LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Matheson, Amanda; Wood, Laura; Franklin, Scott V. (2017)
Languages: English
Types: Preprint
Subjects: Physics - Physics Education

Classified by OpenAIRE into

ACM Ref: ComputingMilieux_COMPUTERSANDEDUCATION
Self-reflection is important metacognitive skill, enabling students to build coherence into their learning and embed content in a broader context. While various pedagogical techniques exist to encourage student reflection, little research has examined the differences between formally guided, partially guided and unguided reflections. This study focuses on student responses to online Guided Reflection Forms (GRFs) from students in a first-semester non-physics class and, separately, a sophomore-level Vibrations \& Waves course for physics majors, and compares these guided reflections with partially guided and unguided journals from a STEM enrichment summer program for incoming college students. A previously developed coding scheme was used on guided reflections and the {\bf LIWC} computational linguistics tool used to confirm the distinct nature of the categories. A new coding scheme was created and validated for the unguided journals. We find that both guided and unguided reflections elicit metacognitive and reflective practice, although of measurably different frequencies and kinds.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] R. G. Bringle and Julie A. Hatcher, Educational Horizons. 179 (1999).
    • [2] M. Scott, T. Stelzer and G. Gladding, Physics Education Research Conference, 188 (2007).
    • [3] J. Westberg and H. Jason, Fostering Reflection and Providing Feedback : Helping Others Learn from Experience. New York, US. 61 *2001).
    • [4] K. Kori, M. Maeots and M. Pedaste, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112, 242 (2014).
    • [5] A. Mason and C. Singh, AIP Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, 1179, 197 (2009).
    • [6] D. R. Dounas-Frazer and D. L. Reinholz, D. L. American Journal of Physics, 83 (10), (2015).
    • [7] D. Boud and D. Walker, Studies in Higher Education 23, 191 (1998).
    • [8] P. Prinsloo, S. Slade and F. Galpin Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 26, 27 (2011).
    • [9] S. V. Franklin, E. Hane, M. B. Kustusch, C. Ptak and E. C. Sayre, “Improving retention through metacognition: a program for deaf/hard-of-hearing and first generation STEM college students.” in preparation (2017)
    • [10] A. P. French, Vibrations and Waves, Taylor & Francis (1971).
    • [11] D. Hammer and L. K. Berland, Journal of Learning Sciences, 23, 37 (2014)
    • [12] Y. R. Tausczik and J. W. Pennebaker, Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29, 24 (2010)
    • [13] https://liwc.wpengine.com
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Funded by projects

  • NSF | Metacognition: A Transforma...
  • NSF | REU Site: Research Experien...

Cite this article

Collected from