skip to main content
10.1145/3491101.3519751acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

MindYoga: Scaffolding the Metacognitive Reflection Process within Learning Ecosystems

Published: 28 April 2022 Publication History

Abstract

To learn how to self-direct research, students must learn to reflect and improve upon a diverse set of metacognitive skills. Models like Agile Research Studios (ARS) provide ecosystems of tools and processes designed to help students hone their reflection skills as they practice research. However, students still struggle to enact their reflection processes across the supports available to them, as mentors coach them to do. MindYoga integrates a process framework that helps students monitor and enact their metacognitive reflection process across an ARS ecosystem. Findings show students using MindYoga were (1) able to monitor which metacognitive risks may affect their upcoming project work, (2) able to develop action plans based on mentor feedback to address these risks, and (3) actively reminded of their action items during relevant practice sessions. Moving forward, process frameworks like MindYoga can help learners develop and improve their work processes as they practice within learning ecosystems.

Supplementary Material

MP4 File (3491101.3519751-talk-video.mp4)
Talk Video

References

[1]
Robin S Adams, Tiago Forin, Mel Chua, and David Radcliffe. 2016. Characterizing the work of coaching during design reviews. Design Studies 45(2016), 30–67.
[2]
Robin S Adams, Jennifer Turns, and Cynthia J Atman. 2003. Educating effective engineering designers: The role of reflective practice. Design studies 24, 3 (2003), 275–294.
[3]
Susan A Ambrose, Michael W Bridges, Michele DiPietro, Marsha C Lovett, and Marie K Norman. 2010. How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
[4]
Ann Brown. 1987. Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (1987).
[5]
Ann L Brown. 1978. Knowing when, where, and how to remember; a problem of metacognition. Advances in instructional psychology 1 (1978).
[6]
Allan Collins and Manu Kapur. 2006. Cognitive Apprenticeship. Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences(2006), 47–60. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10029777798/en/
[7]
Lyn Corno. 1986. The metacognitive control components of self-regulated learning. Contemporary educational psychology 11, 4 (1986), 333–346.
[8]
K Anders Ericsson and Neil Charness. 1994. Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition.American psychologist 49, 8 (1994), 725.
[9]
K Anders Ericsson, J Starkes, and K Ericsson. 2003. Development of elite performance and deliberate practice. Expert performance in sports: Advances in research on sport expertise (2003), 49–83.
[10]
Peggy A Ertmer and Timothy J Newby. 1996. The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective. Instructional science 24, 1 (1996), 1–24.
[11]
John H Flavell. 1976. Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. The nature of intelligence(1976).
[12]
John H Flavell. 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry.American psychologist 34, 10 (1979), 906.
[13]
David Jonassen. 2010. Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving Learning Environments (09 2010), 1–437. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203847527
[14]
Chris Quintana and Meilan Zhang. 2004. The Digital Ideakeeper: Extending digital library services to scaffold online inquiry. In American Education Research Association Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA. Citeseer.
[15]
Ido Roll, Vincent Aleven, Bruce M McLaren, and Kenneth R Koedinger. 2011. Improving students’ help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system. Learning and instruction 21, 2 (2011), 267–280.
[16]
Donald A Schön. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions.Jossey-Bass.
[17]
Philip H Winne. 2011. A cognitive and metacognitive analysis of self-regulated learning: Faculty of education, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. In Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. Routledge, 29–46.
[18]
Haoqi Zhang, Matthew W Easterday, Elizabeth M Gerber, Daniel Rees Lewis, and Leesha Maliakal. 2017. Agile research studios: Orchestrating communities of practice to advance research training. In Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. ACM, 45–48.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
CHI EA '22: Extended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
April 2022
3066 pages
ISBN:9781450391566
DOI:10.1145/3491101
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 28 April 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Agile Research Studios
  2. Learning Ecosystems
  3. Metacognition
  4. Reflection

Qualifiers

  • Poster
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Funding Sources

  • NSF

Conference

CHI '22
Sponsor:
CHI '22: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
April 29 - May 5, 2022
LA, New Orleans, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,164 of 23,696 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

CHI 2025
ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
April 26 - May 1, 2025
Yokohama , Japan

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)52
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7
Reflects downloads up to 13 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media