Judgments of Learning in Collaborative Learning Environments

Helsdingen, A. S. (2010, March). Judgments of Learning in Collaborative Learning Environments. Poster presented at the 1st International Air Transport and Operations Symposium (ATOS 2010), Delft, The Netherlands: Delft University of Technology.Professional environments such as Air Traffic Control are characterized by increasing interdependency and complexity. As the complexity of the situation and environment increases, it becomes more unlikely that an individual will be able to manage the situation alone. Therefore, organizations are increasingly using teams to handle difficult, complex situations. Many studies on effective team performance show that effective teams have developed specific team behaviors such as supporting each other, re-allocating tasks to share workload, taking initiative, and providing relevant information to other team members (Stout, Cannon-Bowers, Salas & Milanovich,1999). Such behaviors rely on team members having an adequate awareness of other team member’s performance and workload (Entin & Serfaty, 1999; Stout, Cannon-Bower, Salas & Milanovich, 1999). Similarly, we expect that for effective team learning in a collaborative environment, it is essential to be able to adequately assess one’s own and other team members’ learning progress and share workload. In recent years, the interest in cognitive strategies such as self-monitoring and self-regulation in cognitive and learning research has grown considerably (Koriat, 1998; Nelson & Narens, 1990). Adequate self-monitoring is important, especially in self-directed learning programs, because it determines the effort and time an individual spends on learning something or taking extra measures so as to prevent forgetting (Koriat, 1997). However, these cognitive strategies, such as Judgments of Learning, have mainly been studied in individual learning environments. Therefore, this study aims to investigate how adequate judgments of learning can be supported in a collaborative learning environment and whether these contribute to individual and team learning. The poster will outline the relevant theory on collaborative learning and Judgments of Learning, the hypotheses and the experimental approach that is foreseen.Knowledge development center Mainport Schipho

Learning to make sense

Helsdingen, A. S., & Van den Bosch, K. (2009). Learning to make sense. Paper presented at the Cognitive Systems with Interactive sensors conference in Paris. November, 16-18, 2009, Paris, France.Sensemaking is the process of understanding situations of high complexity or uncertainty in order to make decisions. Individuals and teams that are good at sensemaking tend to collect and critically evaluate the available evidence, seek for consistency, and test assumptions underlying assessments. Furthermore, their experience allows them to have a high appreciation for how the context affects the problem. In this paper we will (1) present observations on successful and failing sensemaking in first responder teams, (2) discuss the development of sensemaking competency, and (3) present an approach for training the knowledge and skills that are critical for sensemaking

Critical thinking instruction and contextual interference to increase cognitive flexibility in complex judgment

Helsdingen, A. S., Van Gog, T., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2009). Critical thinking instruction and contextual interference to increase cognitive flexibility in complex judgment. Paper presented at the Joint meeting of the Scientific Network on "Developing critical and flexible thinking" and the European Network on Epistemological beliefs. June, 3-5, 2009, Marche-en-Famenne, Belgium.Learning predictive relationships between cues and outcomes is a central aspect of many cognitive tasks. Studies on judgment and decision making have provided knowledge of how experienced decision makers approach complex decision problems. It seems to involve at least two types of skill: (1) recognition skills based on subject matter expertise (i.e., acquired cognitive schemas), that is, knowledge of relevant cues, their mutual interrelationships and the relationships with the criterion value that needs to be predicted, and (2) higher order critical thinking skills that serve to increase understanding by means of generalization and abstraction. Targeting training at these skills may improve cognitive flexibility through elaboration of the content (e.g., by generalisation, discrimination, or abstracting away from it). We established that instructional methods for implementing critical thinking and contextual interference, separately and in combination, can increase transfer of judgment skills to new tasks and contexts

The Effects of Practice Schedule and Critical Thinking Prompts on Learning and Transfer of a Complex Judgment Task

Helsdingen, A. S., Van Gog, T., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2011). The effects of practice schedule and critical thinking prompts on learning and transfer of complex judgment task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 383-398. doi:10.1037/a0022370Many instructional strategies that appear to improve learners’ performance during training, may not realize adequate post test performance or transfer to a job. And the converse has been found true as well: instructional strategies that appear to slow the learner’s progress during training often lead to better post-training or transfer performance. For example, many studies have shown beneficial effects of random over blocked practice on transfer of learning, even though blocked practice often leads to better performance during the training session. In a 2 x 3 factorial experiment (N = 120) with the factors practice schedule (random, blocked) and critical thinking prompts (before task, after task, none), this study investigates whether this also applies to complex judgement tasks, and whether critical thinking prompts can enhance the effectiveness of particular practice schedules. It is hypothesized that prompts provided after task execution yield best transfer in a random practice schedule, whereas prompts provided before task execution yield best transfer in a blocked schedule. In line with our hypothesis, a blocked schedule led to better performance than random practice during training, but not on the transfer test, where a random schedule was beneficial. The hypothesized interaction effect was also found: critical thinking prompts after task execution significantly benefit transfer performance of participants following a random schedule, and transfer performance following a blocked schedule can be a little enhanced through providing critical thinking prompts before task execution. These results warrant instruction in critical thinking processes to teach complex judgment tasks, using random practice schedules combined with critical thinking prompts provided after task execution

The effects of practice schedule on learning a complex judgment task

Helsdingen, A. S., Van Gog, T., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2011). The effects of practice schedule on learning a complex judgment task. Learning & Instruction, 21(1), 126-136. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.12.001The effects of practice schedule on learning a complex judgment task were investigated. In Experiment 1, participants' judgment accuracy on a retention test was higher after a random practice schedule than after a blocked schedule or operational schedule. Experiment 2 demonstrated that judgment on a transfer test was also better after a random practice schedule than after a blocked schedule. Both experiments failed to show any effects of practice schedule on performance during learning. These findings show that benefits of random practice for retention and transfer apply to learning a complex judgment task, and may be achieved without performance degradation during practice

Reflection: A Socratic approach

Open accessReflection is a fuzzy concept. In this article we reveal the paradoxes involved in studying the nature of reflection. Whereas some scholars emphasize its discursive nature, we go further and underline its resemblance to the self-biased dialogue Socrates had with the slave in Plato’s Meno. The individual and internal nature of the reflection process creates difficulty for studying it validly and reliably. We focus on methodological issues and use Hans Linschoten’s view of coupled systems to identify, analyze, and interpret empirical research on reflection. We argue that researchers and research participants can take on roles in several possible system couplings. Depending on who controls the manipulation of the stimulus, who controls the measuring instrument, who interprets the measurement and the response, different types of research questions can be answered. We conclude that reflection may be validly studied by combining different couplings of experimenter, manipulation, stimulus, participant, measurement, and response