Information problem solving by experts and novices: Analysis of a complex cognitive skill.

In (higher) education students are often faced with information problems: tasks or assignments that require them to identify information needs, locate corresponding information sources, extract and organize relevant information from each source, and synthesize information from a variety of sources. It is often assumed that students master this complex cognitive skill of information problem solving all by themselves. In our point of view, however, explicit and intensive instruction is necessary. A skill decomposition is needed in order to design instruction that fosters the development of information problem solving. This research analyzes the information problem solving process of novices and experts in order to reach a detailed skill decomposition. Results reveal that experts spend more time on the main skill ‘define problem’ and more often activate their prior knowledge, elaborate on the content, and regulate their process. Furthermore, experts and novices show little differences in the way they search the Internet. These findings formed the basis for formulating instructional guidelines

The effect of embedded instruction on solving information problems

In higher education students are often faced with information problems: tasks or assignments that require them to identify information needs, locate corresponding information sources, extract and organize relevant information from each source, and synthesize information from a variety of sources. Explicit and intensive instruction is necessary, because solving information problems is a complex cognitive skill. In this study instruction for Information Problem Solving (IPS) was embedded in a competence and web-based course for distance education students about research methodology in the field of Psychology. Eight of the sixteen students following this course received a version of the course with embedded IPS instruction. The other half received a variant of the course without extra IPS instruction. The analysis of the thinking aloud protocols revealed that after the course students in the experimental condition regulate the IPS process more often than students in the control condition. They also judged the information found more often

Eindrapportage ELO-project 1.1. - Nadere uitwerking onderwijsconcept

Dit verslag vormt de eindrapportage van ELO project 1.1 'Uitwerking onderwijsconcept'. De activiteiten die hebben geleid tot deze rapportage zijn uitgevoerd in de periode van 15 januari 2000 tot 1 april 2000. Een deel van deze activiteiten zal in een andere vorm ook na 1 april 2000 worden voortgezet. In vorige fases van het ELO-programma is gewerkt aan een onderwijsconcept in het kader van het innoveren van totale opleidingen (Koper, et al, 1998). Hierbij is het begrip competentiegericht onderwijs verkend en gedefinieerd, is een opzet voor competentiekaarten bedacht (Westera, et al, 1999), en zijn didactische scenario's (Manderveld, et al, 1999) tot op zekere hoogte uitgewerkt. Al deze zaken bleken nog verre van 'uitontwikkeld'. In het project waarover hier wordt gerapporteerd, is vooral in concrete zin een vervolg gegeven op deze activiteiten

The role of personality traits and goal orientations in strategy use

\u3cp\u3eThe aim of this study was to contribute to the development of an integrated theory on individual learning differences. To that end, theories on learning styles, personality, and achievement motivation were combined in an explanatory model (tested with structural equation modelling). Goal orientations play an important role in this model, situated between personality traits and theories of intelligence, on the one hand, and learning strategy constructs (surface learning and deep learning), on the other. Surface-level strategies were related to entity theory beliefs and ego orientation as well as to conscientiousness, agreeableness, and effort orientation. Deep-level strategies were only directly related to task orientation and intellect. The relations found shed more light on what individual differences in learning consist of and help explain regularities in learning behavior.\u3c/p\u3

Powerful learning environments? How university students differ in their response to instructional measures

\u3cp\u3eThis study aimed at measuring the effects of a university educational reform project on student learning, and individual differences in students' responses to similar instructional measures. The reforms mainly failed to influence reported learning strategies in the direction of more deep and self-regulated learning. One explanation for this could be that the instructional measures were not powerful enough to create more deep-level learning strategies. In a second study, a different explanation was explored. It was found that student groups with different learner characteristics tend to use instructional measures in different ways, such that they suit their own habits, ideas and preferences of learning well. This makes it quite clear that direct influence of instructional measures on learning processes does not take place. We explore suggestions for adapting instructional practice.\u3c/p\u3

Consistency and variability of learning strategies in different university courses

\u3cp\u3eThe present study addressed the question of consistency and variability in learning strategies. Four university courses provided different learning contexts. The same group of students reported about their learning strategies by completing identical questionnaires on each of these courses. Participants were 85 students attending the first year of Law studies. A second study consisted of 63 students attending similar courses in the following academic year. An analysis of variance showed that students varied their reported learning strategies as a function of different learning contexts. This indicated a context-specific component in strategy use. Intercorrelations, however, showed that students displayed consistency in reported learning strategies across course contexts as well. This indicated a personal, habitual component in strategy use. It thus seems that the question of variability and consistency in learning strategies does not yield an 'either-or' answer. Context variables were explored to explain the variations. Use of stated cases, provision of a clear organisation of subject matter and of diverse didactic resources appeared to diminish encountered problems and lack of regulation (which proved to be related variables), and promote the use of concrete processing, relating, analyzing, self-regulation and externally regulated strategies. Evidence was found that learning strategies differed among each other in the degree of variability. Memorizing turned out to be relatively resistant to differences in course context, whereas concrete processing strategies and lack of regulation showed relatively large susceptibility to course context. Explanations were proposed in terms of different stages in the development of learning strategies and in terms of context-variables.\u3c/p\u3