nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

19.02.2020

Self-regulated learning strategies and non-academic outcomes in higher education blended learning environments: A one decade review

verfasst von: Lilian Anthonysamy, Ah-Choo Koo, Soon-Hin Hew

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 5/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Although university students use their digital devices for almost everything, current studies shows that students have difficulties with digital learning because they lack in self-regulated skills which in return lead to low performance. Self-regulated learning strategies (SRLS) are used assist students to learn efficiently. While many researchers have investigated SRLS towards academic outcomes such as grades, little is known about the use of SRLS towards non-academic outcomes that are also essential to assist university students’ learning progression. Hence, there is a need to understand how best to utilise SRLS to drive positive non-academic outcomes in digital learning within a blended learning environment. The systematic review methodology follows PRISMA guidelines to explore the current literature. Different sources were searched using predefined search items. A total of 239 retrievals were found which were screened for duplication. A closer screening was done on the abstracts and titles of 239 papers after duplication removal. 28 full text papers were evaluated for eligibility. Finally, 14 papers were then selected for the review. Most of the papers included in the review were peer-reviewed articles published in social science and educational journals. List of self-regulated learning strategies and non-academic outcomes used in a blended learning environment in higher education institutions were identified. Majority of the 14 reviewed papers investigated metacognitive knowledge, resource management and motivational belief strategies towards learning performance whereas cognitive engagement strategies was the least researched. Results revealed that generally, SRLS positively correlate with non-academic outcomes. At the end of the review, research gap and the future direction are presented.

Vorheriger Artikel Virtual learning communities (VLCs) rethinking: Collaboration between learning communities

Nächster Artikel ICT policy implementation in higher education institutions in Namibia: A survey of students’ perceptions

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Anderson, P. (2009). What makes a difference? How measuring the non-academic outcomes of schooling can help guide school practice. Assessment and Student Learning: Collecting, Interpreting and Using Data to Inform Teaching, 15–19.

Anthonysamy, L., Ah-Choo, K., Soon-Hin, H. (2019). Development and validation of an instrument to measure the effects of self-regulated learning strategies on online learning performance. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical & Control Systems, 11(10-special issue), 1093–1099. https://doi.org/10.5373/JARDCS/V11SP10/20192910.

Amiri Gharghani, A., Amiri Gharghani, M., & Hayat, A. A. (2019). Correlation of motivational beliefs and cognitive and metacognitive strategies with academic achievement of students of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. Strides in Development of Medical Education, In Press (In Press), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.5812/sdme.81169.

Azevedo, R., Moos, D.C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F.I., & Cromley, J. G. (2008). Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9067-0

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Barnard, L., Lan, W. Y., To, Y. M., Paton, V. O., & Lai, S. L. (2009). Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. Internet and Higher Education, 12(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.10.005.CrossRef

Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3.CrossRef

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. Berkshire: McGraw Hill.

Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001.

Bowyer, J. (2017). Evaluating blended learning: Bringing the elements together. Research Matters, (23), 17–26. Retrieved from http://www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/research-matters/

Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007.CrossRef

Cacciamani, S., Cesareni, D., Martini, F., Ferrini, T., & Fujita, N. (2012). Influence of participation, facilitator styles, and metacognitive reflection on knowledge building in online university courses. Computers and Education, 58(3), 874–884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.019.CrossRef

Chang, M. M. (2005). Applying self-regulated learning strategies in a web-based instruction - an investigation of motivation perception. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(3), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220500178939.CrossRef

Chen, Y.-C., Yeh, R. C., Lou, S.-J., & Lin, Y.-C. (2013). What drives a successful web-based language learning environment? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing college students’ learning satisfaction. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 1327–1336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.463.CrossRef

Chen, Z. H., De Lu, H., & Chou, C. Y. (2019). Using game-based negotiation mechanism to enhance students’ goal setting and regulation. Computers and Education, 129, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.011.CrossRef

Cheng, L., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Antonenko, P. (2019). Effects of the flipped classroom instructional strategy on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9633-7.

Cho, M.H. & Heron, M.L. (2015). Self-regulated learning: The role of motivation, emotion, and use of learning strategies in Students' learning experiences in a self-paced online mathematics course. Distance Education, 36(1), 80–99. Retrieved November 29, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/161247/.

Cho, M.H., & Shen, D. (2013). Self-regulation in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3), 290–301.

Cho, M.H., Kim, Y., & Choi, D. H. (2017). The effect of self-regulated learning on college students’ perceptions of community of inquiry and affective outcomes in online learning. Internet and Higher Education, 34, 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.04.001

Dumford, A. D., & Miller, A. L. (2018). Online learning in higher education: Exploring advantages and disadvantages for engagement. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(3), 452–465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9179-z.CrossRef

Effeney, G., Carroll, A., & Bahr, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Key strategies and their sources in a sample of adolescent males. Australian Journal of Educational & Develop- mental Psychology, 13, 58–74.

Ertmer, P. A., Sadaf, A., & Ertmer, D. J. (2011). Student-content interactions in online courses: The role of question prompts in facilitating higher-level engagement with course content. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2–3), 157–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9047-6.CrossRef

Fanguy, M., Costley, J., Lange, C., Baldwin, M., & Han, S. (2018). The role of motivation in the use of lecture behaviors in the online classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education Research, 17, 471–484. https://doi.org/10.28945/4131.CrossRef

Gá, V., & Soldado, R. M. (2014). Self - assessment v ia a blended learning strategy to improve performance in an accounting subject, (2), 41–54.

Galy, E., Downey, C., & Johnson, J. (2011). The effect of using e-learning tools in online and campus-based classrooms on student performance. Journal of Information Technology Education Research, 10(1), 209–230. https://doi.org/10.28945/1503.CrossRef

Goda, Y., Yamada, M., Kato, H., Matsuda, T., Saito, Y., & Miyagawa, H. (2015). Procrastination and other learning behavioral types in e-learning and their relationship with learning outcomes. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.001.CrossRef

Greene, J. A., Copeland, D. Z., Deekens, V. M., & Yu, S. B. (2018). Beyond knowledge: Examining digital literacy’s role in the acquisition of understanding in science. Computers and Education, 117, 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.10.003.CrossRef

Hashemyolia, S., Asmuni, A., Ayub, A. F. M., Daud, S. M., & Shah, J. A. (2015). Motivation to use self-regulated learning strategies in learning management system amongst science and social science undergraduates. Asian Social Science, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n3p49.

Haron, H. N., Harun, H., Ali, R., Salim, K. R., & Hussain, N. H. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies between the performing and non-performing students in statics. Proceedings of 2014 international conference on interactive collaborative learning, ICL 2014, (December), 802–805. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICL.2014.7017875.

Honicke, T., & Broadbent, J. (2016). The influence of academic self-efficacy on academic performance: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 17, 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.11.002.CrossRef

Joo, Y. J., Joung, S., & Kim, J. (2014). Structural relationships among self-regulated learning , learning flow , satisfaction, and learning persistence in cyber universities. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(6), 752–770. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2012.745421.CrossRef

Kew, S. N., Petsangsri, S., Ratanaolarn, T., & Tasir, Z. (2018). Examining the motivation level of students in e-learning in higher education institution in Thailand: A case study. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2947–2967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9753-z.CrossRef

Kizilcec, R. F., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., & Maldonado, J. J. (2017). Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in massive open online courses. Computers & Education, 104, 18–33.CrossRef

Kuo, Y., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R., & Schroder, K. E. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs | Kuo | the international review of research in open and distributed learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(1). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1338/2416

Lee, E., Pate, J., & Cozart, D. (2015). Autonomy support for online students. TechTrends, 59(4), 54–59.CrossRef

Li, J., Ye, H., Tang, Y., Zhou, Z., & Hu, X. (2018). What are the effects of self-regulation phases and strategies for Chinese students? A meta-analysis of two decades research of the association between self-regulation and academic performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(DEC), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02434.CrossRef

Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., … Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 339. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2700.

Lin, Y. T. (2018). Impacts of a flipped classroom with a smart learning diagnosis system on students’ learning performance, perception, and problem solving ability in a software engineering course. Computers in Human Behavior, 95. Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.036.

Mägi, K., Männamaa, M., & Kikas, E. (2016). Profiles of self-regulation in elementary grades: Relations to math and reading skills. Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.08.028.CrossRef

Milligan, C., & Littlejohn, A. (2016). How health professionals regulate their learning in massive open online courses. Internet and Higher Education, 31, 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.07.005.CrossRef

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264–269.CrossRef

Mikum, S., Suksakulchai, S., Chaisanit, S., & Murphy, E. (2018). Students’ participation in peer-to-peer communication supported by social media. Education and Information Technologies, 23(2), 659–679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9628-8.CrossRef

Noh, G. O., & Kim, D. H. (2019). Effectiveness of a self-directed learning program using blended coaching among nursing students in clinical practice: A quasi-experimental research design. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1672-1.CrossRef

OECD. (2013a). PISA 2012. Results in focus. What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they know. Paris: OECD.

OECD. (2013b) Skilled for life? Key findings from the survey of adult skills. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/SkillsOutlook_2013_ebook.pdf

Padgett, J., Cristancho, S., Lingard, L., Cherry, R., & Haji, F. (2018). Engagement: What is it good for? The role of learner engagement in healthcare simulation contexts. Advances in Health Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-018-9865-7.

Paechter, M., & Maier, B. (2010). Online or face-to-face? Students’ experiences and preferences in e-learning. Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 292–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.004.CrossRef

Pellas, N. (2014). The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning programs: Evidence from the virtual world of second life. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.048.CrossRef

Phillips, B. N., Turnbull, B. J., & He, F. X. (2015). Assessing readiness for self-directed learning within A non-traditional nursing cohort. Nurse Education Today, 35, 1–7.CrossRef

Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 459–470.CrossRef

Report, I. (2018). The future of jobs Report 2018 insight Report Centre for the new Economy and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1946756712473437.

Sedigheh, S., Rashid, M. S. M., & Reza, B. (2012). Self-regulated learning strategies (SRLS) and academic achievement in pre-university EFL learners. Education, XXXVII(1), 1–35.

Sivaranjani, B., & Prakash, S. (2014). E- learning – An overview. International Journal of Engineering and Management Research, 4(4), 117–123.

Soderstrom, N. C., & Bjork, R. A. (2015). Learning versus performance: An integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 176–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615569000.CrossRef

Swanson, J. A. (2018). Assessing the effectiveness of the use of Mobile Technology in a Collegiate Course: A case study in M-learning. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9372-1.

Tang, C. M., & Chaw, L. Y. (2016). Digital literacy: A prerequisite for effective learning in a blended learning environment? The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(1), 54–65.

Tsai, C. W. (2014). Exploring the effects of online team-based learning and co-regulated learning on students’ development of computing skills. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(4), 665–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.917106.CrossRef

Turner, L., Shamseer, L., Altman, D. G., Weeks, L., Peters, J., Kober, T., & Moher, D. (2012). Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.mr000030.pub2.

Vo, H. M., Zhu, C., & Diep, N. A. (2017). The effect of blended learning on student performance at course-level in higher education: A meta-analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 17–28.CrossRef

Wandler, J., & Imbriale, W. (2017). Promoting undergraduate student self-regulation in online learning environments, Online Learning 21(2).

Wichadee, S. (2018). Significant predictors for effectiveness of blended learning in a language course. JALT CALL Journal, 14(1), 25–42.CrossRef

Yamada, M., Goda, Y., Matsuda, T., Saito, Y., Kato, H., & Miyagawa, H. (2016). How does self-regulated learning relate to active procrastination and other learning behaviors? Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 28(3), 326–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9118-9.CrossRef

Yang, J. C., Quadir, B., Chen, N. S., & Miao, Q. (2016). Effects of online presence on learning performance in a blog-based online course. Internet and Higher Education, 30, 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.04.002.CrossRef

Yick, K. L., Yip, J., Au, S. C., Lai, Y. Y., & Yu, A. (2018). Effectiveness of blended learning in the first year of fashion education. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 12(2), 178–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/17543266.2018.1546910.CrossRef

Zhu, Y., Au, W., & Yates, G. (2016). University students’ self-control and self-regulated learning in a blended course. Internet and Higher Education, 30, 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.04.001.CrossRef

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 614–628.CrossRef

Zusho, A. (2017). Toward an integrated model of student learning in the college classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 29(2), 301–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9408-4.CrossRef

Titel: Self-regulated learning strategies and non-academic outcomes in higher education blended learning environments: A one decade review
verfasst von: Lilian Anthonysamy
Ah-Choo Koo
Soon-Hin Hew
Publikationsdatum: 19.02.2020
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 5/2020
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10134-2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2020

A case study investigating programming students’ peer review of codes and their perceptions of the online learning environment

ICT resources for research: an ANOVA analysis on the digital research skills of higher education teachers comparing the areas of knowledge within each gender

Use of mixed reality applications in teaching of science

Exploring teachers’ increased knowledge of the potential of mobile phone use: pilot study reducing the difference between students’ and teachers’ ideas

ICT policy implementation in higher education institutions in Namibia: A survey of students’ perceptions

Effects of microworld game-based approach on neuromuscular disabled students learning performance in elementary basic science courses