Coding schemes for the analysis of video and stimulated Sample Clauses

Coding schemes for the analysis of video and stimulated recall interview data In order to tackle the first research question, two coding schemes within a multi-step analysis design were used to capture the evidence of self-, co-, and shared regulation of learning processes that emerged from the video data and stimulated-recall interviews. For the first analysis step, a coding scheme was developed in order to identify and analyse incidents that indicated evidence of students’ regulation of their learning processes. The initial coding scheme was drawn up based on several theoretical models of SRL and previous research literature. In line with the objectives of this current study, it included two main categories, namely metacognitive and motivational and emotional regulation, and several sub-categories within each main category (e.g., planning, monitoring, control & evaluation processes). Primarily, these initial coding categories were derived from Pintrich’s (2004) conceptual framework of SRL and Xxxxxxxxx’x (2000) social cognitive model of SRL (see Appendix A for more details about these models). They were also based on the coding scheme developed by Xxxxxxx and Xxxxxxx (2005) for investigating students’ regulation of their learning in a collaborative computer-based scientific inquiry context, as well as that of Xxxxxxxxxx et al. (2009) which was used to assess pre- school children’s regulation of their learning processes. During this step, the students and teacher’s verbal discourses were transcribed verbatim and their non-verbal actions (e.g., eye contact, body language, hand speed, facial expression, and tone of voice) were noted in italic font within the parenthesis. An utterance(s) and /or nonverbal action(s) in the transcripts represented the coding units for this step. An utterance was defined as any verbal statement with a particular function and meaning (akin to XxXxxx, & Xxxxxxxxxx 2010) and similarly, nonverbal actions referred to any behaviour which had a specific function and meaning. In some cases, when one utterance or nonverbal action served two functions, it was assigned two different codes. On the other hand, if several utterances and/or nonverbal actions served the same function, only a single code was applied. Regarding the transcripts, utterances and nonverbal actions were represented in terms of turns (3963 turns in total). A turn was defined as the utterance and/or nonverbal action of a person bounded by another person’s utterance and/or nonverbal action. Here, a turn could include only a ...