 4 semesters. Students in the first 3 semesters: randomly assigned to self-monitoring condition and instructor-monitoring groups. Ones in the 4th semester participant in the control condition.
  3. Procedure:

(1)Self-monitoring protocol: 75 statistical concepts—self-recoding time spent and frequency in reading the textbook and others assignments.

(2)Instructor-monitoring protocol: rating the instructor’s teaching activities rather than to the students’ learning activities.

(3)Regularity and proximity (Bandura,1986;Shapiro,1984): recording responses and exchanging protocols.

  1. Measures:

(1)Mathematics ability test: 22 multiple-choice items

(2)Course examinations: 40 multiple-choice questions for each of the 4 examinations

(3)Self regulated learning strategies: 13 self-regulated learning strategies.(Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons,1986):self-evaluation, organizing instructional materials, goal-setting, seeking information, keeping records and monitoring, environmental structuring, self- consequences, rehearsal and memorization, seeking assistance from peers, seeking assistance from teachers, reviewing the textbook/notes/previous tests/assignments.

(4)Perceived control over learning: ”I know what I am dong when studying for this course.” 6-point Likert scale.

(5)Intrinsic motivation toward statistics: “I would like to take more statistics classes, even if I am not required to do so.” 6-point Likert scale.

(6)Self-judgment accuracy: When taking the exams, students were instructed to assign a value from 1 to 10 to each problem to indicate their level of confidence that their answer was correct.

(7)Knowledge representation: At the end of each examination, three extra questions were asked. Students were asked to find relevant concepts, organize them in an outline format, and indicate the headings of the outline.

◆Results

  1. Table 1: (1) Within-subject effect-variable of exams, F(3,207)=25.01, p<.001

(2) Between-subject effect, F(2,69)=3.88, p<.025

S/I was significant F(3,69)=3.43, p<.05

  1. Table 2: (1) Self-monitoring group used the strategies of self-evaluation and

environmental structuring more frequently than did the

instructor-monitoring and control groups.

(2) Instructor-monitoring group sought assistance from peers more

frequently than did the self-monitoring and control groups.

  1. Self-monitoring group developed better knowledge representation than did the instructor-motoring group and the control group.

◆Discussion

  1. It’s important for self-monitoring and other self-regulatory processes to become increasingly automatic through repetition and practice, therefore educators need to create opportunities for students to practice them.
  2. Students at all levels need systematic help to learn and use self-regulated learning strategies.

Table 1:means and SD of course examination scores by condition

Exam 1 / Exam 2 / Exam 3 / Exam 4 / Average
Self-monitoring (n=25)
M / 36.32 / 35.80 / 35.00 / 32.68 / 34.95
SD / 2.56 / 3.75 / 3.80 / 3.81 / 2.50
Instructor-monitoring (n=28)
M / 34.32 / 33.61 / 33.14 / 29.75 / 32.71
SD / 4.56 / 3.75 / 4.50 / 5.30 / 3.80
Control (n=19)
M / 34.42 / 33.26 / 32.79 / 29.63 / 32.53
SD / 4.07 / 5.79 / 3.41 / 4.52 / 3.66
Combined (n=72)
M / 35.04 / 34.28 / 33.69 / 30.74 / 33.44
SD / 3.90 / 4.89 / 4.06 / 4.77 / 3.50

Table 2:ANOVA for treatment group scores on use of self-regulated learning strategies

Self-
Monitoring / Instructor-
Monitoring / Control group / F (df=2,69) / Contrast
Self-evaluation
M / 4.56 / 3.70 / 3.88 / 3.76 / S>I,C
SD / 0.65 / 1.41 / 1.36
Organizing materials
M / 3.24 / 3.41 / 3.53 / .25
SD / 1.48 / 0.97 / 1.13
Goal setting
M / 3.36 / 3.26 / 3.06 / 1.42
SD / 1.15 / 0.98 / 0.83
Seeking information
M / 3.52 / 3.07 / 3.18 / .92
SD / 1.39 / 1.27 / 0.95
Keeping records
M / 3.20 / 2.93 / 2.88 / .32
SD / 1.58 / 1.34 / 1.11
Environmental structuring
M / 4.64 / 3.85 / 3.71 / 5.76 / S>I,C
SD / 0.91 / 1.23 / 1.31
Self-consequences
M / 2.64 / 2.48 / 2.65 / .16
SD / 1.38 / 1.16 / 1.00
Rehearsing/memorization
M / 3.96 / 3.63 / 3.24 / 3.60 / S>C
SD / 0.94 / 1.04 / 1.20
Seeking peers’ help
M / 2.60 / 3.52 / 2.82 / 3.70 / I>S,C
SD / 1.50 / 1.28 / 1.19
Seeking teachers’ help
M / 2.56 / 2.70 / 3.18 / 1.06
SD / 1.33 / 0.82 / 1.24
Reviewing textbook
M / 4.72 / 4.00 / 4.24 / 2.72
SD / 0.61 / 1.39 / 1.30
Reviewing notes
M / 4.40 / 4.48 / 4.00 / 1.71
SD / 1.04 / 1 / .01 / 1.12
Reviewing tests/assignments
M / 4.36 / 3.89 / 3.35 / 5.4 / S>C
SD / 0.76 / 1.01 / 1.46