Is collaborative learners’ adoption of metacognitive regulation related to students’ content processing strategies and the level of transactivity in their peer discussions?
Is collaborative learners’ adoption of metacognitive regulation related to students’ content processing strategies and the level of transactivity in their peer discussions?
复制标题
协作学习者对元认知调节的采用是否与学生的内容处理策略和同伴讨论中的交互水平有关？
DOI：
10.1007/s10212-016-0323-8
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
M. Valcke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Liesje De Backer;H. Keer;M. Valcke
本研究调查了合作学习者对关键调节活动的采用情况（即，指导、计划、监测和评估）以及与其在认知和交流水平上的协作特征有关的深层次调节方法。更具体地说，合作学习者的调节行为与他们的内容处理策略和他们的讨论中的交互水平的相关性进行了分析。本研究是在高等教育的自然互惠同伴辅导（RPT）设置。五个随机选择的RPT组参加为期一个学期的RPT干预会议进行录像（70小时）。二元逻辑回归进行研究如何RPT参与者的元认知调节与他们的内容处理和交互式讨论。结果表明，学生采用的关键调节活动与他们采用的内容加工策略显着相关，虽然不同的相关性被揭示为特定的调节活动。此外，RPT参与者的监管活动的采用显着相关的学生的交互式讨论，无论是在反应对方的认知和元认知的贡献。关于RPT参与者采用深层次的调节方法，结果显示出显着的相关性与高阶内容处理，以及与代表性和操作性的交互式讨论，学生分别释义或阐述对方的贡献。本研究的微观分析检查的RPT参与者的学习和调节过程中贡献了重要的见解，合作学习者的调节文献，提供输入更强的理论模型，并促进教师的合作学习者的充分支持。
The present study investigates collaborative learners’ adoption of key regulation activities (i.e., orienting, planning, monitoring, and evaluating) and a deep-level regulation approach in relation to characteristics of their collaboration on the cognitive and communicative level. More specifically, the correlation of collaborative learners’ regulation behavior with respectively their content processing strategies and the level of transactivity in their discussions is analyzed. The study is conducted in a naturalistic reciprocal peer tutoring (RPT) setting in higher education. Sessions of five randomly selected RPT groups participating in a semester-long RPT intervention were videotaped (70 h). Binary logistic regressions were performed to examine how RPT participants’ metacognitive regulation is related to their content processing and transactive discussions. Results reveal that students’ adoption of key regulation activities is significantly correlated with their adoption of content processing strategies, although different correlations are revealed for particular regulation activities. Additionally, RPT participants’ adoption of regulation activities is significantly related to students’ transactive discussions, both when reacting to each other’s cognitive and metacognitive contributions. With regard to RPT participants’ adoption of a deep-level regulation approach, the results show significant correlations with higher-order content processing as well as with representational and operational transactive discussions, in which students respectively paraphrase or elaborate on each other’s contributions. The present study’s micro-analytical examination of RPT participants’ learning and regulation processes contributes important insights to the literature on collaborative learners’ regulation, providing input for stronger theoretical models and facilitating instructors’ adequate support of collaborative learners.