Statistical discourse analysis of collaborative learning shows metacognitive planning organizes subsequent cognitive activity while relational activities help enact it¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In statistical discourse analysis of 51,338 turns from eighteen scaffolded triads, after low cognition, high cognition, planning, or evaluation both low and high cognition were more likely to occur, and after a denial high cognition was less likely to occur. → Azevedo 2014 q2 i? The authors interpret these patterns as showing that metacognitive planning organizes subsequent cognitive activities and facilitates transitions in knowledge acquisition, whereas relational activities help enact them. → Azevedo 2014 (2)

Evidence¶

Azevedo 2014¶

Azevedo, R. (2014). Issues in dealing with sequential and temporal characteristics of self- and socially-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 9, 217–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-014-9123-1

q2 · i? · review · r2

The commentary reports, citing Molenaar and Chiu, statistical discourse analysis of 51,338 conversational turns from eighteen triads of elementary students writing a report with avatar scaffolding, yielding these three sequential likelihood patterns.

"(1) after low cognition, high cognition, planning, or evaluation, both low and high cognition were more likely to occur; (2) after monitoring or positive relational activities (e.g., confirm, engage), low cognition was more likely to occur; and (3) after a denial, high cognition was less likely to occur."

Azevedo 2014 (2)¶

Azevedo, R. (2014). Issues in dealing with sequential and temporal characteristics of self- and socially-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 9, 217–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-014-9123-1

q2 · i? · review · r2

The commentary reports the authors' interpretation of the SDA findings from the collaborative report-writing study: "metacognitive planning organizes subsequent cognitive activities" while relational activities help enact them.

"their results suggest that metacognitive planning organizes subsequent cognitive activities and facilitates the transition between acquisition of knowledge whereas relational activities help enact them"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The field lacks micro-level S-SRL theory and methodological guidelines, and studies have not connected temporal/sequential characteristics to learning gains — related
• During collaborative learning, low and high cognition have remarkably long lasting (6 lags) positive effects on themselves, planning induces low cognition which sparks high cognition, and scaffolding does not alter these sequences — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Problematizing scaffolds elicit constructive, interaction-embedded metacognitive activities, whereas structuring scaffolds elicit application of examples — related
• BEAGLE's HIGH and LOW performer profiles differentiate by SRL strategy: HIGH performers allocate 72% of steps to PLANNING and MONITORING while LOW performers spend 50.8% trapped in ENACTING — related
• A temporal extraction rule classified the GENERAL INSTRUCTION -> PLANNER action pattern as Planning in the first 15 minutes but as Monitoring in the last 30 minutes — related