Abstract
Education has come to recognise the
importance of the development of learning ability, that is, the acquisition of
self-directed learning (SDL) skills and self-regulated learning (SRL) skills,
because these skills equip students for functioning in our constantly changing
society as life long learners. To give students the opportunity to develop
these skills a flexible learning environment is needed. Such an environment
enables learners to determine more or less personalised learning trajectories
for themselves. Moreover, a flexible learning environment should be designed in
such a way that the acquisition of SRL and SDL skills is supported. In this
chapter after addressing the concept of learning ability or more specifically
the concepts of SRL and SDL and the way the two are intertwined, the basic
elements needed in the design of a flexible learning environment are discussed.
The need for well-structured learning materials, assessment criteria,
portfolios, advisory models and instructional support for acquiring SRL and SDL
skills is discussed.
Learning Ability
Development in Flexible Learning Environments
This chapter discusses flexible learning
environments (FLES) that foster the development of learning ability, that is,
the acquisition of self-directed learning (SDL) skills and self-regulated
learning (SRL) skills. A flexible learning environment refers to an environment
in which learners are able to follow their own learning trajectory given the
formal learning goals. Concisely stated (as this is discussed extensively in
the rest of this chapter), SDL encompasses the ability to formulate learning
need, determine learning goals and select learning resources. Moreover, SRL is
the ability to monitor and steer own learning processes. Education has come to
recognise the importance of SDL and SRL. It is important because these skills
equip students for functioning in our constantly changing society as life long
learners. To give students the opportunity to develop these skills in education
a flexible learning environments is needed in which a student can follow their
own learning trajectory and get the support needed to create the most optimal
learning path. Such an environment enables learners to have choices in term of
what, where, when, why and how they learn (Hill, 2006). Based on formulated
learning needs and learning goals learners should be able to identify human and
material resources for learning in a flexible learning environment. In this
way, such an environment enables learners to determine personalised learning
trajectories given the formal learning goals. But just given the learners the
opportunity to choose is not recommended, because research shows that learners
are not always capable of making substantiated, appropriate, and effective
choices (e.g. Williams, 1996), resulting in ineffective learning and low
transfer of learning. So, we argue that a flexible learning environment can be
a good starting point to encourage learners to become self-directed and
self-regulated learners. But the support and guidance given in the environment
to the learners in acquiring these skills and make appropriate choices seems
essential.
A flexible learning environment differs from
what is called an adaptive learning environment. In an adaptive environment the
learning trajectory and learning materials are personalised, but the system
does this for the learner. Adaptivity can be defined as the capability of a
system to alter its behavior according to the learners and other
characteristics (Vandewaetere, Desmet, & Clarebout, 2011). The “system” could
be a teacher, a trainer, an intelligent agent or tutor, etc. In any event, the
system adapting the materials and trajectory to the learner is not the learner
herself/himself and thus the learner cannot develop the needed SRL and SDL
skills in such an environment, unless the “system” decides the environment
should allow flexibility.
This chapter outlines the basic elements
needed in the design of an FLE. The need for well-structured learning
materials, assessment criteria, portfolios, advisory models and instructional
support for acquiring regulation skills is discussed. But before we go into
that, we address the concept of learning ability or more specifically the
concepts of SRL and SDL and the way the two are intertwined. The chapter
concludes with a discussion section in which theoretical and practical
implications are addressed and directions for future research are given.
Learning ability
Learning ability is related to SDL and SRL.
The SRL and SDL skill can be referred to as higher-order skills, skills
overlooking and governing the cognitive system, while simultaneously being part
of it (Veenman, Van Hout-Wolter, & Affierbach, 2006). In the literature,
SDL and SRL are often difficult to distinguish from each other with confusion
being the result. The constructs are regularly used interchangeably (Boekaerts
& Como, 2005; Bolhuis, 2003; Dinsmore, Alexander, & Loughlin, 2008),
often no precise definitions are given and a variety of related terms (e.g.
autodidaxy, SDL, independent study, SRL, self-planned learning. self-guided learning
and learner control) is used to indicate both constructs (Brockett &
Hiemstra, 1991). Moreover, SDL and SRL are complex constructs that focus on
different aspects of the learner and her/his learning processes (e.g.
motivational or cognitive processes, organisation of learning). Although the
constructs are closely related, they differ in theoretical background as well
as empirical methods to study them and, therefore, should not be used interchangeably.
Self-Directed Learning
SDL is described by Knowles (1975) as
"a process in which individuals take initiative, with or without the help
of others, in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating learning goals,
identifying human and material resources for learning, choosing and
implementing appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating learning outcomes”
(p. 18). Although the concept of SDL was introduced in adult education, Knowles
pointed out that SDL does not exclusively apply to adult. Brockett and Hiemstra
(1991) developed a conceptual frame, work for understanding SDL called the
“Personality Responsibility Orientation” with personal responsibility as the
starting point for SDL. In their view, individuals need to be owners of their
thoughts and actions and should have or be willing to take-control over how to
respond to a situation and make choices concerning their learning process without
ignoring the social context. The freedom to make choices implies that learners
need to be able to make good choices during their learning process (Brockett,
2006), and must be responsible for the consequences of their thoughts and
actions. Self-directed learners, thus, are able, ready, and willing to
independently prepare, execute and complete learning (Van Hout-Wolters, Simons,
& Volet, 2000 ).
Different authors have described
characteristics of a skilful self-directed learner. These include initiative,
intentions, choices, freedom, energy and responsibility (Tough, 1979, in Levett-Jones,
2005), the ability to learn on one’s own, personal responsibility for the
internal cognitive and motivational aspects of learning (Garrison, 1997),
independence, autonomy and the ability to control one’s own affairs
(Candy,1991). These characteristics stress a key aspect of SDL, namely, that
the learner determines the planning and execution of her/his learning
trajectory in the long term. Therefore, as stated by Jossberger, Brand-Gruwel,
Van de Wiel, and Boshuizen (2010) SDL can be situated at the macro level and concerns
the person’s learning trajectory as a whole. Self-directed learners are able to
decide what needs to be learned next and how their learning can best be
accomplished. Skilful self-directed learners can-based on an evaluation of
previous learning-diagnose their own learning needs, formulate learning goals,
and identify and choose human and material resources for learning, and
determine appropriate learning strategies (cf. Kicken. Brand-Gruwel, Van
Merrienboer, & Slot, 2009; Knowles, 1975).
Self-Regulated Learning
SRL. in contrast, functions on a micro-level
and concerns processes within the execution of a specific learning task. It is
argued (Jossberger et al., 2010; Loyens, Magda. & Rikers, 2008) that White
SDL includes SRL, the opposite is not the case. In other words, self-directed
learners are supposed to be able to also self-regulate their learning, but a
self-regulated learner is not necessarily able to self-direct her/his learning.
SRL deals with subsequent steps in a learning
process (Loyens et al., 2008). owever,
in the SRL literature there is a variety perspectives on how cognitive,
meta-cognitive, motivational and contextual factors influence the learning process
(e.g. Boekaerts, 1997; Pintrich, 2003; Zimmerman, 2002). A well known and often
used perspective is that of Zimmerman (1989, p. 329) who states that “students
can be describe as self-regulated to the degree that they are meta cognitively,
motivationally, and behaviourally active participant in their own learning
process”. Important in this citation is the word degree. The more the learner
is intrinsically motivated, is learning in an active way and is metacognitively
involved in the process the more self-regulated the learner is.
Zimmerman (2000, 2006) describes three
phases and underlying sub-processes that involve behavioural, environmental, and
covert self-regulation. The forethought phase is a preparatory phase where
learners orient themselves to the learning task and plan the steps that need to
be taken to carry out the learning task. Self-regulated learners analyse the learning
task, set a clear goal, make a plan and select strategies for achieving the
goal. Task demands and personal resources must be considered before beginning a
task so that potential obstacles can be identified (Ertmer & Newby, 1996; Zimmerman,
2000, 2006). In the performance phase, monitoring and adjusting are central
skills during the learning proses. Monitoring is essential, as learners should
be conplan are of what they are doing by looking back at the and looking
forward at the steps that still need to be performed to achieve the goal in
mind. When learners realise that things do not work out as planned, they need
to adjust their approach. In the final reflection phase, assessing and evaluating are key skills. After having carried out the
task, learners valuate the effectiveness and efficiency of the plan an of their
strategy use (Ertmer & Newby, 1996; Zimmerman,
2000,2006). Evaluating the process and
refiecting on experience can increase learning from actual experience and can possibly
be used in the future (Ertmer & Newby, 1996; Fowler, 2008). Reflection is,
therefore, critical for the link between previous learning experiences and
future learning experiences because a learner can, by reiiecting, draw upon previous
knowledge to gain new knowledge (Ertmer & Newby, 1996).
To conclude, learning ability is related to
both SDL and SRL which are two distinctive types of learning that describe learning
processes on a macro level (SDL) and on a micro level (SRL). Learning ability includes
both SDL skills (learning trajectory level) and SRL skills (learning task
level). In Fig. 29.1, the way the two skills are interrelated is visualised. AS
can be seen, the two skills act on different levels but proper execution of
both skills is needed to optimise the learning process. The outcome of the task
performance and the assessment of the task helps learners to formulate learning
needs and goals and to direct learning, and select tasks for future learning.
It is important to realise that guidance and
support in these skills must be embedded in the domain specific content of the
curriculum. As mentioned these skills are higher-order skills and Van
Merrienboer (1997) assumes higher-order skills can only be trained in a
particular domain. Furthermore he claims that “...if we want the strategic
component of higher-order skills to transfer between domains, they should be
trained in as many domains (or, courses) as possible and it should be made
explicit to students that a higher-order skill that works in one domain may
also work, or may not work, in another domain” (pp. 15-16). This promotion of
mindful abstraction and decontextualisation of general principles of
higher-order skills, is referred to as “the high road of transfer” (Perkins
& Salomon, 1987). This assumption has its consequences for the way the
instruction to acquire these skills should be designed. The next section
discusses the design of an FLE and the instructional support that can be embedded
in it to acquire these skills.
Flexible Learning
Environments: Enabling Self-Directed Learning
As stated, a flexible learning environment
is an environment that enables learners to make choices, select learning materials
(e.g. subsequent learning tasks) and personalise their learning trajectory
based on the formulated learning needs and learning goals. These needs and
goals are based on the assessment of the previous performed learning tasks. Furthermore,
we argue that a FLE should be designed in such a way that the acquisition of
these skills is supported. The responsibility of the choices made in the
learning environment can be gradually shift from the teacher (or intelligent
agent) to a learner. When the learner acquired a set of well-developed SDL
skills, the learner can be given full control and complete freedom to decide on
the learning trajectory. But when the learner is not yet able to accomplish a self-assessment,
formulate learning needs and goals. And select appropriate tasks, the teacher
and learner should share the control. A flexible learning environment based on
shared control is an environment where learners can learn to become self-directed
in a guided way.
When designing a flexible learning
environment the design elements necessary to foster SDL must be thoroughly
considered. Based on the work of Knowles (1975) on SDL, of Zeichner and Wray
(2001) on portfolio use, of Bell & Kozlowski, 2002 on enhancing self
regulation, and of Tennyson (1980) on instructional strategies Kicken, Brand-Gruwel,
and Van Merrienboer (2008) developed what they called the informed self-directed
learning (ISDL) model in which three components or information resources are
distinguished to support SDL skills development in an FLE The elements are (1)
learning tasks with metadata, (2) a development portfolio and (3) an advisory
model. Figure 29.2 Shows how these components are related in a learning
environment with shared control. The components at the top of the figure (development
portfolio, advisory model, task metadata) negate the major problem in many
so-called flexible learning environments, namely, the learners’ lack of
information essential for successful SDL. The inclusion of the advisory model here
is based on the empirical findings that learners often have not yet
sufficiently developed their own SDL skills and, thus, need to be explicitly
supported in developing them. The information provided by the development
portfolio and task metadata is directly related to the activities of
performance (self-) assessment, learning goal formulation, and resource
selection (e.g. learning tasks) (Knowles, 1975). The rule bars indicate the
amount of support given to the learner in order to perform the SDL skills to a
sufficient level and make adequate decisions on the learning trajectory. The
model by Kicken et al. provides the basis for the development of a FLE.
The ISDL model implemented in an FLE
supports a cyclical learning process. The learner selects one or more learning tasks
from the task database, carries it/them out, gathers assessments of the
task/tasks in the portfolio based on assessment criteria, selects one or more
new learning tasks from the database taking the information in the portfolio
into account, and so on. In each cycle, the updated information in the portfolio
is used to formulate/reformulate individual learning need and set new learning
goals to select suitable subsequent task. The teacher or computer system uses
the coaching protocol base on the advisory model to support and guide the
process of formulating learning needs, setting learning goals, and selecting
new tasks and so optimises the development of both domain-specific skills and
SDL skills. The model gives insight in the process of SDL but also provides
information about the important design elements of the FLE. We briefly discuss
the design elements and address research that has been conducted to concerning
the models’ elements.
Learning Tasks with Metadata
Learners should be supported in selecting new learning tasks according
to their level of performance, because such a selection is a difficult aspect
of SDL. When the learning environment is too open, providing learners with to
many choices andtoo little guidance or
advice to help them make appropriate decisions, it can lead to even negative effects
on cognitive, metacognitive, and affective learning variables (Katz & Assor,
2007; Williams, 1996). Selecting new tasks or resources for learning must be
learned by practising and receiving
feedback on the quality of the selection process and the appropriateness of it.
To help students to select appropriate tasks that fit their learning needs it
is necessary that alarge set of learning tasks is available. To select tasks from
this set, learners should have the tasks’ relevant metadata available (Bell
& Kozlowski, 2002). These metadata can include the tasks’ objectives, the
skills that can be acquired the task’s level of difficulty and support
provided, the applicable performance standards for determining whether the task
has been carried out to a predetermined level, and the prerequisite skills,
knowledge and attitudes necessary to perform it (Kicken et al., 2008). The
goals and skills that can be acquired is of major importance, because taken the
personal learning goals and learning needs one has to choose if the new tasks
is in essence suitable.
Development Portfolio
A development portfolio, which can be electronic or
paper-and-pencil, gives an overview of assessments of task performances and
keeps track of the learning process by providing an overview (Kicken et al.,
2008, 2009). Several studies reported that development portfolios are effective
tools to help students reflect on their learning and to think about the development
of their skills (Chen, Liu, Ou, & Lin, 2000; Driessen, van Tartwijk, Qvereem,
Vermunt, & van der Vleuten, 2005; Mansvelder-Longayroux, Beijaard, & Verloop,
2007; Zeichner & Wray, 2001). An important aspect in the assessments is the
use of assessment criteria.These criteria should be specific and related to the
learning goals of the task. The assessor(s) (e.g. teacher, coach, peer or intelligent
agent) can put the assessment into the portfolio. In that case the learner and
the teacher have an overview of the learners’ progress. A development portfolio
also allows the learner the opportunity or can even require that the learner
bring his or her self-assessments into it. Finally, the portfolio can allow the
comparison of these assessments. This kind of infomation make that learners
acquire more experience in self-assessments, and can gain more insight in their
progress or lack of piogress (Birenbaum & Dochy, 1996; Falchikov &
Boud, 1989). The assessments gathered in the portfolio and the information they
provide on competency development offer a sufficient basis for identifying individual
learning needs; The learning needs, formulated either by the learner or by the learner
and the agent (e.g. teacher, tutor, peer, computer) in a shared control
condition should also added into the ponfolio. These learning needs can be
related to the assessment criteria. Students are not used to think about or
formulate their learning needs (Holme
& Chalauisaeng, 2006), and therefore, it is important
that learner perceive that assessments for a basis for formulating learning
needs. Also the learning goals for future learning can be part of the
portfolio; in this way the goals can be related to the learning needs and the
tasks that can be selected to fulfil these learning needs.
Advisory Models
FLES should make learners increasingly responsible for their own
SDL process and advisory models can help teachers to integrate support on these
skills in their education. Providing students with advice has shown to be an
effective method to help students make better choices and develop their task selection
skills (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002; Tennyson & Buttery, 1980). For giving
advice the teacher can use different advisory models (Taminiau, Kester,
Corbalan, Van Merrienboer, & Kirschner, 2010). A procedural advisory model
provides the students with feedback on their self assessment skills and formulated
learning goals, by informing them whether the self-assessments are in line with
expert assessments and the SMART rules. Feedforward is provided merely by
informing learners which task(s) they could select in order to improve their
performance. A strategic advisory model provides the learners with feedback on
their self-assessments and self-formulated learning goals in terms of their
accuracy and effectiveness, and provides directions for improvement of
self-assessment skills and formulating learning goals. With respect to
feedforward information, the directions for task selection are heuristic in
nature and extend the basic information on suitable tasks with in-depth explanations
and arguments for their suitability. A strategic model makes explicit how
assessments of prior performance are interpreted and converted into directions
for the selection of new learning tasks (Kicken et al., 2008).
Flexible Learning Environments in Practice
Kicken et al. (2009) investigated the effects of giving students
specific portfolio-based advice on the development of their SDL skills in a
flexible environment. In a flexible hair-dressing programme in vocational
secondary education, one group of students received feedback on their achievements
while a second group received specific portfolio-based advice (i.e. feedback
and feedforward) in regular supervision meetings. In the environment, learning
tasks were of different complexity levels, were all authentic tasks and the tasks
differed concerning the amount of support. To help students take responsibility
for their own learning process and make effective choices, a web-based
development portfolio called Structured Task Evaluation and Planning Portfolio (STEPP)
was designed and implemented. STEPP has three functionalities. namely. helping
students to (a) assess their own task performance using assessment standards
and criteria. (b) formulate learning needs based on assessed Short comings in
task performance and (c) select future learning tasks with characteristics that
help to fulfil the formulated learning needs. Figure 29.3 is a screen dump of this electronic
portfolio.
On the left side of the screen, a hierarchical menu with all possible
hairdressing skills and subskills are presented and on the right side students
can add their self-ssessment and their points of improvement. On another screen
students were able to select future learning tasks, skills and subskills that
need further practice to meet the formulated learning needs. Finally. STEPP
provides three structured overviews with all portfolio data necessary for
discussing a student’s progress during supervision meetings. The first screen
presents all learning tasks performed by the student, together with the
corresponding self-assessments and, if applicable, teacher assessments. The
second screen gives an overview of all formulated learning needs. The third
screen presents' the working plan for the forthcoming week.
In
both the advice and the feedback-only group, the supervisor provided feedback
on the student’s progress report and planning of learning over the previous 2
weeks, while discussing the three above mentioned STEPP overview screens in a
hxed order. In the advice condition, the supervisor provided not only feedback
but, in addition, advice on how to improve SDL skills.
Effects were studied on the development of SDL skills
(i.e.self-assessment of performance,
formulating learning needs and selecting new learning tasks), learning results,
and student perceptions of the effectiveness of the supervision meetings. The
effect of giving advice was evident in students’ ability to formulate learning
needs. Students who received advice were better able to diagnose possible cause
(s) of their weaknesses and formulated relatively more diagnostic learning
needs than students who only received feedback. With respect to task selection
skills, providing feedback on task selection was to some extent effective,
provided that students selected tasks from a limited number of available tasks.
With respect to self-assessment skills, students did not reach a stage where
they were able to assess their own performance at a sufficient level. So it can
be concluded that the SDL skills of the students were to some extent improved,
However, transfer to other learning situations and over time were not measured in
this study. Further research should be conducted to gain insight in how
transfer processes occur. Furthemiore, students in the advice condition showed
better learning results.
Flexible Learning Environments: Embedded Support
on Self-Regulated Learning
When functioning in an FLE it is also
important that learners receive support on the acquisition of SRL skills,
because for functioning well in an FLE also requires regulation of learning processes
when accomplishing learning tasks. In the following, four well-known
instructional interventions that facilitate the acquisition of SRL skills and
which can be embedded in the tasks used in the FLE are discussed. These are
process worksheets (e.g. Nadolski, Kirschner, & Van Merrienboer, 2006),
prompting (e.g. Stacltler & Bromme, 2008), modeling (e.g. Collins, Brown,
& Holum, 1991) and feedback (e.g. Butler & Winne, 1995; Hattie &
Timperley, 2007).
Process Worksheets
To help learners to attend to their micro
level learning process providing general strategies and heuristics. can enable
them to carry out the task and meet the assessment criteria for the task (Van
Merrienboer, 1997). According to Nadolski et al. (2006) a process worksheet
provides a systematic approach to accomplish a learning task, presenting
descriptions of the steps that need to be taken to carry out the task, and
hints or rules of thumb that may help the
learner to successfully complete the task. They support both the acquisition of
domain specific skills and SRL skills such as monitoring task performance and
adjusting one’s behaviour when task performance is not successful. Powerful
scaffolds that can be added to a process worksheet are the presentation of keywords or leading questions reflecting a
strategic approach to carrying out the task (Land & Greene, 2000).
Wopereis, Brand Gmwel, and Vermetten (2008) taught students to solve information-based
problems while searching for information on the Internet, making use of process
worksheets to structure and regulate the solution process. They found that,
after the intervention, students who had received the process worksheets
regulated their task performance, more often than the students who had not. In other
words, using process worksheets enabled students to acquire SRL skills when
accomplishing a similar task as during the intervention.
Prompts
A prompt is a cue given to someone to help
or remember him or her to act on time or immediately. Prompts embedded in the
learning context trigger the learner to execute specific SRL skills on a
regular basis (Banneit, 2004) directing the learner’s attention towards her/his
own cognition during the learning process (Brown, 1997). Empirical evidence for
the effect of using prompts on SRL skill acquisition has been found in a number
of experimental studies. These studies have been carried out in different
content domains such as mathematics (Gerjets, Scheiter, & Schuh, 2005; Kramarski
& Gutman, 2006), psychology (Bannext, 2003), software programming (Schmidt
& Ford, 2003), physics (Veenman, Elshout, & Busato, 1994), educational
measurement (Kaufman & Lichtenberger, 2006) and biology (Lin &Lehman,
1999). Stadtler and Bromme (2008), for example, prompted students to monitor
their comprehension process while studying multiple hypertext documents and
found that repeated prompting assisted domain novices in detecting comprehension
failures and inconsistencies in their text representation thereby enabling them
to regulate their inforrnation processing accordingly (e.g. by re-reading
difficult parts of the text or slowing down their reading speed). Further evidence
showing that prompts indeed have a positive impact on SRL skill acquisition has
been found in studies using think aloud methodology (Bannert, 2004; Veenman et
al., 1994).
Modelling
Modelling is an instructional strategy that
can be seen as a first step in cognitive apprenticeship, "a model of
instruction that works to make thinking visible” (Collins et al., l99l, p. l). Modelling
refers to the teacher or instructor (or actually any expert in a domain)
demonstrating the carrying out of a task and also thinking aloud about what
she/he is doing while performing that task. By verbalising her/his thoughts,
the teacher makes it possible for learners to conceptually understand the task
as well as observe the regulation aspects involved in carrying out the task. A
teacher is likely to offer explicit description of each part of the process
while performing the task, thus providing the learner with both a conceptual
overall understanding and an analysis of the regulation processes involved. Effects
of using modelling as an instructional measure to foster regulation have been
studied for example by Brand-Gruwel, Aarnoutse, and van den Bos (1998). Primary
school children learned to regulate their reading comprehension process during
a 1-month intervention where the process of reading comprehension was modelled
by both the teacher and peers. Compared to students in the control condition,
students receiving the modelling intervention exhibited more regulation behaviour.
Furthermore, when measuring transfer over time, the effects were not found
anymore. It seems important to keep supporting the children in using these
skills.
Feedback
According to Hattie and
Timperley (2007), feedback is a powerful tool or teaching strategy in
supporting learners in enhancing their leaaring performance. Feedback can be
defined as “information provided by an agent (e.g. teacher, peer, book, parent,
self, experience) regarding aspects of one’s performance or understanding”
(Hattie & Timperley, 2007,p.8l) and it is “information with which a learner
can confirm, add to, overwrite, tune, or restructure information in memory,
whether that information is domain knowledge, metacognitive knowledge, beliefs
about self and tasks, or cognitive tactics and strategies” (Winne & Butler,
1994, p. 5740). Feedback aims to bridge the gap between the current level of
performance/understanding and the learning goals. According to Hattie and Timperley,
the effectiveness of feedback depends on its focus. Task mastery is especially
promoted by feedback on process level and self-regulation level because this
feedback is related to learning (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Focusing
feedback on the learning process can guide learners how to learn, set learning
goals, choose and execute learning activities, diagnose and monitor the
learning process, and evaluate learning results (Bolhuis & Voeten, 2001).
