Norma Araceli Juarez Collazo

Metacognition and the Use of Tools

In this chapter the relationship between metacognition and the use of tools is addressed. Being able to determine when the use of a tool would be beneficial for one’s learning is seen as a metacognitive skill. Different assumptions are made with respect to this relationship between metacognitive knowledge (including instructional conceptions) and tool usage. A series of studies are addressed in which different instruments were used to measure metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive skills to provide empirical underpinning for these assumptions.

The multiple effects of combined tools in computer-based learning environments

Learners with high performance avoidance and perceived usability levels decreased the use of the tools.Learners with high critical thinking increased tool use.Only one of the two employed tools influenced performance positively.Time spent on tool seems to be positively related to performance.The (non-/)embeddedness of the tools and the tool advice influenced performance positively. Research has repeatedly established that the theoretical benefits of support devices, also addressed as tools, in computer-based learning environments (CBLEs) do not match their actual impact on performance. This study investigated the effectiveness and the use of tools in a CBLE. The impact of combined tools (concept maps and adjunct questions), tool-related characteristics (tool delivery mode: non-/embedded tool), tool advice (non-/explained tool functionality) and learner-related characteristics (prior knowledge, self-efficacy, goal orientation, perceptions and self-regulation) on the quantity and quality of tool use was analyzed. The effects of tool use on performance were also studied. One hundred and eighty-two participants were randomly assigned to one out of five conditions (embedded with and without explanation of tool functionality; non-embedded with and without explanation of tool functionality and a control condition). The results revealed that the tools were functional: Learners in the experimental groups did better in the performance test than the learners in the control group. Specifically, learners in the non-embedded conditions and with the explanation of the tool performed better than the control condition. Furthermore, learners in the embedded conditions spent significantly more time on both tools. The time spent on the tools decreased in learners with high performance avoidance levels (goal orientation) and tool usability perceptions, but increased in learners with high critical thinking (self-regulation skill). Consecutively, the time spent on the tools influenced performance positively. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for further research on tool use.

Support Device Usage

Learning environments typically confront learners with a number of support devices. These support devices aim at helping learners in their learning; they provide a learning opportunity. As suggested by Perkins (Educational Researcher 14:11–17, 1985), it can be assumed that in order for these support devices to be beneficial (1) the opportunity has to be there, i.e., the support device has to be functional; (2) the learners have to recognize this opportunity, and (3) the learners have to be motivated to use the opportunity or the support device.