1. Exploring the Effects of Motivated Learning Support in a Problem-based Learning Environment Ming-Puu Chen National Taiwan Normal University Taipei, Taiwan mpchen@ice.ntnu.edu.tw

2. 1. The Technology The web-based technology The web-based technology –facilitates the creation of learner- centered active learning environments that promote higher order thinking Web-based learning systems Web-based learning systems –must engage the learners –support cognitive processing leading to knowledge construction In this study, a web-based system was used to facilitate problem solving. In this study, a web-based system was used to facilitate problem solving.

3. 2. Perspectives Active learning relies on learners ’ self- regulatory skills. Active learning relies on learners ’ self- regulatory skills. Active learning can be facilitated Active learning can be facilitated –if factors of self-regulation can be considered in the instructional design phase and implemented in the learning process. Self-regulation consists of 3 sub-processes: self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and Self-regulation consists of 3 sub-processes: self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and self-reaction. self-reaction.

4. Self-monitoring is a critical element of self- reflective practice, and self-reflective practice allows learners to monitor, evaluate, and adjust their performance during learning. Self-monitoring is a critical element of self- reflective practice, and self-reflective practice allows learners to monitor, evaluate, and adjust their performance during learning. Teachers must provide students with training in self-monitoring and opportunities for its use. Teachers must provide students with training in self-monitoring and opportunities for its use. Learning environment should be designed to provide information about progress. This is especially helpful when progress otherwise is difficult to ascertain. Learning environment should be designed to provide information about progress. This is especially helpful when progress otherwise is difficult to ascertain. Use learning goals and provide feedback on goal progress. Use learning goals and provide feedback on goal progress. Schunk (1997) 3. Implications for Teaching

5. Purpose of instruction Purpose of instruction Content difficulty Content difficulty Cognitive processing Cognitive processing Strategy instruction Strategy instruction Performance feedback Performance feedback Models Models Goal setting Goal setting Rewards Rewards Attributional feedback Attributional feedback 4. Motivated Learning Practice

6. 5. Purposes of this Study Examining the effect of motivated learning support on web-based problem-solving Examining the effect of motivated learning support on web-based problem-solving Exploring learners ’ interactions during problem-solving (Comprehension, Planning, Execution, & Evaluation). Exploring learners ’ interactions during problem-solving (Comprehension, Planning, Execution, & Evaluation).

7. 6. Research Design Motivated learning implemented Motivated learning implemented –Attributional feedback + High- Problem-solving support –Performance feedback + Low- Problem-solving support Independent variables: Independent variables: –Type of support (Attributional Vs. Performance) –Prior knowledge (High vs. Low in programming) Dependent variables: Dependent variables: –Progressive performance –Time on tasks –Project performance

8. Cont. Participants Participants –104 college students (2nd year) –Taking the application of database systems course –With good Chinese keyboarding skills The MTV (Making Thinking Visible) system The MTV (Making Thinking Visible) systemMaking Thinking VisibleMaking Thinking Visible

9. 7. Analysis and Results Group Performance Group Performance Individual Performance Individual Performance –by PK & Support Progressive Performance Progressive Performance –by PK & Support On-line Self-Monitoring On-line Self-Monitoring –by PK & Support On-line Self-Evaluation On-line Self-Evaluation –by PK & Support

10. Results - Group Performance Dependent VariableType III Sum of Squares dfMean SquareFSig. Progressive Performance9692.4621 11.793.002 Time on Tasks19403712.3461 2.357.138 Project Performance645.0101 10.783.003

11. Results - Individual Performance SourceDependent VariableType III Sum of Squares dfdf Mean Square FSig. Prior Knowledge Progressive Performance988.4471 12.985.001 Time on Tasks834100.6251 1.259.265 Type of Support Progressive Performance1465.2421 19.248.000 Time on Tasks4139403.8751 6.250.014

12. Results - Progressive Performance by Prior Knowledge SourceDependent Variable Type III Sum of Squares dfMean SquareFSig. Prior Knowledge Comprehension 94.6671 11.539.001 Planning 33.0571 2.140.147 Execution 47.6971 11.424.001 Evaluation 80.5621 12.249.001

13. SourceDependent Variable Type III Sum of Squares dfMean SquareFSig. Type of Support Comprehension 176.8011 21.550.000 Planning 400.2141 25.907.000 Execution 2.6041.624.432 Evaluation 14.6991 2.235.138 Results - Progressive Performance by Type of Support

14. Results - On-line Self-Monitoring Source Dependent Variable Type III Sum of Squares dfMean SquareFSig. Prior Knowledge Comprehension96.5101.170.681 Planning112.3471.181.671 Execution143.2901.644.424 Evaluation254.8291 2.575.112 Type of Support Comprehension2947.9151 5.182.025 Planning1441.9511 2.326.131 Execution.1911.001.977 Evaluation3.8831.039.843

15. Results - On-line Self-reaction by Prior Knowledge SourceDependent Variable Type III Sum of Squares dfMean SquareFSig. Prior Knowledge Comprehension 68.8691 9.264.003 Planning 31.6921 2.250.137 Execution 40.0431 11.720.001 Evaluation 43.7011 9.930.002

16. Results - On-line Self-reaction by Type of Support SourceDependent Variable Type III Sum of Squares dfMean SquareFSig. Type of Support Comprehension 810.4671 109.022.000 Planning 820.5811 58.249.000 Execution 14.4841 4.239.042 Evaluation 116.2101 26.406.000

17. 8. Summary and Conclusions Group Performance Group Performance –Attributional support enhanced progressive performance during problem- solving process –Performance support enhanced the final project performance 1. In accordance with previous studies 2. Whether engaged the learner in the learning tasks lessened the attributional group ’ s final project performance ?

18. Cont. 1 Progressive Performance - by Individual Progressive Performance - by Individual –Attributional support engaged the learner in the problem-solving process and resulted in higher progressive performance & time on tasks –High prior knowledge also enhanced progressive performance, but not time on tasks Progressive Performance - by Stage Progressive Performance - by Stage –Attributional Support Only enhanced Comprehension & Planning –Prior Knowledge: Enhanced Comprehension, Execution, & Evaluation. Q2: Yes 3. Whether enhancing Execution and Evaluation will result in better final project performance?

19. Cont. 2 On-line self-monitoring behaviors On-line self-monitoring behaviors –Attributional support enhanced problem comprehension –Prior knowledge no significant effect 4. Better CMC tools for documenting self- monitoring behaviors is suggested.

20. Cont. 3 On-line self-reaction behaviors On-line self-reaction behaviors –Attributional support enhanced problem comprehension, planning, execution, and evaluation. –Prior knowledge enhanced problem comprehension, planning, execution, and evaluation. 5. Attributional support and high prior knowledge enhanced on-line self-reaction behavior. 6. Attributional support and high prior knowledge seem to contribute to better progressive performance.

21. ~ The End ~