skip to main content
10.1145/3576050.3576095acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageslakConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

When to Intervene? Utilizing Two Facets of Temporality in Students’ SRL Processes in a Programming Course

Published: 13 March 2023 Publication History

Abstract

This study explored two aspects of temporality in students’ SRL behaviours to understand the dynamics of SRL phase transitions. In the first aspect, which refers to the temporal order of Self-regulated learning (SRL) phases, we characterized four types of SRL processes based on phase transitions and the cyclical nature of SRL. The SRL types were mapped into the kinds of iterative behaviours over SRL phases which correspond to the theorized self-regulatory behaviours of students at different levels of SRL skills. We found a significant association between SRL types and the assignment grades that suggests the higher achieved learning outcomes, i.e., programming skills demonstrated in the assignments, being associated with more advanced SRL processes. This study also focused on the second aspect of temporality, which refers to the instance of time. We revealed the temporal dynamics between SRL phase transitions by analyzing time profiles for transitions in each SRL process type. Next, we showed that a two-day interval is a threshold by which most students iteratively transition from adapting to enactment phases, which provides a suitable time to intervene if the transition is not observed.

References

[1]
Roger Azevedo, Daniel C. Moos, Amy M. Johnson, and Amber D. Chauncey. 2010. Measuring cognitive and metacognitive regulatory processes during hypermedia learning: Issues and challenges. Educ. Psychol. 45, 4 (October 2010), 210–223.
[2]
Roger Azevedo, Michelle Taub, and Nicholas V. Mudrick. 2017. Understanding and Reasoning about Real-Time Cognitive, Affective, and Metacognitive Processes to Foster Self-Regulation with Advanced Learning Technologies. Handb. Self-Regulation Learn. Perform. (September 2017), 254–270.
[3]
Ryan S. J. D. Baker, Albert T. Corbett, and Angela Z. Wagner. 2006. Human Classification of Low-Fidelity Replays of Student Actions. In Proceedings of the Educational Data Mining Workshop at the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 29–36. Retrieved October 4, 2022 from http://130.203.136.95/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.102.2435
[4]
Maria Bannert, Peter Reimann, and Christoph Sonnenberg. 2014. Process mining techniques for analysing patterns and strategies in students’ self-regulated learning. Metacognition Learn. 9, 2 (2014), 161–185.
[5]
Paula G de Barba, Donia Malekian, Eduardo A Oliveira, James Bailey, Tracii Ryan, and Gregor Kennedy. 2020. The importance and meaning of session behaviour in a MOOC. Comput. Educ. 146, (2020), 103772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103772
[6]
Adar Ben-Eliyahu and Matthew L. Bernacki. 2015. Addressing complexities in self-regulated learning: a focus on contextual factors, contingencies, and dynamic relations. Metacognition Learn. 10, 1 (April 2015), 1–13.
[7]
Matthew L. Bernacki. 2018. Examining the Cyclical, Loosely Sequenced, and Contingent Features of Self-Regulated Learning: Trace Data and Their Analysis. Handb. Self-Regulation Learn. Perform. (September 2018), 370–387.
[8]
D. L Butler and P. H Winne. 1995. Feedback and Self-Regulated Learning: A Theoretical Synthesis. Rev. Educ. Res. 65, 3 (1995), 245–281.
[9]
Hercy N.H. Cheng, Zhi Liu, Jianwen Sun, Sanya Liu, and Zongkai Yang. 2017. Unfolding online learning behavioral patterns and their temporal changes of college students in SPOCs. Interact. Learn. Environ. 25, 2 (February 2017), 176–188.
[10]
Cesar Dominguez, Francisco J. Garcia-Izquierdo, Arturo Jaime, Beatriz Perez, Angel Luis Rubio, and Maria A. Zapata. 2021. Using Process Mining to Analyze Time Distribution of Self-Assessment and Formative Assessment Exercises on an Online Learning Tool. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 14, 5 (2021), 709–722.
[11]
Katrina Falkner, Claudia Szabo, Rebecca Vivian, and Nickolas Falkner. 2015. Evolution of Software Development Strategies. Proc. - Int. Conf. Softw. Eng. 2, (August 2015), 243–252.
[12]
Katrina Falkner, Rebecca Vivian, and Nickolas J.G. G Falkner. 2014. Identifying Computer Science Self-Regulated Learning Strategies. Proc. 2014 Conf. Innov. Technol. Comput. Sci. Educ. - ITiCSE ’14 (2014), 291–296.
[13]
Yizhou Fan and John Saint. 2021. A learning analytic approach to unveiling self-regulatory processes in learning tactics. J. Learn. Anal. (2021), 184–195.
[14]
Yizhou Fan, John Saint, Shaveen Singh, Jelena Jovanovic, and Dragan Gašević. 2021. A Learning Analytic Approach to Unveiling Self-Regulatory Processes in Learning Tactics. In LAK21: 11th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK21), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 184–195.
[15]
Andrew Fitz Gibbon, David A Joiner, Henry Neeman, Charles Peck, and Skylar Thompson. 2010. Teaching High Performance Computing to Undergraduate Faculty and Undergraduate Students. In Proceedings of the 2010 TeraGrid Conference (TG ’10), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA.
[16]
Marek Hatala, Sina Nazeri, and Fatemeh Salehian Kia. 2023. Progression of students’ SRL processes in subsequent programming problem-solving tasks and its association with tasks outcomes. Internet High. Educ. 56, March 2022 (January 2023), 100881.
[17]
Matthew Hertz. 2010. What Do “CS1” and “CS2” Mean? Investigating Differences in the Early Courses. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE ’10), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 199–203.
[18]
Lingyun Huang and Susanne P Lajoie. 2021. Process analysis of teachers’ self-regulated learning patterns in technological pedagogical content knowledge development. Comput. Educ. 166, (2021), 104169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104169
[19]
Dirk Ifenthaler. 2012. Determining the effectiveness of prompts for self-regulated learning in problem-solving scenarios. Educ. Technol. Soc. 15, 1 (2012), 38–52. Retrieved October 2, 2022 from https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.15.1.38
[20]
Jelena Jovanović, Dragan Gašević, Shane Dawson, Abelardo Pardo, and Negin Mirriahi. 2017. Learning analytics to unveil learning strategies in a flipped classroom. Internet High. Educ. 33, (April 2017), 74–85.
[21]
Jelena Jovanović, Dragan Gašević, Abelardo Pardo, Shane Dawson, and Alexander Whitelock-Wainwright. 2019. Introducing meaning to clicks: Towards traced-measures of self-efficacy and cognitive load. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge - LAK19 (LAK19), ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 511–520.
[22]
Simon Knight, Alyssa Friend Wise, and Bodong Chen. 2017. Time for Change: Why Learning Analytics Needs Temporal Analysis. J. Learn. Anal. 4, 3 (December 2017).
[23]
Simon Knight, Roberto Martinez-Maldonado, Andrew Gibson, and Simon Buckingham Shum. 2017. Towards Mining Sequences and Dispersion of Rhetorical Moves in Student Written Texts. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (LAK ’17), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 228–232.
[24]
Mehmet Kokoç, Gökhan Akçapınar, Mohammad Nehal Hasnine, Mehmet Kokoc, Gokhan Akcapinar, and Mohammad Nehal Hasnine. 2021. Unfolding Students’ Online Assignment Submission Behavioral Patterns using Temporal Learning Analytics. Educ. Technol. Soc. 24, 1 (2021), 223–235. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/26977869
[25]
Wei Chen Kuo and Ting Chia Hsu. 2020. Learning Computational Thinking Without a Computer: How Computational Participation Happens in a Computational Thinking Board Game. Asia-Pacific Educ. Res. 29, 1 (February 2020), 67–83.
[26]
Dastyni Loksa and Andrew J Ko. 2016. The Role of Self-Regulation in Programming Problem Solving Process and Success. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER ’16), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 83–91.
[27]
Dastyni Loksa, Andrew J. Ko, Will Jernigan, Alannah Oleson, Christopher J. Mendez, and Margaret M. Burnett. 2016. Programming, problem solving, and self-awareness: Effects of explicit guidance. Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. - Proc. (May 2016), 1449–1461.
[28]
Wannisa Matcha, Dragan Gašević, Nora'Ayu Ahmad Uzir, Jelena Jovanović, and Abelardo Pardo. 2019. Analytics of Learning Strategies: Associations with Academic Performance and Feedback. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (LAK19), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 461–470.
[29]
Inge Molenaar and Sanna Järvelä. 2014. Sequential and temporal characteristics of self and socially regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning 9, 75–85.
[30]
Daniel C. Moos. 2017. Emerging Classroom Technology: Using Self-Regulation Principles as a Guide for Effective Implementation. Handb. Self-Regulation Learn. Perform. (September 2017), 243–253.
[31]
Pedro Manuel Moreno-Marcos, Pedro J. Muñoz-Merino, Jorge Maldonado-Mahauad, Mar Pérez-Sanagustín, Carlos Alario-Hoyos, and Carlos Delgado Kloos. 2020. Temporal analysis for dropout prediction using self-regulated learning strategies in self-paced MOOCs. Comput. Educ. 145, May 2019 (2020).
[32]
Ernesto Panadero. 2017. A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology 8.
[33]
Ido Roll and Philip H. Winne. 2015. Understanding, evaluating, and supporting self-regulated learning using learning analytics. J. Learn. Anal. 2, 1 (July 2015), 7–12.
[34]
John Saint, Yizhou Fan, Shaveen Singh, Dragan Gasevic, and Abelardo Pardo. 2021. Using process mining to analyse self-regulated learning: A systematic analysis of four algorithms. ACM Int. Conf. Proceeding Ser. (2021), 333–343.
[35]
John Saint, Dragan Gašević, Wannisa Matcha, Nora'Ayu Ahmad Uzir, and Abelardo Pardo. 2020. Combining Analytic Methods to Unlock Sequential and Temporal Patterns of Self-Regulated Learning. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (LAK ’20), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 402–411.
[36]
John Saint, Alexander Whitelock-Wainwright, Dragan Gasevic, and Abelardo Pardo. 2020. Trace-SRL: A Framework for Analysis of Microlevel Processes of Self-Regulated Learning From Trace Data. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 13, 4 (2020), 861–877.
[37]
Fatemeh Salehian Kia. 2021. Measuring Self-Regulatory Phases with Multi-Channel Trace Data in Open-Ended Learning Technology. Simon Fraser University.
[38]
Fatemeh Salehian Kia, Marek Hatala, Ryan S. Baker, and Stephanie D. Teasley. 2021. Measuring students’ self-regulatory phases in LMS with behavior and real-time self report. ACM Int. Conf. Proceeding Ser. (April 2021), 259–268.
[39]
Melody Siadaty, Dragan Gašević, and Marek Hatala. 2016. Trace-Based Microanalytic Measurement of Self-Regulated Learning Processes. J. Learn. Anal. 3, 1 (2016), 183–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.31.11
[40]
Maria Theobald. 2021. Self-regulated learning training programs enhance university students’ academic performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation: A meta-analysis. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 66, (July 2021), 101976.
[41]
Philip H. Winne. 2010. Improving measurements of self-regulated learning. Educ. Psychol. 45, 4 (October 2010), 267–276.
[42]
Philip Winne and Allyson Hadwin. 1998. Studying as self-regulated learning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
[43]
Barry J. Zimmerman. 1990. Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An Overview. Educ. Psychol. 25, 1 (January 1990), 3–17.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Investigating Validity and Generalisability in Trace-Based Measurement of Self-Regulated Learning: A Multidisciplinary StudyProceedings of the 15th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference10.1145/3706468.3706511(339-350)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2025
  • (2025)Analytics of Temporal Patterns of Self-regulated Learners: A Time Series ApproachProceedings of the 15th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference10.1145/3706468.3706504(283-292)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2025
  • (2025)Investigating Self-Regulated Learning Measurement Based on Trace Data: A Systematic Literature ReviewTechnology, Knowledge and Learning10.1007/s10758-025-09816-yOnline publication date: 18-Jan-2025
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. When to Intervene? Utilizing Two Facets of Temporality in Students’ SRL Processes in a Programming Course
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      LAK2023: LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference
      March 2023
      692 pages
      ISBN:9781450398657
      DOI:10.1145/3576050
      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 the author(s) 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].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 13 March 2023

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Conference

      LAK 2023

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 236 of 782 submissions, 30%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)55
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
      Reflects downloads up to 22 Feb 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2025)Investigating Validity and Generalisability in Trace-Based Measurement of Self-Regulated Learning: A Multidisciplinary StudyProceedings of the 15th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference10.1145/3706468.3706511(339-350)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2025
      • (2025)Analytics of Temporal Patterns of Self-regulated Learners: A Time Series ApproachProceedings of the 15th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference10.1145/3706468.3706504(283-292)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2025
      • (2025)Investigating Self-Regulated Learning Measurement Based on Trace Data: A Systematic Literature ReviewTechnology, Knowledge and Learning10.1007/s10758-025-09816-yOnline publication date: 18-Jan-2025
      • (2024)CTAM4SRL: A Consolidated Temporal Analytic Method for Analysis of Self-Regulated LearningProceedings of the 14th Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference10.1145/3636555.3636926(645-655)Online publication date: 18-Mar-2024

      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