This study implemented and evaluated the innovative use of a performance-based assessment platform to support the development of self-regulated learning (SRL) in senior primary students as they completed programming tasks. We embedded SRL support features into a performance-based assessment platform as scaffolding to help the students implement problem-solving strategies. A mixed-methods approach was adopted to evaluate the intervention. The students’ perceptions of their SRL skills after working through the programming tasks were measured by a survey of 45 students. The quantitative results suggested that the students benefited from the performance-based assessment platform in developing their SRL skills. A thematic analysis of interview data from 20 students further indicated that the embedded SRL scaffolding and automatic marking function helped them to solve the programming tasks. The results demonstrate that a well-designed performance-based assessment platform with embedded SRL support can be an effective tool for developing students’ SRL. The qualitative results further revealed that algorithmic thinking is an aspect of programming for which students need more SRL support.
AliA. D.HannaW. K. (2022). Predicting students’ achievement in a hybrid environment through self-regulated learning, log data, and course engagement: A data mining approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(4), 960–985. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211056178
2.
AyresP.PaasF. (2009). Interdisciplinary perspectives inspiring a new generation of cognitive load research. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9090-7
3.
AzevedoR.HadwinA. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition – Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33(5–6), 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-1272-9
4.
BannertM. (2009). Promoting self-regulated learning through prompts. Zeitschrift Für Pädagogische Psychologie, 23(2), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652.23.2.139
5.
Barnard-BrakL.PatonV. O.LanW. Y. (2010). Profiles in self-regulated learning in the online learning environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i1.769
6.
BembenuttyH.KitsantasA.ClearlyT. J. (Eds), (2013). Applications of self-regulated learning across diverse disciplines: A tribute to Barry J. Zimmerman. Information Age Publishing.
7.
BerginS.ReillyR.TraynorD. (2005). Examining the role of self-regulated learning on introductory programming performance. In Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Computing Education Research, ACM, pp. 81–86. https://doi.org/10.1145/1089786.1089794
8.
BiesingerK.CrippenK. (2010). The effects of feedback protocol on self-regulated learning in a web-based worked example learning environment. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1470–1482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.013
9.
BrennanK.ResnickM. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 1, Vancouver, 2012, p. 25.
10.
BroadbentJ.PoonW. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007
11.
ÇakıroğluÜ.Çevikİ.KöşeliE.AydınM. (2021). Understanding students’ abstractions in block-based programming environments: A performance based evaluation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41, 100888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100888
12.
ChenC.-M.WangJ.-Y.ChenY.-C. (2014). Facilitating English-language reading performance by a digital reading annotation system with self-regulated learning mechanisms. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(1), 102–114.
13.
ChiuT. K. F. (2021). Student engagement in K–12 online learning amid COVID-19: A qualitative approach from a self-determination theory perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1926289
ChoiJ.LeeY.LeeE. (2017). Puzzle based algorithm learning for cultivating computational thinking. Wireless Personal Communications, 93(1), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-016-3679-9
16.
ÇobanE.KorkmazÖ. (2021). An alternative approach for measuring computational thinking: Performance-based platform. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 42, 100929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100929
17.
DabbaghN.KitsantasA. (2005). Using web-based pedagogical tools as scaffolds for self-regulated learning. Instructional Science, 33, 513–540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-1278-3
18.
DelenE.LiewJ.WillsonV. (2014). Effects of interactivity and instructional scaffolding on learning: Self-regulation in online video-based environments. Computers & Education, 78, 312–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.018
19.
DempsterF. N. (1988). The spacing effect: A case study in the failure to apply the results of psychological research. American Psychologist, 43(8), 627–634. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.43.8.627
20.
EngelmannK.BannertM.MelznerN. (2021). Do self-created metacognitive prompts promote short- and long-term effects in computer-based learning environments?Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 16(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-021-00148-w
21.
GeorgeD.MalleryP. (2006). SPSS for windows step-by-step: A simple guide and reference, 14.0 update. Allyn & Bacon.
22.
Gresse Von WangenheimC.AlvesN. da C.RauberM. F.HauckJ. C. R.YeterI. H. (2021). A proposal for performance-based assessment of the learning of machine learning concepts and practices in K–12. Informatics in Education, 21(3), 479–500. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2022.18
23.
GuestG.MacQueenK. M.NameyE. E. (2014). Applied thematic analysis. SAGE Publications, Inc.
24.
HannafinM.LandS.OliveK. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In ReigeluthC. M. (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (2, pp. 115–140). Taylor and Francis.
25.
HaoQ.TsikerdekisM. (2019). How automated feedback is delivered matters: Formative feedback and knowledge transfer. Proceedings of 2019 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE43999.2019.9028686
KimH. J.PedersenS. (2011). Advancing young adolescents’ hypothesis-development performance in a computer-supported and problem-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1780–1789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.03.014
30.
KohK. H.BasawapatnaA.NickersonH.RepenningA. (2014). Real time assessment of computational thinking. In Proceedings of 2014 IEEE symposium on visual languages and human-centric computing, Melbourne, Australia, 2014, pp. 49–52. https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2014.6883021
31.
KongS. C.LiuB. (2020). A performance-based assessment platform for developing computational thinking concepts and practices: EasyCode. Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Learning Technology, 20(2), 8.
32.
LajoieS. P.GuerreraC.MunsieS. D.LavigneN. C. (2001). Constructing knowledge in the context of bioworld. Instructional Science, 29(2), 155–186. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003996000775
33.
LiuC.-C.ChenG.-D.WangC.-Y.LuC.-F. (2002). Student performance assessment using Bayesian network and web portfolios. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 27(4), 437–469. https://doi.org/10.2190/EL2A-TQF1-PYVM-N51V
34.
LoksaD.KoA. J. (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, ACM, pp. 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1145/2960310.2960334
35.
MessickS. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023002013
36.
PanaderoE.AndradeH.BrookhartS. (2018). Fusing self-regulated learning and formative assessment: A roadmap of where we are, how we got here, and where we are going. The Australian Educational Researcher, 45(1), 13–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-0258-y
37.
PintrichP. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In BoekaertsM.ZeidnerM.PintrichP. R. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
38.
RiversD. J.NakamuraM.VallanceM. (2022). Online self-regulated learning and achievement in the era of change. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(1), 104–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211025108
39.
SalmaN.PrastikawatiE. F. (2021). Performance-based assessment in the English learning process: Washback and barriers. Getsempena English Education Journal, 8(1), 164–176. https://doi.org/10.46244/geej.v8i1.1305
40.
SamruayruenB.EnriquezJ.NatakuatoongO.SamruayruenK. (2013). Self-regulated learning: A key of a successful learner in online learning environments in Thailand. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(1), 45–69. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.1.c
41.
SchunkD. H.MullenC. A. (2013). Toward a conceptual model of mentoring research: Integration with self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 25(3), 361–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9233-3
42.
ShapiroA. M (2008). Hypermedia design as learner scaffolding. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9063-4
43.
ShinY.SongD. (2022). The effects of self-regulated learning support on learners’ task performance and cognitive load in computer programing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(6), 1490–1513. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211052632
44.
SimonsK. D.KleinJ. D. (2007). The impact of scaffolding and student achievement levels in a problem-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 35(1), 41–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-006-9002-5
45.
TabuencaB.KalzM.DrachslerH.SpechtM. (2015). Time will tell: The role of mobile learning analytics in self-regulated learning. Computers & Education, 89, 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.004
46.
TammyD. A.LillianT. E. (Eds.), (2011). The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach. John Wiley & Sons.
47.
TorranceH. (Ed.), (1995). Evaluating authentic assessment: Problems and possibilities in new approaches to assessment. Open University Press.
48.
Van der GraafJ.LimL.FanY.KilgourJ.MooreJ.BannertM.GasevicD.MolenaarI. (2021). Do instrumentation tools capture self-regulated learning? In LAK21: 11th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, ACM, pp. 438–448. https://doi.org/10.1145/3448139.3448181
49.
VohsK. D. (Ed.), (2013). Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
50.
WangQ.PengY.WangH. (2022). A curation activity-based self-regulated learning promotion approach as scaffolding to improving learners’ performance in STEM courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(4), 843–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211056532
51.
WäschleK.LachnerA.StuckeB.ReyS.FrömmelC.NücklesM. (2014). Effects of visual feedback on medical students’ procrastination within web-based planning and reflection protocols. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 120–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.022
52.
WeissR. S. (1995). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies (1st ed.). Free Press.
WinneP. H. (2019). Paradigmatic dimensions of instrumentation and analytic methods in research on self-regulated learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 96, 285–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.026
55.
WongJ.BaarsM.DavisD.Van Der ZeeT.HoubenG.-J.PaasF. (2019). Supporting self-regulated learning in online learning environments and MOOCs: A systematic review. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(4–5), 356–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1543084
56.
XingW.LiC.ChenG.HuangX.ChaoJ.MassicotteJ.XieC. (2021). Automatic assessment of students’ engineering design performance using a Bayesian network model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(2), 230–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120960422
57.
YuP. (2005). A focused conversation model in consumer research: The incorporation of group facilitation paradigm in in-depth interviews. Asia Pacific Advances in Consumer Research, 6, 337–344.
58.
ZhangY.LinC.-H. (2021). Effects of community of inquiry, learning presence and mentor presence on K–12 online learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(3), 782–796. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12523
59.
ZimmermanB. J (2000). Attaining self-regulation. In BoekaertsM.ZeidnerM.PintrichP. R. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7
ZimmermanB. J.MoylanA. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In HackerD. J.DunloskyJ.GraesserA. C. (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (1st ed., pp. 311–328). Elsevier.
62.
ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. H. (Eds.), (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. Routledge.
63.
ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. H. (2013). Reflections on theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. H. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 289–307). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
