Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 17.2
Mean percentage and standard deviations of co-regulated learning indicators
Co-regulation
F-condition
S-condition
2.02
∗
(1.02)
4.21
∗
(1.16)
Planning
Expressing lack of
knowledge
Explore strategy
-Free exploration
5.13
(6.91)
5.72
(4.29)
-Completion-driven
4.11
(3.59)
5.78
(3.07)
8.17
∗
(5.20)
2.32
∗
(2.27)
-Specific-question-driven
Monitoring
Checking understanding
-Reading
7.44
∗
(2.72)
12.76
∗
(4.88)
-Elaboration
18.98
(3.63)
16.85
(4.48)
-Explanation
4.72
(3.80)
1.85
(1.14)
15.47
∗
(2.09)
-Raise question
8.03
(3.03)
-Simple answer
1.95
(1.34)
6.67
(2.10)
-Agree
5.76
(2.27)
6.90
(2.54)
-Disagree
0.62
(0.85)
0.75
(0.39)
-Feeling of knowing
2.90
(3.76)
3.10
(1.98)
7.84
∗
(2.87)
2.64
∗
(2.17)
Check learning progress
Evaluating
Content evaluation
2.57
(2.05)
2.55
(2.17)
Strategy evaluation
1.80
(1.12)
0.67
(0.81)
Learning process evaluation
3.71
(1.47)
2.35
(2.73)
Learning product evaluation
2.98
(1.61)
1.75
(1.54)
Topic unrelated talk
11.26
(8.73)
7.64
(6.26)
The asterisk symbols show the items that have significant differences in the comparison statistics
used the F-hypermedia had significant gains in their understanding of nonsalient
behaviors (
F
(1.18)
0.01), whereas students using the S-hypermedia
did not. No other main effects or interactions were significant. However due to the
small sample, it was hard to tell the differential impact of the underlying conceptual
representations in the quantitative results.
=
10.76,
p
=
