Thank you for the comment and for testing this, Katerina. Hi Les.
I do separate cognition from motivation, affect, and context because, in a design perspective (and not field work in the classroom or online environment when design is done), the contexts (design context: our institution, establishment) (teaching context: classroom or online learning environment) (learning context: private, personal, at home or office) are not connected but will be eventually, although loosely and disconnectedly. If the design environment itself is institutional then in the design perspective, student|learner context is remote. Conversely, where learners are actively engaged with processing|learning new knowledge, the institutional context is external. No 'internal' context needs to be construed, Katerina; there is no 'internal' (uncommunicable|uncommunicated) context unless bordering on philosophy of mind (not going there except for the private, intimate metacognitive). In this respect I like to remind myself of Wenger's approach whereby "models of communicable knowledge" need only be considered, that is, "a representation of knowledge very broadly, as a mapping of knowledge into a physical medium" (Wenger 1987:312).
As well, when preparing|designing a course or module, the concern is with curriculum, knowledge, and we make room for communicate - collaborate, but we don't know yet what will be conveyed and this is not reason enough to presume of any entity's 'internal' context. In design tasks, I must therefore leave out the learner's private sphere because there are basic institutional requirements or prescriptions addressing that: own or access a computer with online connection, operate word processor and other software programs, navigate online, etc. In addition, from the moment learners are admitted and enrolled, I must presume that they are 'cognitively' able (although there are surprises or cultural challenges in the feedback). Likewise, I must presume that the learner has engaged into the admission and enrollment process, and paid tuition, and is therefore in an appropriate state of mind and mature enough (speaking of higher education). Further, where 'pedagogical' or 'post-pedagogical' characteristics are imparted to the design, it is usually a matter of institutional orientation or, as I have seen, the individual professor's overriding curricular decision (in touch with her discipline; for example environmental or health and safety normative knowledge).
How to support metacognitive efforts in online learning? Provide and underline a few dynamic and engaging paragraphs --or more-- on that very subject in the study guide and in the course presentation pages; learners might recognise themselves. I like to add a few references --even quotes-- on the sentiment of self-efficacy (well, I guess the latter is motivational but it is not an 'intervention' in the tradition of pedagogy).
/HCh
WENGER, E. 1987. Artificial intelligence and tutoring systems: computational and cognitive approaches to the communication of knowledge. Los Altos: Morgan Kaufmann.
* * *