Justin G. Gyllen
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Research Subjects
Justin G. Gyllen has a total of 8 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Negin Entezari
Department of Computer Science and Engineering Bourns College of Engineering, University of California Riverside California
2 shared publications- Thomas Frank Stahovich
University of California
2 shared publications Amirali Darvishzadeh
Department of Computer Science and Engineering Bourns College of Engineering, University of California Riverside California
1 shared publication- Amirali Darvishzadeh
University of California, Riverside, USA
1 shared publication R. Mayer
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences University of California, Santa Barbara CA USA
1 shared publicationRichard E. Mayer
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences University of California Santa Barbara California
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 12 October 2020
- Published by Wiley in Applied Cognitive Psychology
- Vol. 35 (1) , 169-180
Priming productive study strategies with preparatory quizzes in an engineering course
- 12 October 2020
- Published by Wiley in Applied Cognitive Psychology
- Vol. 35 (1) , 169-180
Priming productive study strategies with preparatory quizzes in an engineering course
- 1 August 2019
- Published by Springer Nature in Metacognition and Learning
- Vol. 14 (2) , 215-228
Accuracy in judgments of study time predicts academic success in an engineering course
- 1 August 2019
- Published by Springer Nature in Metacognition and Learning
- Vol. 14 (2) , 215-228
Accuracy in judgments of study time predicts academic success in an engineering course
- 14 June 2018
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
- Vol. 34 (6) , 701-712
How students read an e‐textbook in an engineering course
Time on task has been recognized as an important variable in academic learning, but self‐report measures of study time are problematic. Therefore, this study employs an automated system for recording time spent reading a course textbook. College students in an introductory engineering course accessed their textbook online. The book contained pages of instructional text, worked examples, homework problems, and answers to homework problems. An instrumented document reader program called “STL Reader” recorded the time each student spent on each page, thus providing detailed measures of reading habits. Across the 10‐week course, students spent an average of 1.9 hr reading instructional text, 1.4 hr on worked examples, 22.1 hr on homework problems, and 0.9 hr on homework answers, indicating a preference for practicing to solve test problems (i.e., self‐testing) rather than being told (i.e., receiving direct instruction). Furthermore, course grade (based largely on solving problems on exams and quizzes) correlated significantly and positively with time viewing homework problems, but not with time viewing either instructional text or worked examples, indicating that achievement was related to time spent practicing for solving test problems but not to time spent being instructed. Results suggest a revision of the time‐on‐task hypothesis to include the value of spending time on tasks aligned to test requirements.
- 14 June 2018
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
- Vol. 34 (6) , 701-712
How students read an e‐textbook in an engineering course
Time on task has been recognized as an important variable in academic learning, but self‐report measures of study time are problematic. Therefore, this study employs an automated system for recording time spent reading a course textbook. College students in an introductory engineering course accessed their textbook online. The book contained pages of instructional text, worked examples, homework problems, and answers to homework problems. An instrumented document reader program called “STL Reader” recorded the time each student spent on each page, thus providing detailed measures of reading habits. Across the 10‐week course, students spent an average of 1.9 hr reading instructional text, 1.4 hr on worked examples, 22.1 hr on homework problems, and 0.9 hr on homework answers, indicating a preference for practicing to solve test problems (i.e., self‐testing) rather than being told (i.e., receiving direct instruction). Furthermore, course grade (based largely on solving problems on exams and quizzes) correlated significantly and positively with time viewing homework problems, but not with time viewing either instructional text or worked examples, indicating that achievement was related to time spent practicing for solving test problems but not to time spent being instructed. Results suggest a revision of the time‐on‐task hypothesis to include the value of spending time on tasks aligned to test requirements.