You are here:

The Role of Goal Structure in Undergraduates’ Use of Self-Regulatory Variables in Two Hypermedia Learning Tasks
Article

, , University of Maryland, United States

Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia Volume 15, Number 1, ISSN 1055-8896 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

We collected think-aloud and posttest data from 60 undergraduates to examine whether they used different proportions of self-regulated learning (SRL) variables in two related learning tasks about science topics while using a hypermedia environment. We also manipulated the goal structure of the two hypermedia learning tasks in order to explore whether the goal structure of the learning task is related to the use of SRL variables. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions (mastery goal structure, performance-approach goal structure, or performance-avoidance goal structure) and participated in two 20-minute learning tasks in which they used hypermedia to learn about the circulatory system in one learning task and the respiratory system in another. Results indicate that a mastery goal structure and a performance-approach goal structure are related to undergraduates' use of similar proportions of SRL variables in two hypermedia learning tasks, whereas a performance-avoidance goal structure is related to undergraduate's use of different proportions of SRL variables, specifically planning, in two similar hypermedia learning tasks. Based on these results, the implications for the design of hypermedia learning environments are discussed.

Citation

Moos, D. & Azevedo, R. (2006). The Role of Goal Structure in Undergraduates’ Use of Self-Regulatory Variables in Two Hypermedia Learning Tasks. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(1), 49-86. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 9, 2024 from .

© 2006 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Alexander, P. A., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1998). Integrated, constructivist education: Challenge and reality. Educational Psychology Review, 10(2), 129154.
  2. Ames. C. (1992). Classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
  3. Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J.G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 523-535.
  4. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J.G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344-370
  5. Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J.T., & Seibert, D. (2004). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students’ conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1), 87-111.
  6. Azevedo, R., Winters, F. I., & Moos, D. C. (2004). Can students collaboratively use hypermedia to lean about science? The dynamics of self- and other-regulatory processes in an ecology classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 215-245.
  7. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  8. Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2001). The use of embedded scaffolds with hypermediasupport student-centered learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(4), 333-356.
  9. Brusilovsky, P. (2001). Adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling & User-Adapted Interaction, 11(1-2), 87-110.
  10. Clarebout, G., Elen, J., Johnson, L., & Shaw, E. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents: An opportunity to be grasped? Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 11(3), 267-286.
  12. Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18(2), 88108.
  13. Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (2004). What we have learned about student engagement in the last twenty years. In D. M. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Big theories revisited (pp. 299-328). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  14. Ellermann, H. H., & Free, E. L. (1990). A participant-controlled environment for paired associate learning. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction 17(3), 97102.
  15. Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1994). Goal setting, achievement orientation, and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 968-980.
  16. Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461-475.
  17. Ericsson, K A, & Simon, H.A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  18. Hadwin, A., & Winne, P. (2001). CoNoteS2: A software tool for promoting self-regulation. Educational Research & Evaluation, 7(2-3), 313-334.
  19. Hartley, J. R. (1985). Some psychological aspects of computer-assisted learning and teaching. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 22(2), 140-149.
  21. Jonassen, D. H. (1989). Hypertext/hypermedia. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
  22. Jonassen, D., & Reeves, T. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp.694-719). New York: Macmillan.
  23. Lepper, M. R., Woolverton, M., Mumme, D. L., & Gutner, J. L. (1993). Motivational techniques of expert human tutors: Lessons for the design of computer-based tutors. In S.P. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  24. Lajoie, P. (2000). Computers as cognitive tools: No more walls, Vol. II. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  25. Liu, M., & Pederson, S. (1998). The effect of being hypermedia designers on elementary school students’ motivation and learning of design knowledge. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 9(2), 155-182.
  26. Maehr, M. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (Eds.) (1991). Advances in motivation and achievement: Goals and self-regulatory processes (Vol. 7). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  27. Microsoft Corporation (2003). Encarta Reference Library. [Computer Software]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation.
  28. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Baldwin, W. (1992). Student control of context and instructional support in learning and elementary school mathematics. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(1), 5-13.
  29. Müller-Kaltjoff, T., & Möller, J. (2003). The effects of graphical overview, prior knowledge, and self-concept on hypertext disorientation and learning achievement. Journal of Educational Multimedia & Hypermedia, 12(2), 117-134.
  30. Pintrich, P. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds) Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 452-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  31. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). The manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ) (Tech Report No. 91-B-004). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, School of Education.
  32. Shapiro, A. (1999). The relationship between prior knowledge and interactive overviews during hypermedia-aided learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(2), 143-167.
  34. Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of associative processes in animals. Psychological Review, Monograph Supplement, 2(8).
  35. Williams, M. (1996). Student control and instructional technologies. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 957-983). New York: Macmillan.
  36. Winne, P.H. (2001). Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning
  37. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  38. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531-566). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
  39. Wishart, J. M. (1990). Cognitive factors relating to user involvement with computers and their effects upon learning from an educational computer game. Computers and Education, 15(1-3), 145-150.
  40. Wishart, J. (2000). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of motivation and learning through the use in schools of multimedia encyclopedias on CD-ROMs. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(4), 333-347.
  41. Wolters, C. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and goal orientations to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 236-250
  42. Wolters, C., Yu, S., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students’ motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 211-238.
  43. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R., Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  44. Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 1-37). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections