Abstract:

Self-regulated learning doesn’t happen by chance: although some students acquire these sorts of competencies prior to university, many do not. As universities increasingly move away from a presumption that the transition to university is inevitably daunting and confusing, the creation of purposive courses and programmes that unpack and inculcate self-regulated learning competencies are slowly becoming the norm.

Self-regulated learning engenders the ability to “seek new information; how to utilize it and evaluate its importance; how to solve novel, non-textbook, professional problems” (Biggs, 2003, p. 93). According to Biggs, self-regulated learning, including the acquisition of generic study skills (notetaking, referencing, and time management), content-specific study skills (identifying, analysing and synthesizing key words, concepts and issues; thinking conceptually), and meta-cognitive learning skills (problem analysis, bridging between knowledges, identifying and accessing new sources; problem resolution), are requisite for student success at the university level (2003, pp. 93-95).
A concurrent discourse in higher education extols the virtues of technology enhanced and technology enabled learning. This paper examines ways in which particular learning technologies can be instrumental in the acquisition of self-regulated learning related competencies.

These technologies include:
• Formative self-assessment via learning management system (LMS) quizzes, which offer automated assessment and pre-programmed feedback about right and wrong responses.
• Student-generated test questions using Peerwise, where students write, submit and peer review potential multiple choice questions. Encouraging students to think about how to teach or assess a subject facilitates deep learning.
• Self-created flashcards using Quizlet, allowing students to generate digital flash cards for identifying and matching concepts and definitions.
• Peer- and self-assessment of group work using tools like TeamMates to integrate assessment rubrics and de-identified feedback about the contributions of student peers. By focusing on each rubric at the beginning of a collaborative task, students will transparently see what effective, substantive collaboration requires.
• Collaborative writing, using Google Drive or a wiki: online spaces where synchronous editing of a common document exposes students to others’ ways of formulating and refining academic arguments.
• Eportfolios that include a structured, substantive reflective element, where students are encouraged to engage in what Schön (1983) described as reflection in practice (during learning activities) and on practice (post hoc).

These tools’ impacts are constrained by nature of the educational design and the élan with which they are implemented by the instructor. A plethora of technologies cannot compensate for problematic instructional design or course delivery: any technologies used must be purposefully selected, situated and deployed to be effective. Used in this spirit, however, the undergraduate student experience can be transformed positively.

References:
[1] Biggs, J. (1999): Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Buckingham : SRHE & Open University Press.
[2] Schön, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.

Keywords:

Learning, learning technology, assessment, self-regulated learning, undergraduate.