Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Making Students Responsible for Their Learning – Empowering Learners to Build Shared Mental Models

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Transformative Perspectives and Processes in Higher Education

Part of the book series: Advances in Business Education and Training ((ABET,volume 6))

Abstract

Students often fail to live up to the challenge of taking charge of their own learning, even in learning environments that are designed to self-regulate study behavior. This chapter describes attempts to create conditions under which students in tutorial groups in a problem-based learning environment assume greater responsibility for their learning while examining how information technology can support their group work. ICT tools like mapping software and webconferencing facilities, and diminished access to tutor support, allow tutorial groups to strike a new balance between student-centered and teacher-centered activities. Results suggest that students in higher education can learn to thrive on more autonomy. However, educators need to consider several moderating influences like social climate, (nonverbal) feedback, (virtual) collaboration competencies, type of learning task, uncertainty, media richness and length of time that students work together. They may also need to reflect on their identity as teachers.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Baker, R., Walonoski, J., Heffernan, N., Roll, I., Corbett, A., & Koedinger, K. (2008). Why students engage in “gaming the system” behavior in interactive learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19, 185–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blume, B., Ford, J., Baldwin, T., & Huang, J. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36, 1065–1105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, A., Keith, N., & Mueller, S. (2013). Self-regulated performance improvement through deliberate practice in organizations: The case of female employees and skills to career advancement. Paper presented at 16th European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology Congress, Muenster, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, L., & Hutchins, H. (2007). A study of best practices in training transfer and proposed model of transfer. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 19, 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chai, S., & Kim, M. (2010). What makes bloggers share knowledge? An investigation on the role of trust. International Journal of Information Management, 30, 408–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Trends in Cognitive Science, 1, 73–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R., & Lengel, R. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeRosa, D., Smith, C., & Hantula, D. (2007). The medium matters: Mining the long-promised merit of group interaction in creative idea generation tasks in a meta-analysis of the electronic brainstorming literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1549–1581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolmans, D., & Schmidt, H. (2010). The problem-based learning process. In H. van Berkel, A. Scherpbier, H. Hillen, & C. Van der Vleuten (Eds.), Lessons from problem-based learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolmans, D., Wolfhagen, I., van der Vleuten, C., & Wijnen, W. (2001). Solving problems with group work in problem-based learning: Hold on to the philosophy. Medical Education, 35, 884–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekeocha, J., & Brennan, S. (2008). Collaborative recall in face-to-face and electronic groups. Memory, 16, 245–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonteijn, H., & Frerejean, J. (2010, December). Enhancing small group functioning in problem based learning using a visual organiser. In Proceedings international conference on enhancing learning experiences in higher education. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University. http://www.cetl.hku.hk/conference2010/conf_proc.htm. Accessed 29 July 2013.

  • Gagne, M. (2009). A model of knowledge sharing motivation. Human Resource Management, 48, 571–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelernter, D. (2010). Time to start taking the Internet seriously. http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/gelernter10/gelernter10_index.html. Accessed 20 Apr 2010.

  • Gureckis, T., & Markant, D. (2012). Self-directed learning: A cognitive and computational perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 464–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertel, G., Geister, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 69–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilbert, T., & Renkl, A. (2008). Concept mapping as a follow-up strategy to learning from texts: What characterizes good and poor mappers? Instructional Science, 36, 53–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofgaard Lycke, K., Stromso, H., & Grottum, P. (2006). Tracing the tutor role in problem-based learning and PBLonline. In M. Savin-Baden & K. Wilkie (Eds.), Problem-based learning online. New York: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, C., Colquitt, J., Wesson, M., & Zapata-Phelan, C. (2006). Psychological collectivism: A measurement validation and linkage to group member performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 884–899.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T., Erez, A., Bono, J., & Thoresen, C. (2003). The core self-evaluations scale: Development of a measure. Personnel Psychology, 56, 303–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krumm, S., & Hertel, G. (2013). Knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics (KSAOs) for virtual teamwork. Paper presented at 16th European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology Congress, Muenster, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, B., D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2012). Confusion and complex learning during interactions with computer learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 15, 184–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martins, L., Gilson, L., & Maynard, M. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30, 805–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mesmer-Magnus, J., & DeChurch, L. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesmer-Magnus, J., DeChurch, L., Jimenez-Rodriguez, M., Wildman, J., & Shuffler, M. (2011). A meta-analytic investigation of virtuality and information sharing in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 214–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, S., & Kulkarni, S. (2010). Access and quality in self organized learning environments. British Journal of Educational Psychology. Wiley Online Library, at http://wikieducator.org/images/c/cb/Suneeta_Kulkarni.pdf. Accessed 29 July 2013.

  • Mohammed, S., Ferzandi, L., & Hamilton, K. (2010). Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. Journal of Management, 36, 876–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijstad, B., & Stroebe, W. (2006). How the group affects the mind: A cognitive model of idea generation in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 186–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ordóñez, L., Schweitzer, M., Galinsky, A., & Bazerman, M. (2009). Goals gone wild: The systematic side effects of overprescribing goal setting. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23, 82–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz de Guinea, A., Webster, J., & Staples, D. (2012). A meta-analysis of the consequences of virtualness on team functioning. Information and Management, 49, 301–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulfrey, C., Darnon, C., & Butera, F. (2012). Autonomy and task performance: Examining the impact of grades on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 683–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar, S. (2006). Analyzing collaborative interactions: Divergence, shared understanding and construction of knowledge. Computers & Education, 47, 332–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren, Y., Harper, F. M., Drenner, S., Terveen, L. G., Kiesler, S. B., Riedl, J., & Kraut, R. E. (2012). Building member attachment in online communities: Applying theories of group identity and interpersonal bonds. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 841–864.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rentsch, J., Mello, A., & Delise, L. (2010). Collaboration and meaning analysis process in intense problem solving teams. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 11, 287–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S., Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. (2012). The science of training and development in organizations. What matters in practice. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13, 74–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savin-Baden, M., & Wilkie, K. (2006). Problem-based learning online. McGraw-Hill International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H. (2010). A review of the evidence: Effects of problem-based learning on students and graduates of Maastricht medical school. In H. van Berkel, A. Scherpbier, H. Hillen, & C. van der Vleuten (Eds.), Lessons from problem-based learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H., van der Molen, H., te Winkel, W., & Wijnen, W. (2009). Constructivist, problem-based learning does work: A meta-analysis of curricular comparisons involving a single medical school. Educational Psychologist, 44, 227–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwonke, R., Ertelt, A., Otieno, C., Renkl, A., Aleven, V., & Salden, R. (2013). Metacognitive support promotes an effective use of instructional resources in intelligent tutoring. Learning and Instruction, 23, 136–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singaram, V. S., Van Der Vleuten, C. P., Van Berkel, H., & Dolmans, D. H. (2010). Reliability and validity of a tutorial group effectiveness instrument. Medical Teacher, 32(3), e133–e137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Son, L., & Seti, R. (2010). Adaptive learning and the allocation of time. Adaptive Behavior, 18, 132–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonnentag, S., Niessen, C., & Ohly, S. (2004). Learning at work: Training and development. In C. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 249–289). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. (2011). Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science, 333, 776–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communications. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staples, D., & Webster, J. (2008). Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams. Information Systems, 18, 617–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, C., Coman, A., Brown, A., Koppel, J., & Hirst, W. (2012). Conversational silence and memory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 39–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change (Vol. 219). Lexington: CreateSpace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, M., Naccarato, M., Parker, K., & Moskowitz, G. (2001). The Personal Need for Structure (PNS) and Personal Fear of Invalidity (PFI) scales. In G. Moskowitz (Ed.), Cognitive social psychology (pp. 19–39). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unsworth, K., & Clegg, C. (2010). Why do employees undertake creative action? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 77–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Emmerik, I. J., Jawahar, J., & Stone, T. (2004). The relationship between personality and discretionary helping behaviors. Psychological Reports, 95, 355–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelder, T. (2003). Enhancing deliberation through computer supported argument visualisation. In P. Kirschner, S. Buckingham Shum, & C. Carr (Eds.), Visualizing argumentation. London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Knippenberg, D., de Dreu, C., & Homan, A. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1008–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange, P., Schippers, D., & Balliet, D. (2010). Who volunteers in psychology experiments? An empirical review of prosocial motivation in volunteering. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 279–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visschers-Pleijers, A., Dolmans, D., de Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I., Jacobs, J., & van der Vleuten, C. (2006). Student perceptions about the characteristics of an effective discussion during the reporting phase in problem-based learning. Medical Education, 40, 924–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, H., Euwema, M., & Van Emmerik, I. J. (2009). Leadership and team cohesiveness across cultures. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 358–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E., White, N., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. Portland: CPsquare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, T., Lu, L., & Liu, T. (2010). Exploring factors that influence knowledge sharing behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 32–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Work and Social Psychology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Herco Fonteijn

Authors
  1. Herco Fonteijn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Herco Fonteijn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Park University, Parkville, Missouri, USA

    Amber Dailey-Hebert

  2. Park University, Parkville, Missouri, USA

    Kay S. Dennis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fonteijn, H. (2015). Making Students Responsible for Their Learning – Empowering Learners to Build Shared Mental Models. In: Dailey-Hebert, A., Dennis, K. (eds) Transformative Perspectives and Processes in Higher Education. Advances in Business Education and Training, vol 6. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09247-8_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation