Convergence Of The Virtual And The Living Realities: A Constructivist Grounded Theory On University Students’ Self-Regulated Learning

• Authors: Judita Kasperiūnienė , Vilma Žydžiūnaitė
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Studies of informal learning at universities have indicated that social online network Facebook is used for learning purposes. Understanding of self-regulated academic learning processes in which students and their instructors are involved is very important for successful application and use of online social networks in university teaching and learning. This aims to reveal the learning that takes place in online social networks beyond the boundaries of universities such as Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin and related. Research object is the conditions and strategies of self-regulated learning of university students. Research question in this study is the following: “What situations, actions, interactions and consequences construct the content of self-regulated learning in a social network account?” The methodology of constructivist Grounded theory was implemented in the study. The theoretical sampling was conducted in order to involve the research participants into the study and receive the answers to the research question. For data collection were used the individual semi-structured interviews. Convergence of the virtual and the living realities is the core of university student’s self-regulated learning within the virtual space. In total in the study participated 12 research participants. Findings showed that convergence of the virtual and living realities explains university students’ self-regulated learning within the two contexts: the first, academic communication and the second, virtual learning. Self-regulated learning is affected and formed by the learner dependent and the organization dependent conditions. Two learning contexts emerged from analysis of our research data: virtual learning and academic communication. University students SRL strategies can be separated into two categories: self- oriented strategies and strategies, oriented towards others. The research findings revealed four types of intervening factors: technological, image formation, personal and psychosocial. By concluding it could be highlighted that professors and instructors are important players in the process of self-regulated learning of university students. The data grounded in the voices of academics, instructors and administrative staff can provide a deeper understanding of students’ self-regulated learning and enrich the learning results.

Keywords

EN

Grounded theory; Online social networks; Self-regulated learning; University students

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Vocational Training: Research And Realities
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 26
• Issue: 1

Dates

published

2015-11-01

online

2015-12-10

Contributors

author

Judita Kasperiūnienė

• Aleksandras Stulginskis University; Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas, Lithuania

author

Vilma Žydžiūnaitė

• Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas, Lithuania

References

• Bernacki, M. (2010). The influence of self-regulated learning and prior knowledge on knowledge acquisition in computer-based learning environments. Doctoral dissertation. NY: Temple University.
• Bernacki, M. L., Nokes-Malach, T. J., & Aleven, V. (2013). Fine-grained assessment of motivation over long periods of learning with an intelligent tutoring system: Methodology, advantages, and preliminary results. In International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 629-644). New York: Springer.
• Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(2013), 417-444.[Crossref]
• Breckenridge, J., & Jones, D. (2009). Demystifying theoretical sampling in grounded theory research. The Grounded Theory Review, 8(2), 113-126.
• Breckenridge, J., Jones, D., Elliott, I., & Nicol, M. (2012). Choosing a methodological path: Reflections on the constructivist turn. The Grounded Theory Review, 11(1), 64-71.
• Borgatti, S. P., & Cross, R. (2003). A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 49(4), 432-445.[Crossref]
• Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. London: Sage.
• Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Pine Forge Press.
• Chen, I. Y., Chen, N. S., & Kinshuk (2009). Examining the factors influencing participants' knowledge sharing behavior in virtual learning communities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 134-148.
• Chou, S. W., & Liu, C. H. (2005). Learning effectiveness in a Web-based virtual learning environment: a learner control perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(1), 65-76.
• Coyne, I. T. (1997). Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(3), 623-630.[Crossref]
• Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal Learning Environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3-8.
• Davies, D., & Dodd, J. (2002). Qualitative research and the question of rigor. Qualitative Health Research, 12(2), 279-289.
• Dal Yong Jin. (2013). De-convergence of global media industries. New York: Routledge.
• de Andrés Martínez, C. (2012). Developing metacognition at a distance: sharing students’ learning strategies on a reflective blog. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(2), 199-212.
• Glaser, B. G. (2003). The grounded theory perspective II: Description’s remodeling of grounded theory methodology. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
• Glaser, B. G. (2003). Naturalist Inquiry and Grounded Theory [68 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 5(1), Art. 7. Available at (Retrieved on 25/10/2015).
• Glaser, B. G. (2005). The Grounded Theory Perspective III: Theoretical coding. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
• Glaser, B. G. (2011). Getting out of the data: Grounded theory conceptualization. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
• Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606.
• Hartley, J. (2012). Communication, cultural and media studies: The key concepts. London and New York: Routledge.
• Haythornthwaite, C. (2005). Social networks and Internet connectivity effects. Information, Community & Society, 8(2), 125-147.
• Heo, G.M., Lee, R. & Park, Y. (2007). Blog as a Meaningful Learning Context: Adult Bloggers as Cyworld Users in Korea. In C. Montgomerie & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2007 (pp. 76-81). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Available at (Retrieved on 13/09/2015).
• James, F. (2013). An exploration of grounded theory with reference to self and identity of part-time, mature learners in higher education. Doctoral dissertation. Yorkshire: University of Hull.
• Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York and London: NYU Press.
• Kop, R., & Fournier, H. (2011). New dimensions to self-directed learning in an open networked learning environment. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 7(2), 2-20.
• Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2015). Effect of a TPCK-SRL Model on Teachers’ Pedagogical Beliefs, Self-Efficacy, and Technology-Based Lesson Design. In Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (pp. 89-112). New York: Springer.
• Kvale, S. (2008). Doing interviews. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage Publications.
• Lichtman, M. (2012). Qualitative Research in Education: A User's Guide. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage Publications.
• Lin, J. W., Huang, H. H., & Chuang, Y. S. (2015). The impacts of network centrality and self-regulation on an e-learning environment with the support of social network awareness. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 32-44.[Crossref]
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
• Madge, C., Meek, J., Wellens, J., & Hooley, T. (2009). Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: ‘It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 141-155.
• Ma, W. W., & Chan, A. (2014). Knowledge sharing and social media: Altruism, perceived online attachment motivation, and perceived online relationship commitment. Computers in Human Behavior, 39(2014), 51-58.[Crossref]
• Ma, W. W., & Yuen, A. H. (2011). Understanding online knowledge sharing: An interpersonal relationship perspective. Computers & Education, 56(1), 210-219.
• Martin, S., Diaz, G., Sancristobal, E., Gil, R., Castro, M., & Peire, J. (2011). New technology trends in education: Seven years of forecasts and convergence. Computers & Education, 57(3), 1893-1906.
• Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
• Nicholas, D., Watkinson, A., Jamali, H. R., Herman, E., Tenopir, C., Volentine, R., & Levine, K. (2015). Peer review: still king in the digital age. Learned Publishing, 28(1), 15-21.[Crossref]
• Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(3), 801–813.
• Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia, T. (1994). Self-regulated learning in college students: Knowledge, strategies, and motivation. Student motivation, cognition, and learning: Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie, 113-133.
• Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.[Crossref]
• Robertson, J. (2011). The educational affordances of blogs for self-directed learning. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1628-1644.
• Roth, A., Ogrin, S., & Schmitz, B. (2015). Assessing self-regulated learning in higher education: a systematic literature review of self-report instruments. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 1-26.
• Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2012). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, Research, and Applications. New York, London: Routledge.
• Song, L., Hill, J. R. (2007). A conceptual model for understanding self-directed learning in online environments. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(1), 27-42.
• Stedman, L. (1998). New media and borderless education: a review of the convergence between global media networks and higher education providers. The Technology Source Archives at the University of North Carolina. Available at (Retrieved on 04/09/2015).
• Stewart-Sicking, J. A., Snodgrass, J. L., Pereira, R., Mutai, W. W., & Crews, R. (2013). A grounded theory investigation into the process and effects of service-learning in counselor education. The International Journal of Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement, 1(1), 47-60.
• Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research (Vol. 15). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Templeman, K., Robinson, A., & McKenna, L. (2015). Student identification of the need for complementary medicine education in Australian medical curricula: A constructivist grounded theory approach. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 23(2), 257-264.
• Tess, P. A. (2013). The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual)–A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), 60-68.[Crossref]
• Watson, J. (2008). Blended Learning: The Convergence of Online and Face-to-Face Education. Promising Practices in Online Learning. North American Council for Online Learning. Available at (Retrieved on 06/05/2015)
• Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.), Handbook of selfregulation (pp. 531–566). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
• Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). nStudy: Tracing and supporting self-regulated learning in the Internet. In International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 293-308). New York: Springer.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17.[Crossref]
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/vtrr-2015-0002