Susan Bergin
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between self-regulated learning (SRL) and introductory programming performance. Participants were undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory computer programming module at a third-level (post-high school) institution. The instrument used in this study was designed to assess the motivations and learning strategies (cognitive, metacognitive and resource management strategies) of college students. The data gathered was analyzed to determine if a relationship existed between self-regulation and programming performance and investigate if SRL could be used to predict performance on the module. The study found that students who perform well in programming use more metacognitive and resource management strategies than lower performing students. In addition, students who have high levels of intrinsic motivation and task value perform better in programming and use more metacognitive and resource management strategies than students with low levels of intrinsic motivation and task value. Finally, a regression model based on cognitive, metacognitive and resource management strategies was able to account for 45% of the variance in programming performance results.
- S. Bergin and R. Reilly. The influence of motivation and comfort-level on learning to program. In Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on Psychology of Programming, PPIG'05, 2005.Google Scholar
- S. Bergin and R. Reilly. Programming: Factors that influence success. In Proceedings of the 36th SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education, SIGCSE'05, pages 411--415, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. F. Campbell and G. P. McCabe. Predicting the success of freshmen in a computer science major. Commun. ACM, 27(11):1108--1113, 1984. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Cantwell-Wilson and S. Shrock. Contributing to success in an introductory computer science course: a study of twelve factors. In Proceedings of the thirty-second SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education, pages 184--188, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. Pajares, S. Brinter, and G. Valiante. Relation between achievement goals and self-beliefs of middle school students in writing and science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4):406--422, 2000.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. Patrick, A. Ryan, and P. Pintrich. The differential impact of extrinsic and mastery goal orientations on males' and females' self-regulating learning. Learning and Individual differences, 11(2):153--171, 1999.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Pintrich. The dymanic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. Advances in motivation and achievement: motivation enhancing environments, 6:117--160, 1989.Google Scholar
- P. Pintrich. The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self -regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31:459--470, 1999.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Pintrich and E. DeGroot. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1):33--40, 1990.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Pintrich and T. Garcia. Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 7:371--403, 1991.Google Scholar
- P. Pintrich and B. Schrauben. 'Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks' in 'Student perceptions in the classroom'. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992.Google Scholar
- P. R. Pintrich, D. Smith, T.Garcia, and W. McKeachie. A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. technical report 91-b-004. The Regents of the University of Michigan., 1991.Google Scholar
- P. Pokay and P. Blumenfeld. Predicting achievement early and late in the semester: the role of motivation and learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1):41--50, 1990.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. Rountree, J. Rountree, and A. Robins. Predictors of success and failure in a cs1 course. SIGCSE Bull., 34(4):121--124, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Zimmerman. Becoming a self-regulated learner: which are the key sub-processes? Contemporary Educational Psychology., 11(4):307--313, 1986.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. Zimmerman and M. Martinez-Pons. Student differences in self-regulated learning: relating grade, sex and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82:51--59, 1990.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Examining the role of self-regulated learning on introductory programming performance
Recommendations
Promoting self-regulated learning in web-based learning environments
Self-regulated learning with the Internet or hypermedia requires not only cognitive learning strategies, but also specific and general meta-cognitive strategies. The purposes of the Study2000 project, carried out at the TU Dresden, were to develop and ...
Ontologies for Self-Regulated Learning
Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Towards Sustainable and Scalable Educational Innovations Informed by the Learning Sciences: Sharing Good Practices of Research, Experimentation and InnovationSelf-regulated learning is the key for students to be masters of their own learning processes. These self-initiated processes enable these students to become controllers of their learning experiences. The objective of this research is to maximize the ...
Supporting learners' self-regulated learning in Massive Open Online Courses
AbstractIn MOOCs, learners are typically presented with great autonomy over their learning process. Therefore, learners should engage in self-regulated learning (SRL) in order to successfully study in a MOOC. Learners however often struggle to self-...
Highlights- Learners struggle to regulate their learning in massive open online courses (MOOCs).
- A self-regulated learning (SRL) intervention was implemented in three MOOCs.
- Learners' SRL was measured with trace data variables.
- ...
Comments