Looking down the road: Future directions for research on depth and regulation of strategic processing

Abstract

Purpose. The primary goal of this commentary was to consider the future directions that researchers dealing with levels and regulation of strategies and with approaches to learning may wish to pursue in the years to come.Procedure. In order to accomplish this goal, the first step was to look for any common ground shared by authors contributing to this Special Issue. That common ground represented a convergence of evidence for these programmes of research; in effect, where they intersect. Next, theoretical, methodological, and data-analytic barriers that have long impeded progress within and across these research communities were identified.Outcome. Recommendations were offered that might serve to diminish or remove those existing barriers and, thus, open new avenues of inquiry.It is a privilege to serve as a commentator for this Special Issue that examines the complicated relation between depth and regulation of strategic processing, especially in the light of the international scholars chosen as contributors. According to the editors, the purpose of this issue is to consider how levels of cognitive strategy use among students relate to their metacognitive or self-regulatory behaviours (Dinsmore & Fryer, 2018). Contributors to the issue were to be guided by three overarching questions:1. What is the association between cognitive and metacognitive processing during academic performance in varied contexts (e.g., text, technology rich environments, university settings)? 2. How does the shifting developmental landscape change associations between depth of processing and monitoring and regulation of learning on academic performance? 3. Do individuals' competence help explain associations between monitoring, regulation, and strategic processing? (p. 2)To the credit of the editors, these are timely, important, and ambitious questions to be posed at this juncture when theory and research into strategic processing approach the half-century mark. Any issue that effectively addresses any one of these complex questions

The effect of cues for calibration on learners' self-regulated learning through changes in learners’ learning behaviour and outcomes

“…Although we investigated the effect of learners' metacognitive skilfulness based on learners' domain general ability to control and apply cognitive and metacognitive processes, the cues for calibration provided might have lacked the potential to evoke the transfer of these processes to a domain specific context (Butler & Winne, 1995). This hypothesis has been supported by prior findings (e.g., Ardasheva et al, 2017;Dinsmore & Fryer, 2018) indicating that cues on the use of cognitive and/or metacognitive strategies should strongly align with the content provided (e.g., Alexander, 2018;Tricot & Sweller, 2014).…”

The relation between cognitive and metacognitive processing: Building bridges between the SRL, MDL, and SAL domains

“…Based on these data, each researcher could, for each student, form a judgement of the metacognitive processing for the given task (e.g., beneficial for learning, partially beneficial, not beneficial, or detrimental). This judgement could subsequently be compared within and across frameworks (Gwet, ) and, as also emphasized by Alexander (), discussed with the aim of agreeing upon a common conceptualization.…”

Illuminating learning from informative texts in secondary education: A switching replication design study

“…Finally, deep-level strategies, aimed at deep understanding and active transformation or application of information (e.g., elaborating) and surface-level strategies, aimed at basic comprehension without any information integration (e. g., read-and-repeat techniques) can be distinguished (Dinsmore & Alexander, 2012). Notwithstanding the value of each separate strategy, it is particularly the ability to flexibly and selectively use a variety of apt strategies that has been shown to be crucial for students' learning and performance (Alexander, 2018;Alexander, Graham, & Harris, 1998; Despite the importance of effective text-learning strategies at the beginning of secondary education, strategy instruction is rarely provided in secondary school. As this type of instruction is often not part of preservice teacher training, teachers perceive it as difficult and challenging (Boardman, Klingner, Buckley, Annamma, & Lasser, 2015;Simpson & Nist, 2000;Weinstein et al, 2011).…”