在互动学习环境中,元认知提示对信心判断的限制

Q2 Social Sciences
Maria Klar, J. Buchner, M. Kerres
{"title":"在互动学习环境中,元认知提示对信心判断的限制","authors":"Maria Klar, J. Buchner, M. Kerres","doi":"10.1515/edu-2022-0209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Metacognitive activities are reported to improve learning but prompts to support metacognition have only been investigated with mixed results. In the present study, metacognitive prompts for confidence judgments were implemented in a learning platform to provide more insights into their effectiveness and their limits. Comparing the prompted group (n = 51) with the control (n = 150), no benefits of the prompts are seen: Performance is not better with prompts, and there is no improvement in metacognitive accuracy over time within the prompted group. Notably, half of the prompted group did not use the metacognitive prompts as intended. Alternative ways to integrate such prompts are discussed.","PeriodicalId":33645,"journal":{"name":"Open Education Studies","volume":"163 5-6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Limits of Metacognitive Prompts for Confidence Judgments in an Interactive Learning Environment\",\"authors\":\"Maria Klar, J. Buchner, M. Kerres\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/edu-2022-0209\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Metacognitive activities are reported to improve learning but prompts to support metacognition have only been investigated with mixed results. In the present study, metacognitive prompts for confidence judgments were implemented in a learning platform to provide more insights into their effectiveness and their limits. Comparing the prompted group (n = 51) with the control (n = 150), no benefits of the prompts are seen: Performance is not better with prompts, and there is no improvement in metacognitive accuracy over time within the prompted group. Notably, half of the prompted group did not use the metacognitive prompts as intended. Alternative ways to integrate such prompts are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33645,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Education Studies\",\"volume\":\"163 5-6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Education Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2022-0209\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Education Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2022-0209","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

据报道,元认知活动可以提高学习效果,但对支持元认知的提示只进行了调查,结果喜忧参半。本研究在一个学习平台上实施了信心判断元认知提示,以深入了解其有效性及其局限性。将提示组(n = 51)与对照组(n = 150)进行比较,没有发现提示有任何益处:提示组的成绩并没有因为提示而提高,元认知的准确性也没有随着时间的推移而提高。值得注意的是,提示组中有一半人没有按照预期使用元认知提示。本文讨论了整合此类提示的其他方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Limits of Metacognitive Prompts for Confidence Judgments in an Interactive Learning Environment
Metacognitive activities are reported to improve learning but prompts to support metacognition have only been investigated with mixed results. In the present study, metacognitive prompts for confidence judgments were implemented in a learning platform to provide more insights into their effectiveness and their limits. Comparing the prompted group (n = 51) with the control (n = 150), no benefits of the prompts are seen: Performance is not better with prompts, and there is no improvement in metacognitive accuracy over time within the prompted group. Notably, half of the prompted group did not use the metacognitive prompts as intended. Alternative ways to integrate such prompts are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Open Education Studies
Open Education Studies Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
27 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信