=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=None
|storemode=property
|title=The Influence of Collaboration and Self-Regulated Learning Services on the Motivation to Learn at the Workplace
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-957/matel12_submission_3.pdf
|volume=Vol-957
}}
==The Influence of Collaboration and Self-Regulated Learning Services on the Motivation to Learn at the Workplace==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-957/matel12_submission_3.pdf
The
influence
of
collaboration
and
self-‐regulated
learning
services
on
the
motivation
to
learn
at
the
workplace
Teresa
Holocher-‐Ertl1,
Claudia
Magdalena
Fabian1
ZSI
–
Centre
for
Social
Innovation,
Vienna,
Austria
{holocher, fabian}@zsi.at
Abstract. Motivating workplace learners to actively getting involved in learn-
ing and sharing knowledge with their colleagues is still a challenging task for
researchers and educational designers. In this paper we present results from the
two-months evaluation of the IntelLEO motivational concept, investigating the
role of ICT-supported collaboration and self-regulated learning activities on the
motivation and self-efficacy for learning and knowledge building of workplace
learners. This motivational concept was evaluated in three different business
cases involving 59 participants.
Keywords: workplace learning, collaboration, self-regulation, motivation, self-
efficacy
1 Introduction
Learning
at
the
workplace
and
social
learning
on
ICT-‐enabled
work-‐communities
is
foreseen
to
become
the
dominant
source
of
education
in
areas
where
new
practical
knowledge
emerges
rapidly
and
has
a
short
lifetime
[1].
But
engagement
in
collaborative
learn-‐
ing
and
knowledge
building
(LKB)
activities
at
the
workplace
is
still
a
big
challenge
for
many
educationists
and
researchers.
Challenges
arise
on
how
to
make
the
individual
tacit
knowledge
of
experts
ex-‐
plicit
and
useful
for
other
workers,
how
to
combine
it
to
more
complex
constructs
that
embody
the
organizational
goals
and
vi-‐
sions,
and
how
to
shape
the
action
and
practice
in
organization
with
this
accumulated
knowledge.
Especially
in
highly
competitive
environments
motivation
for
an
increased
knowledge
sharing
is
an
important
challenge,
as
people
might
feel
reluctant
to
give
away
too
much
of
their
tacit
knowledge
[2].
One
model
that
explains
organizational
knowledge
management
from
individuals’
and
organizations’
perspective
is
the
knowledge
conversion
model
(also
called
SECI-‐
model)
from
Nonaka
and
Takeuchi
[3].
This
model
has
been
used
to
explain
how
to
dynami-‐
cally
update
organizational
knowledge
using
organization
mem-‐
bers
experiences,
but
it
does
not
integrate
the
issues
of
motivation
for
learning
and
knowledge-‐
building
(LKB)
in
the
workplace.
In
IntelLEO,
a
research
project
of
the
7th
Framework
program,
we
aimed
to
increase
mo-‐
tivation
for
LKB
within
and
across
organiza-‐
tional
borders
through
innovative
tools
and
procedures
[4].
With
this
aim,
the
research
team
took
the
approach
to
adapt
the
SECI
model
[3]
into
the
projects’
“pedagogic
and
motivational
model”.
2 The IntelLEO motivational model
To
integrate
motivation
for
learning
and
knowledge-‐building
into
the
SECI
model,
IntelLEO
decided
to
focus
on
two
aspects,
and
inte-‐
grate
them
in
the
original
SECI
phases:
1)
Support
of
self-‐regulated
learners
[5],
and
2)
Support
of
collaboration
and
social
and
organi-‐
zational
embeddedness.
We
understand
our
adapted
knowledge
conversion
model
as
an
approach,
which
integrates
and
fosters:
Ad
1)
Support
of
self-‐regulated
achievement
of
learning
and
per-‐
formance
goals:
The
planning
of
one’s
competence
development
and
self-‐regulated
learning
from
others
are
activities
that
are
cov-‐
ered
in
the
model’s
internalization
phase
[17],
while
self-‐
regulated
reflecting,
documenting
and
bringing
evidence
of
competence
de-‐
velopment
are
supported
in
the
externalization
phase
(see
the
dotes
squares
in
Figure
1).
Ad2)
Support
of
collaboration
and
social
and
organizational
emb-‐
bededdness:
The
strengthening
of
the
community
as
a
source
of
motivation
will
support
learning
and
knowledge
sharing
activities
in
all
SECI-‐phases.
Pro-‐social
goals,
feeling
of
relatedness,
collabo-‐
rative
discussion
and
enhancement
of
learning
objects,
support
and
tutoring
for
increased
self-‐efficacy
are
highly
relevant
factors
to
motivate
people
for
non-‐intrinsically
motivated
tasks.
Additional
this
cluster
fosters
the
social
embeddedness
of
learners
into
the
goals,
norms
and
visions
of
organizations.
Fig.
1.
The
IntelLEO
motivational
model
A
more
detailed
introduction
into
the
IntelLEO
pedagogic
and
mo-‐
tivational
model
was
presented
at
the
last
MATEL
2011
workshop
[6].
In
this
workshop
we
want
to
present
the
results
from
the
two-‐
months
evaluation
of
this
model
in
three
different
Business
Cases
involving
59
participants
from
industry
and
research
organisa-‐
tions.
3 Evaluation of the motivational model
The
IntelLEO
pedagogic
and
motivational
model
was
evaluated
during
a
testing
period
of
two
months
with
employees
in
three
Business
Cases
(BCs).
The
testing
took
place
between
October
2011
and
January
2012.
All
59
test-‐participants
were
provided
with
a
set
of
learning
services,
which
supported
self-‐regulated
and
collabora-‐
tive
learning
at
the
workplace
during
this
testing
period,
while
the
scenarios
for
the
usage
of
these
services
were
adapted
to
the
spe-‐
cific
needs
and
requirements
of
each
BC.
The
testing
phase
started
with
an
initial
training
session
for
the
test-‐participants,
where
the
services
were
introduced
and
pre-‐
evaluation
questionnaire
distributed
to
the
employees.
After
the
two-‐months
testing
period,
the
evaluation
was
concluded
with
a
post-‐evaluation
questionnaire
and
two
focus
groups
per
BC
to
in-‐
vestigate
the
experiences
of
participants
in
more
detail.
In
addition
the
facilitators
and
representatives
of
the
management
were
invit-‐
ed
for
expert
interviews
to
provide
feedback
regarding
the
organi-‐
zational
point
of
view
on
the
IntelLEO
learning
services
and
peda-‐
gogic
concept.
The
data
from
the
questionnaires
were
used
to
in-‐
vestigate
the
participant’s
attitudes
towards
learning
and
knowledge-‐sharing,
as
well
as
their
motivation
and
self-‐efficacy
towards
self-‐regulated
and
collaborative
learning
at
the
workplace.
A
pre-‐
and
post-‐data
comparison
tried
to
find
out
in
how
far
the
two-‐months
testing
period
changed
these
attitudes
and
motiva-‐
tional
aspects
of
participants.
Correlation
analysis
tried
to
answer
in
how
far
positive
attitudes
towards
learning
and
knowledge
shar-‐
ing
related
to
a
high
motivation
and
self-‐efficacy
perception
of
learners.
The
focus
group
discussions
gave
more
insights
into
the
motivators
and
barriers
of
using
the
learning
services
in
the
differ-‐
ent
organizational
contexts
and
thus
provided
a
better
understand-‐
ing
of
factors
influencing
collaborative,
self-‐regulated
learning
at
the
workplace.
Besides
this,
open
questions
for
future
research
projects
were
derived.
The
expert
interviews
provided
more
in-‐
sights
in
determining
aspects
of
the
implementation
of
the
IntelLEO
learning
services
and
pedagogic
concept
in
the
organisational
envi-‐
ronment
and
culture
and
complemented
the
evaluation
from
the
organisational
perspective.
4 First results from the evaluation
In
this
chapter
we
will
highlight
some
of
the
outcomes
of
the
evalu-‐
ation,
which
will
be
presented
and
discussed
in
more
detail
at
the
MATEL
Workshop
2012:
The
results
show
the
importance
of
collaboration
services
for
an
increased
motivation
for
learning
and
knowledge
building
(LKB)
activities,
but
results
have
to
be
interpreted
carefully
due
to
the
limited
number
of
59
participants
and
the
prototypical
state
of
the
IntelLEO
services.
The
participants
who
got
involved
in
collabora-‐
tion
activities
often
were
amongst
the
most
motivated
for
LKB
and
showed
also
the
highest
self-‐efficacy
for
LKB.
This
result
was
con-‐
firmed
by
the
correlation
analysis
of
post-‐data
on
learning
and
knowledge
sharing
attitudes,
which
highlighted
the
relationship
between
collaboration
and
the
motivation
to
learn,
the
willingness
to
share
knowledge
and
also
the
self-‐efficacy
for
LKB.
In
addition
we
found
a
strong
positive
correlation
between
the
motivation
to
learn
and
self-‐efficacy
for
LKB,
meaning
that
the
more
self-‐
confident
a
person
is
with
respect
to
learning
activities
the
more
motivated
s/he
is
to
actually
learn.
Thus
our
studies
confirm
out-‐
comes
from
existing
studies
on
self-‐efficacy
and
learning
motiva-‐
tion
[7][8].
The
results
from
the
IntelLEO
evaluation
do
not
allow
us
to
clearly
define
the
influence
of
self-‐regulated
learning
activities
on
the
learners’
motivation.
We
therefore
suggest
more
research
that
spe-‐
cifically
investigates
the
role
of
these
services
and
its’
influence
on
self-‐efficacy
and
motivation
to
learn.
We
found
that
the
group
of
participants
who
used
high
collaboration
and
high
self-‐regulated
learning
services
were
not
among
the
most
motivated
ones,
but
the
most
motivated
learners
were
those
using
collaboration
services
often
and
self-‐regulated
learning
services
not
very
often.
The
quali-‐
tative
results
show
that
self-‐regulated
learning
activities,
like
un-‐
derstanding
organisational
objectives,
self-‐reflecting,
setting
of
learning
goals,
and
monitoring
of
the
learning
progress,
are
im-‐
portant
activities
especially
for
self-‐motivation
and
keeping
oneself
on
the
learning
track.
But
it
might
be
that
the
participants
stated
on
the
one
hand
that
planning
and
monitoring
their
learning
progress
in
harmonisation
with
the
organisation
is
important
and
on
the
other
hand,
when
it
comes
to
really
doing
it,
the
less
time
spent
with
it
the
better
it
is.
So
maybe
if
too
much
time
and
effort
are
dedicated
to
self-‐regulated
activities,
it
can
be
perceived
as
de-‐
motivating
again.
The
workplace
learners
seem
to
be
more
willing
to
use
services
that
support
pragmatically
useful
learning
activities
that
they
have
to
do
as
part
of
their
work
process.
Even
if
they
show
a
positive
motivation
towards
planning
competences
and
monitoring
their
learning
process,
the
workplace
learners
seem
to
be
less
willing
to
use
extra
effort
in
the
work
process
for
computer-‐supported
self-‐
regulated
learning
activities.
Planning
and
monitoring
of
one’s
learning
process
was
perceived
as
a
means
of
self-‐control
and
self-‐motivation,
and
helps
to
make
efforts
visible.
In
the
informal
learning
context
the
involed
BCs
us-‐
ing
this
information
to
control
and
evaluate
employees
from
the
“outside”
is
perceived
as
de-‐motivating
again.
Also
organisational
learning
objectives
serve
as
personal
orientation,
but
should
not
be
used
for
evaluation
purposes.
In
contrast,
the
expert
interviews
with
the
management
showed
that
self-‐regulated
learning
services
are
perceived
as
relevant
from
organisational
point
of
view
as
they
help
organisations
to
manage
the
positions,
roles
and
competences
that
they
have
and
the
ones
it
wants
to
achieve.
5 Summary
In
this
paper
we
present
the
results
from
the
evaluation
of
the
In-‐
telLEO
motivational
model,
which
is
based
on
the
support
of
col-‐
laborative
and
self-‐regulated
learning
activities
at
the
workplace.
The
evaluation
highlighted
the
importance
of
collaboration
if
the
motivation
and
self-‐efficacy
to
learn
and
share
knowledge
should
be
increased
amongst
workplace
leaners.
The
role
of
self-‐regulated
learning
services
on
the
motivation
to
learn
in
a
professional
con-‐
text
could
not
be
clearly
defined
yet
and
would
need
further
re-‐
search.
6 References
1. Tuomi,
I.,
“The
Future
of
Learning
in
the
Knowledge
Society:
Disruptive
Changes
for
Europe
by
2020.”
for
EC-‐DG
Joint
Research
Centre/
DG
Education
and
Culture:
1-‐48,
2005
2. Ardichvili,
A.,
Page,
V.,
Wentiling,
T.,
"Motivation
and
barriers
to
participation
in
vir-‐
tual
knowledge
sharing
communities
of
practice"
Journal
of
Knowledge
Management
7(1),
2003:
64.
3. Nonaka,
I.,
Takeuchi,
H.,
The
knowledge-‐creating
company:
How
Japanese
companies
cre-‐
ate
the
dynamics
of
innovation.
Oxford
University
Press,
1995.
4. D1.4
IntelLEO
Public
Concept,
http://intelleo.eu/uploads/tx_abdownloads/files/IntelLEO_Concept_D1.4_v20.pdf
5. Zimmerman,
B.
J,
"A
Social
Cognitive
View
of
Self-‐Regulated
Academic
Learning."
Journal
of
Educational
Psychology
81(3),
1989
6. Holocher-‐Ertl,
T.,
Pata,
K.,
Fabian,
C.M.,
“How
to
integrate
the
motivation
to
learn
into
TEL
enhanced
organizational
knowledge-‐management
models?“
MATEL
2012
Work-‐
shop
at
EC-‐TEL,
Palermo,
Italy
7. Bandura,
A.
(1986).
"Social
foundations
of
thought
and
action:
A
social
cognitive
theo-‐
ry."
Englewoood
Cliffs,
NJ:
Prentice-‐Hall.
8. Montalvo,
F.
T.,
Gonzalez
Torres,
M.C.
(2004).
"Self-‐Regulated
Learning:
Current
and
Future
Directions."
Electronic
Journal
of
Research
in
Educational
Psychology
2(1):
1-‐
34.
Acknowledgements
IntelLEO
[1]
“Intelligent
Learning
Extended
Organization”
is
a
research
project
supported
by
the
ICT
program
of
the
European
Commission
(DG
Information
Society
and
Media,
project
no.
231590).
[1] http://www.intelleo.org