TY - CONF
T1 - Monitoring: A Strategy to Detect Imminent Mistakes
AU - Jossberger, Helen
AU - Brand-Gruwel, Saskia
AU - Boshuizen, Els
AU - Van de Wiel, Margje
N1 - DS_Description: Jossberger, H., Brand-Gruwel, S., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Van de Wiel, M. (2010, August). Monitoring: A strategy to detect imminent mistakes. In D. Sembill (Chair), Human Fallibility: The Ambiguity of Errors for Work and Learning. Symposium conducted at the EARLI Learning and Professional Development SIG Conference, Munich, Germany.
DS_Sponsorship:NWO project number 411-05-207
PY - 2010/11/9
Y1 - 2010/11/9
N2 - The aim of this empirical study was to unravel generic self-regulated learning behaviours and to seek to investigate micro processes of planning, monitoring, and evaluating in workplace simulations. Eighteen students from upper secondary vocational education participated. Students were observed during a practical lesson and interviewed afterward to gain detailed insights into their behaviours, thoughts, and (inter)actions. Information was collected on the way they executed a task, how they dealt with problems and mistakes and why they interacted with peers or the teacher. Students self-regulated during task execution. Monitoring appeared to be an activity that was regularly executed by keeping a close eye on the product students were working on. Teachers were consulted when students had doubts and needed confirmation or when they wanted more information. They consulted their peers when they wanted to get a faster answer and thought that this peer had enough knowledge to help them out.
AB - The aim of this empirical study was to unravel generic self-regulated learning behaviours and to seek to investigate micro processes of planning, monitoring, and evaluating in workplace simulations. Eighteen students from upper secondary vocational education participated. Students were observed during a practical lesson and interviewed afterward to gain detailed insights into their behaviours, thoughts, and (inter)actions. Information was collected on the way they executed a task, how they dealt with problems and mistakes and why they interacted with peers or the teacher. Students self-regulated during task execution. Monitoring appeared to be an activity that was regularly executed by keeping a close eye on the product students were working on. Teachers were consulted when students had doubts and needed confirmation or when they wanted more information. They consulted their peers when they wanted to get a faster answer and thought that this peer had enough knowledge to help them out.
KW - self-regulated learning
KW - vocational education
M3 - Paper
ER -