This article presents the case for the use of the ‘think-aloud protocol’ by teachers who engage in action-research as a source of constructive information about their students’ cognitive learning processes. This method calls upon learners to talk their thoughts out aloud, during engagement in some learning activity regarding which the researching teachers seek insight to inform them to plan enhancement of the learning and teaching process. The case for ‘think-aloud’ reporting of particular learning activities is supported by a review of relevant literature. Accounts of diverse experiences in various discipline areas using modified versions of think-aloud protocols in action-researching are presented, with reports of their transformative outcomes. Reasoned reservations regarding the reliability of uncorroborated sources of retrospective data about students’ learning are advanced. Refined methodologies are outlined together with general guidelines, for those minded to explore their value in their own contexts.
AbualrubIKarsethBStensakerB (2013) The various understandings of learning environment in higher education and its quality implications. Quality in Higher Education19(11): 90–110.
2.
AtmanCBursicK (1998) Verbal protocol analysis as a method to document engineering student design processes. Journal of Engineering Education87(2): 121–32.
3.
BaddeleyAD (1986) Working Memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
4.
BakhtinM (1986) Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
5.
BasarabaDZannouYWoodsD, et al. (2013) Exploring the Utility of Student-Think Alouds for Providing Insights into Students’ Metacognitive and Problem-Solving Processes during Assessment Development. Evanston, IL: Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness.
6.
BrohnDCowanJ (1977) Teaching towards an understanding of structural behaviour. The Structural Engineer55(1): 9–17.
7.
CalderL (2006, March) Uncoverage: Toward a signature pedagogy for the history survey. The Journal of American History1358–70.
8.
CavanaghM (2011) Students’ experiences of active engagement through cooperative learning activities in lectures. Active Learning in Higher Education12(1): 23–33.
9.
ChartersE (2003) The use of think-aloud methods in qualitative research: An introduction to think-aloud methods. Brock Education Journal12(2): 68–82.
10.
ChoiH-Hvan MerrienboerJPaasF (2014) Effects of the physical environment on cognitive load and learning: Toward a new model of cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review26(2): 225–44.
11.
CowanJ (1975) The feasibility of resource-based learning in civil engineering education. PhD Thesis, Heriot-Watt University, UK.
12.
CowanJ (1980) Improving the recorded protocol. Innovations in Education & Training International17(3): 160–3.
13.
CowanJ (1980) Quantitative and Qualitative Understanding of Engineering Phenomena. Vienna: Ingenieur Padagogik.
14.
CowanJ (2006) On Becoming an Innovative University Teacher. Buckingham: Open University Press.
15.
CowanJ (2009) Breaking the rules: Writing reflectively for yourself. In: MertensNL (ed.) Writing: Processes, Tools and Techniques. New York: Nova Science Publishers, pp. 109–13.
16.
CowanJCherryD (2012) The learner’s role in assessing higher level abilities. Practitioner Research in Higher Education6(1): 12–22.
17.
CowanJLowleyKBinghamE (1981, October) Can we usefully analyse our own problem-solving?European Association for Research and Development in European Higher Education: Newsletter31–36.
18.
CowanJPottingerIWeedonE, et al. (1995) Development-through researching your own practice. In: Proceedings of 17th world conference in distance education, Birmingham, June 1995, pp. 241–5. London: ICDE.
19.
DeeleySJ (2014) Summative co-assessment: A deep learning approach to enhancing employability skills and attributes. Active Learning in Higher Education15(1): 39–51.
20.
Dounas-FrazerDVan De BogartKMacKenzieR, et al. (2016) Investigating the role of model-based reasoning while troubleshooting an electric circuit. Physical Review Physics Education Research12(1): 1–20.
21.
DunckerK (1945) On problem solving. Psychological Monographs58(270): i–113.
22.
DurkinHE (1937) Trial-and-Error, Gradual Analysis and Sudden Reorganization: An experimental Study of Problem Solving: Archives of Psychology (210 Thesis). New York: Columbia University.
23.
EllisRA (2016) Qualitatively different university student experiences of inquiry: Associations amongst approaches to inquiry, technologies and perceptions of the learning environment. Active Learning in Higher Education17(1): 13–23.
24.
EricssonK (2003) Valid and non-reactive verbalization of thoughts during performance of tasks. Journal of Consciousness Studies10(9–10): 1–18.
25.
EricssonKSimonH (1980) Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review87(3): 215–51.
26.
EricssonKSimonH (1984) Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
27.
FirestoneW (1987) Meaning in method: The rhetoric of quantitative and qualitative research. Educational Researcher16(7): 21–59.
28.
FonteynMKuipersBGrobeS (1993) A Description of think aloud method and protocol analysis. Qualitative Health Research3(4): 430–41.
29.
GeorgeJWCowanJ (1999) Ten Years of Action Research by R11 Tutorial and Counselling Staff Report. Edinburgh: Open University in Scotland.
30.
GeorgeJWCowanJGibbsG (1997) Brilliant Ideas for Tutoring from Region 11. Edinburgh: Open University in Scotland.
31.
GibsonB (1997) Taking the test: Using verbal report data in looking at the processing of cloze tasks. Edinburgh Working Papers in Applied Linguistics8: 54–62.
32.
Gomez FerragudCSolez-PortolesJSanjoseV (2015) Effects of topic familiarity on analogical transfer in problem-solving: A think-aloud study of two singular cases. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education11(4): 875–87.
33.
GuvendirE (2014) Using think-aloud protocols to identify factors that cause foreign language reading anxiety. The Reading Matrix14 (2): 109–18.
34.
HarrisJ (1998) How the Brain Talks to Itself: A Clinical Primer of Psychotherapeutic Neuroscience. New York: Hawthorn Press.
35.
HendersonMFingerGSelwynN (2016) What’s used and what’s useful? Exploring digital technology use(s) amongst taught postgraduate students. Active Learning in Higher Education17(3): 235–47.
36.
HenrySLeBreckDHolzemerW (1989) The effect of verbalization of cognitive processes on clinical decision making. Research in Nursing and Health12: 187–93.
37.
HermannKJ (2013) The impact of cooperative learning on student engagement: Results from an intervention. Active Learning in Higher Education14(3): 175–87.
38.
JacobseAHarskampE (2012) Towards efficient measurement of metacognition in mathematical problem solving. Metacognition Learning7(2): 133–49.
39.
KaliskiPFranceMHuffK, et al. (2011) Using Think aloud Interviews in Evidence-Centred Assessment Design for the AP World History Exam. New Orleans, LA: American Educational Research Association (AERA).
40.
KarpfD (1972) Thinking aloud in human discrimination learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Dissertation Abstracts International33(6111-B).
41.
MariesASinghC (2016) Teaching assistants’ performance at identifying common introductory student’ difficulties in mechanics revealed by the force concept inventory. Physical Review Physics Education Research12(1): 010131.
42.
Miller-YoungJ (2013) Calculations and expectations: How engineering students describe three-dimensional forces. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning4(1): 4.
43.
MillisB (2012) Active Learning Strategies in Face-to-Face Courses. Manhattan, NY: IDEA.
44.
MooreOAndersonS (1954) Modern logic and tasks for experiments on problem solving behavior. The Journal of Psychology38(1): 151–60.
45.
MorozovAKilgoreDAtmanC (2007) Breadth in design problem scoping: Using insights from experts to investigate student processes. In: ASEE conference report, Honolulu, HI, 24–27 June
. Washington, DC: Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education.
46.
NewellASimonH (1972) Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
47.
NisbettRWilsonW (1977) Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review84(3): 231–59.
48.
OlsonGDuffySMackR (1984) Thinking-out-loud as a method for studying real time comprehension processes. In: KierasDE (ed.) New Methods in Reading Comprehension Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 253–86.
49.
OngWJ (1982) Orality and Literacy. New York: Routledge.
50.
PeacockSCowanJ (2017) Towards online student-directed communities of inquiry. Journal of Further and Higher Education. Epub ahead of print 14 January. DOI: 10.1080/0309877X.2017.1302569.
51.
PrestridgeS (2014) A focus on students’ use of Twitter – their interactions with each other, content and interface. Active Learning in Higher Education15(2): 101–15.
52.
RankinJ (1988) Designing thinking aloud strategies in ESL reading. Reading in a Foreign Language4(2): 119–32.
SmagorinskyP (1989) The reliability and validity of protocol analysis. Written Communication6(4): 463–79.
55.
SmagorinskyP (2001) Rethinking protocol analysis from a cultural perspective. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics21: 233–45.
56.
SmithTThompsonJMountcastleD (2013) Student understanding of Taylor series expansions in statistical mechanics. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4231
57.
StefanouCStolkJPrinceM, et al. (2013) Self-regulation and autonomy in problem-and project-based learning environments. Active Learning in Higher Education14(2): 109–22.
58.
SugirinM (1999) Exploring the comprehension strategies of EFL readers: A multi-method study. ERIC Document Reproduction Service no. ED 428 548, 9December1998. Sydney, NSW, Australia: University of New South Wales.
59.
VuopalaEHyvönenPJärveläS (2016) Interaction forms in successful collaborative learning in virtual learning environments. Active Learning in Higher Education17(1): 25–38.
60.
VygotskyL (1962) Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
61.
WilcoxBPollockS (2015) Upper-division student difficulties with separation of variables. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.03938
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
