Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

One intervention, two benefits: A qualitative analysis of students’ use of reflective prompting for self-regulated learning in an online course

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Asynchronous online learning has grown in popularity due to its flexibility in providing higher education access to learners regardless of distance, transportation, and scheduling constraints. However, for successful online learning, students must adapt and intensify the self-regulated learning (SRL) skills they developed in face-to-face settings to the context of the online learning environment. SRL is the process by which students plan, complete learning activities, and evaluate their independent knowledge-building practice. Studies have associated higher education retention with SRL, suggesting the need for SRL-supportive features in online courses. However, current literature lacks universally applicable instructional design interventions to foster learners' SRL skills across disciplines. This study uses qualitative methods to investigate student perceptions of a reflective SRL intervention in an online biology course in a United States community college. The intervention included weekly self-reflection and post-exam goal-setting prompts followed by instructor feedback. Textual analysis of student reflections confirmed students’ enactment of SRL during the intervention. Additionally, surveys and email interviews showed that students viewed the reflective intervention as a communication strategy and a means of receiving support from their instructor. This finding provided insight into the impact of the intervention on transactional distance. This study recommends reflective prompts as a beneficial practice in online courses and proposes further research to better understand the benefits of reflection on the learning process across educational disciplines. The easy-to-implement intervention is described for the consideration of other practitioners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to the personal nature of the reflection activities. However, they are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Notes

  1. Available as Supplement 1. Intervention Instructions.

  2. Available as Supplement 2. Post Exam Reflection.

  3. Available as Supplement 3. Survey and Interview Questions.

Abbreviations

SRL:

Self-Regulated Learning

LMS:

Learning management system

References

  • Anderson, W. (2012). Independent learning: Autonomy, control, and meta-cognition. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 86–103). Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, M. S., & Bunker, E. L. (2009). A model for self-regulated distance language learning. Distance Education, 30(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910902845956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Araka, E., Maina, E., Gitonga, R., & Oboko, R. (2020). Research trends in measurement and intervention tools for self-regulated learning for e-learning environments—systematic review (2008–2018). Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-020-00129-5

  • Azevedo, R., Reza, B. F., Duffy, M. J., Harley, J. M., & Trevors, G. (2012). Metacognition and self-regulated learning in student-centered learning environments. In D. Johannsen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (2nd ed., pp. 171–197). Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, S., & McPherson, M. (2019). The human factor: The promise & limits of online education. Daedalus, 148(4), 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_01769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop-Clark, C., & Dietz-Uhler, B. (2012). Engaging in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Stylus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2018). Online student perceptions of engagement, transactional distance, and outcomes. Distance Education, 39(3), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1476845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burner, K. J. (2019). Journaling to elicit self-regulation and academic performance in a preservice teacher technology education course. Technology, Instruction, Cognition, and Learning, 11, 219–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, M. M. (2005). Applying self-regulated learning strategies in a web-based instruction - An investigation of motivation perception. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(3), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220500178939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaggars, S., Edgecombe, N., & Stacey, G. (2013). What we know about online course outcomes: What the research tells us? Retrieved from Community College Research Center, Columbia University, on March, 15, 2019, from: http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu

  • Fung, C. Y., Abdullah, M. N. L. Y., & Hashim, S. (2019). Improving self-regulated learning through personalized weekly e-learning journals: A time series quasi-experimental study. eJournal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 13(1), 30–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gering, C. S., Sheppard, D. K., Adams, B. L., Renes, S. L., & Morotti, A. A. (2018). Strengths-based analysis of student success in online courses. Online Learning Journal, 22(3), 55–85. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i3.1464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadwin, A., Jarvela, S., & Miller, M. (2018). Self-regulation, co-regulation, and shared regulation in collaborative learning environments. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 83–106). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollis, R. B., & Was, C. A. (2016). Mind wandering, control failures, and social media distractions in online learning. Learning and Instruction, 42, 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, R. H., & Dent, A. L. (2018). Developmental trajectories of skills and abilities relevant for self-regulation of learning and performance. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 49–63). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, G., Wood, E., & Kitagawa, K. (2014). Use of self-referential (ipsative) feedback to motivate and guide distance learners. Open Learning, 29(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2014.921612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khiat, H. (2017). Academic performance and the practice of self-directed learning: The adult student perspective. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 41(1), 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2015.1062849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marmon, M. (2018). Contextualizing social presence and learner identity: Through the lens of Moore’s theory of transactional distance. In Enhancing Social Presence in Online Learning Environments (pp. 1–19). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-3229-3.ch001

  • Masui, C., & de Corte, E. (2005). Learning to reflect and to attribute constructively as basic components of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(3), 351–372. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905X25030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science, 26(1–2), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003088013286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCaslin, M., & Hickey, D. T. (2009). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A Vygotskian view. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement (2nd ed., pp. 227–252). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Retrieved May 19, 2017, from https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf

  • Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research - A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. G. (2019). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore & W. C. Diehl (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (4th ed., pp. 32–46). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musu-Gillette, L. (2015). Distance education: Learning in non-traditional settings. National Center for Education Statistics Blog. Retrieved May 5, 2021, from https://nces.ed.gov/blogs/nces/post/distance-education-learning-in-non-traditional-settings

  • Saldana, Q. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Greene, J. A. (2018). Historical, contemporary, and future perspectives on self-regulated learning and performance. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 1–16). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, S. [CanvasLIVE]. (2017). Coach metacognition via assignment submission comments [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/IpS-jsEYxh8

  • Song, L., & Hill, J. R. (2009). Understanding adult learners self regulation in online environments: A qualitative study. International Journal of Instructional Media, 36(3). 263-274. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A273359085/AONE?u=anon~f65d95ae&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=a88cda69

  • Van Den Boom, G., Paas, F., & Van Merrie, J. J. G. (2007). Effects of elicited reflections combined with tutor or peer feedback on self-regulated learning and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 17, 532–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton Radford, A., Cominole, M., & Skomsvold, P. (2015). Demographic and enrollment characteristics of nontraditional undergraduates: 2011–12. Retrieved May 14, 2021, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2015025

  • Weidlich, J., & Bastiaens, T. J. (2018). Technology matters - The impact of transactional distance on satisfaction in online distance learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 19(3), 222–242. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i3.3417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, D., & Xu, Y. (2019). The promises and limits of online higher education: Understanding how distance education affects access, cost, and quality. American Enterprise Institute, 1–40. Retrieved June 15, 2021, from https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/the-promises-and-limits-of-online-higher-education/

  • Yilmaz, F. G. K., & Keser, H. (2016). The impact of reflective thinking activities in e-learning: A critical review of the empirical research. Computers and Education, 95, 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zamecnik, A., Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., & Liu, L. (2022). Exploring non-traditional learner motivations and characteristics in online learning: A learner profile study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100051

  • Zheng, L. (2016). The effectiveness of self-regulated learning scaffolds on academic performance in computer-based learning environments: A meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9426-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2009). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), self-regulated learning and academic achievement (2nd ed., pp. 1–38). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). From cognitive modeling to self-regulation: A social cognitive career path. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.794676

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author extends sincere gratitude to Rebecca Shargel and William Sadera of Towson University. Their insightful feedback and support were instrumental in the revision process of this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Technology and Literacy, College of Education, Towson University, 8000 York Road, Towson, MD, 21252, USA

    Alexis Guethler

Authors
  1. Alexis Guethler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexis Guethler.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

There are no competing interests to report.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guethler, A. One intervention, two benefits: A qualitative analysis of students’ use of reflective prompting for self-regulated learning in an online course. Educ Inf Technol 29, 5673–5695 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12016-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12016-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation