Productive group engagement in cognitive activity and metacognitive regulation during collaborative learning: can it explain differences in students’ conceptual understanding?

Co-regulations of learning in small groups of chef apprentices: when do they appear and what influences them?

“…Among the studies addressing the issue of regulation of learning within groups, a proliferation of terms regarding metacognitive and regulatory processes is present: shared regulation (Volet et al 2009a), socially shared regulation and socially shared metacognitive regulation (Volet 2001;Khosa and Volet 2014;Iiskala et al 2011;Volet et al 2009b;De Backer et al 2015); socially shared metacognition (Iiskala et al 2004); and social regulation (Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011). Social regulation can range from other-regulation to socially shared regulation.…”

“…To this aim, we considered the level and quality of content processing and the quality of interaction functioning of the groups from a socioemotional perspective (Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011). The present study is nested in the under-researched field of Initial Vocational Education and Training (VET) and is focused on adolescents working in professional situations, while other scholars have focused on university students (Volet et al 2009b;Khosa and Volet 2014) or pupils at school (Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011). Being embedded both at the company-where the learners work as apprenticesand at school-where they are expected to enhance their theoretical knowledge-represents a rich and inspiring challenge to reinforce their collaborative strengths in both learning locations.…”

Important Biological Issues for Elementary Pupils – A Study of Elementary Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions

“…In this sense, the following issues are important (Fadel et al, 2015, 25): 1) what we know and understand, 2) how we use what we know, and 3) how we behave and engage in the information in real life in the world. Through searching information (Volet, Summers, & Thurman, 2009) and producing knowledge in groups (Khosa & Volet, 2014), evaluating learning, action, and knowing together (Volet et al, 2013) the acquisition of scientific knowledge and collaboration is learned (Vauras et al, 2014;Yli-Panula et al, 2015). Through different learning environments self-efficacy, autonomy, and engagement are supported, and using current and contextual tasks, creativity and flexibility can be fostered (Turner & Fulmer, 2013).…”

Monitoring makes a difference: quality and temporal variation in teacher education students’ collaborative learning

“…The results indicate possible reasons for success, but generalizable information and causal relations are not assured. This type of process-oriented methodological approach can, however, fill a gap in the research on content-level and meta-level processes in collaborative learning and provide an explanation of how learning situations develop in interactions between group members Khosa & Volet, 2014;Salonen et al, 2005).…”

“…In other words, in successful groups, learners use a repertoire of appropriate cognitive activities to attain their learning goals, and use metacognitive activities to control and monitor their learning (e.g. Goos, Galbraith, & Renshaw, 2002;DiDonato, 2013;Khosa & Volet, 2014;Rogat & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2011). Monitoring involves evaluating and judging one's understanding and progress during the task.…”