Monitoring tools show low effects on self-regulated learning (d = 0.19)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r? · q3 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i0 Monitoring tool interventions yield a low effect on learners' use of SRL strategies (d = 0.19). → Dignath 2023

Evidence¶

Dignath 2023¶

Dignath, C., van Ewijk, R., Perels, F., & Fabriz, S. (2023). Let Learners Monitor the Learning Content and Their Learning Behavior! A Meta-analysis on the Effectiveness of Tools to Foster Monitoring. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09718-4

q3 · i0 · quant-synthesis · r?

Same meta-analysis of 32 intervention studies; the SRL outcome pooled 53 effect sizes per the coded study table. The review reports "low effects on self-regulated learning (d = 0.19)".

"supported a reactivity effect by revealing a moderate effect size on academic achievement (d = 0.42), and low effects on self-regulated learning (d = 0.19) and motivation (d = 0.17)"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Self-Regulation — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Monitoring tools produce a moderate effect on academic achievement (d = 0.42), supporting a reactivity effect — related
• Monitoring tools show low effects on learning motivation (d = 0.17) — related
• Self Assessment Improves Self Regulated Learning — related
• Metacognitive strategy instruction, which includes comprehension monitoring, improves academic performance by a medium amount, and in one non-randomised study comprehension-monitoring training raised low achievers' reading scores — related