Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
For the purposes of this chapter, the critical aspect of both theories is that they incor-
porate a predominant role for the monitoring of ongoing learning in determining
what to study and how to distribute study time across materials.
Judgments of Learning as an Index of Current Learning
One difficulty in evaluating how learners operate upon materials of varying dif-
ficulty is the presence of idiosyncratic differences in knowledge and intellectual
skills. What is difficult for one learner may be easy for another, for a variety of
reasons relating to their constitution and experience. In research on metacognition,
this problem is often addressed by asking learners to make explicit assessments of
their level of learning; such
judgments of learning
(JOLs) are reflective of norma-
tive difficulty (e.g., Dunlosky & Matvey, 2001) and show reasonable correlations
with learners' later test performance (e.g., Arbuckle & Cuddy, 1969; Dunlosky &
Nelson, 1992, 1994; Lovelace, 1984). Although there are numerous cases in which
JOLs are dissociable from actual learning (e.g., Benjamin, 2003, 2005; Benjamin &
Bjork, 1996; Benjamin et al., 1998; Finn & Metcalfe, 2008; Schwartz & Metcalfe,
1994; Metcalfe, Schwartz, & Joaquim, 1993), subjective JOLs are likely to be a
reasonable proxy variable for a learner's objective current learning state under most
conditions.
In a meta-analysis of published research examining the relationship between
JOLs and study time allocation, Son and Metcalfe (2000) found that 35 out of
46 published papers revealed a negative correlation: learners devote more time to
items they have rated as the least well learned. In addition, choice of items for re-
study is related to learners' JOLs: when given the option of re-studying a portion
of previously studied materials, learners typically choose to re-study those items to
which they gave the lowest JOLs (Nelson, Dunlosky, Graf, & Narens, 1994). Even
in situations where JOLs are unrelated to final recall performance, learners choose
to re-study items based on their JOLs and not on their ultimate recall performance
(Finn &Metcalfe, 2008). Such evidence suggests that learners control their studying
based on the results of their monitoring, generally choosing to re-study and spend
more time on items they have judged most difficult to remember.
Monitoring of Retrieval Processes and Control of Output
Monitoring has also been found to influence control at the time of retrieval. For
example, when learners give high
feelings of knowing
to unrecalled answers—that
is, high judgments of knowing the answer even though they cannot currently recall
it—they are willing to search memory for a longer period of time (Costermans,
Lories, &Ansay, 1992; Nelson &Narens, 1990). A similar process appears to under-
lie how learners respond to general information questions. An initial, rapid feeling
