Research in Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Students' Self-Regulated Learning Strategies in Traditional and Non-Traditional Classroom: A Comparative Study

  • Davaanyam, Tumenbayar (Department of Mathematics, School of Arts and Sciences, National Univ. of Mongolia) ;
  • Tserendorj, Navchaa (Department of Mathematics, School of Arts and Sciences, National Univ. of Mongolia)
  • Received : 2015.03.10
  • Accepted : 2015.03.26
  • Published : 2015.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study used a posttest control group design and to find out differences between students' self-regulated learning strategies in traditional and non-traditional classroom. To this end, 131 first year university students within the experimental and control groups took part in the study. While ICT-based approach was used as the main medium of instruction in the experimental group, in the control group the paper-based traditional method was used. A survey adapted from Davaanyam [Davaanyam, T. (2013). The structural relationships among Mongolian students' attitudes toward mathematics, motivational beliefs, self-regulated learning strategies, and mathematics achievement. Ph. D. Dissertation. Jeonju, Jeonbuk, Korea: Chonbuk National Unversity.] was used to gather the data. The results of the study indicated a significant difference between the control and experimental groups in regard with their self-regulated learning. That is to say, the experimental group taught through ICT tools acquired higher levels of self-regulation as compared with the control group instructed through the traditional teaching method.

Keywords

References

  1. Balanskat, A.; Blamire, R. & Kefala, S. (2006). The Impact Report: A Review of Studies of ICT Impact on Schools in Europe. European Schoolnet, Dec. 11, 2006. http://www.nesse.fr/nesse/activities/research-mapping/digital-technologies/bibliography/Balanskat2006
  2. Butzin, S. (2001). Using instructional technology in transformed learning environments: An evaluation of project CHILD. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 33(4), 367-373. https://doi.org/10.1080/08886504.2001.10782321
  3. Davaanyam, T. (2013). The structural relationships among Mongolian students' attitudes toward mathematics, motivational beliefs, self-regulated learning strategies, and mathematics achievement. Ph. D. Dissertation. Jeonju, Jeonbuk, Korea: Chonbuk National Unversity.
  4. De Corte, E.; Verschaffel, L. & Op't Eynde, P. (2000). Self-regulation: A characteristic and a goal of mathematics education. In: M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation. (pp. 687-726). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. ME 2001e.03788
  5. Flavell, J. H. (1999). Cognitive development: Children's knowledge about the mind. Annual Review of Psychology 50, 21-45. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.21
  6. Pape, S. J. (2005). Interventions that support future mathematics learning: Developing selfregulated learners in K-12 classrooms. In: S. Wagner (Ed.), Prompt Intervention in Mathematics Education, (pp. 77-97). Columbus, OH; Ohio Department of Education.
  7. Pape, S. J. & Smith, C. (2002). Self-regulating mathematics skills. Theory Pract. 41(2), 93-101. ME 2003c.02056 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_5
  8. Pintrich, P. R. (1988). A process-oriented view of student motivation and cognition. In: J. S. Stark & L. A. Mets (Eds.), Improving Teaching and Learning Through Research. New Directions for Institutional Research, 57. (pp. 65-79). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  9. Pintrich, P. R. & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology 82, 33-40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
  10. Pintrich, P. R. & Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In: M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement: Goals and Self-Regulatory Processes. (pp. 371-402). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  11. Pintrich, P. R.; Smith, D. A. F.; Garcia, T. & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement 53, 801-813. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053003024
  12. Underwood, J. (2009). The Impact of Digital Technology: A Review of the Evidence of Digital Technologies on Formal Education. Coventry, UK: Becta,
  13. Wang, K. S. & Davaanyam, T. (2012). The influences of mathematics motivated beliefs, test anxiety and cognitive learning strategies on mathematics achievement of Mongolian high school graduating students, International Journal of Creativity & Problem Solving (사고 개발) 8(1), 151-172.
  14. Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In: M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching. (pp. 315-327). New York: MacMillan.
  15. Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In: B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives. (pp. 1-37). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.