Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
1993). Planning includes expressing lack of knowledge and setting goals for explor-
ing the hypermedia. Monitoring includes control of various strategies to reach goals
such as students checking their understanding and learning process. To check their
understanding, learners may apply strategies such as reading, elaborating, explain-
ing, raising and answering questions, agreeing and disagreeing, expressing feeling
of knowing. Evaluation involves making assessments of learning content, strategies,
learning processes, and learning products. This mechanism is essential for students
to select effective strategies and reflect on the relations between the strategies and
the learning outcomes (Schoenfeld, 1987). The percentage of each co-regulated
learning indicants were calculated and compared across conditions. A second coder
was trained in the coding system and coded 20% of all data independently of the
primary coder. The interrater agreement was above 90%. All the coding was com-
pleted blind to conditions. ANOVAs were used to compare the mean percentage of
each indicator of co-regulated learning.
The student answers to pre- and posttest questions were analyzed using an SBF-
based coding scheme (Hmelo, Holton, &Kolodner, 2000). For example, the mention
of the lungs was coded as a structure, the mechanism of gas exchange as a behavior,
and the need to provide oxygen as a function. A 2
2 mixed ANOVA with hyper-
media condition as a between subjects factor and time as a within subjects factor
was used to test the effect of hypermedia in terms of SBF.
×
Results
Quantitative Results
Co-regulated learning.
The descriptive statistics for indicators of co-regulated learn-
ing are shown in Table 17.2 as mean percentages. Learners in the S-hypermedia
condition were more likely than the F-hypermedia to express lack of knowledge
(
F
(1.18)
=
12.09,
p
=
0.006) engage in reading (
F
(1.18)
=
5.44,
p
=
0.04), provide
simple answers (
F
(1.18)
=
21.42,
p
=
0.001) and raise question (
F
(1.18)
=
24.42,
p
0.001). Learners in the F-hypermedia condition were more likely to engage in
checking learning progress (
F
(1.18)
=
=
=
13.68,
p
0.004), checking understanding
=
=
=
(
F
(1.18)
5.38,
p
0.043), and specific-question driven exploration (
F
(1.18)
6.36,
p
0.03)
Learning outcomes.
The results of pre- and posttests are shown in Table 17.3.
The results indicate that both versions of hypermedia helped students learn about
the human respiratory system. All students showed reliable gains in learning over
time. Students using the S-hypermedia showed gains in understanding structures
(
F
(1.18)
=
=
34.56,
p
<0.001), behaviors (
F
(1.18)
=
6.61,
p
=
0.03), and func-
tions (
F
(1.18)
0.003). Students using the F-hypermedia showed
gains in understanding structures (
F
(1.18)
=
16.67,
p
=
=
6.975,
p
=
0.027) and behaviors
(
F
(1.18)
=
16.16,
p
=
0.003) in the posttest than in the pretest. Students who
