Farhangian University

Imam Sajad Campus

Internship 2
Designing learning activities
Teaching English as a Foreign Language

From Disorganized Student to self-

regulated learner

Supervisor Advisor
Mrs. Naseh Mrs. Ghaderi

By:
Fateme Zahra Gholizade

1
W/S 2016

2
 6
Table of
content

1
Table of Contents
Chapter one Introduction....................................................................................... 5
1.1 Overview................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Definition................................................................................................... 7
Agency............................................................................................................ 7
Self-regulation theory...................................................................................... 7
1.3 Statement of the problem.........................................................................8
Description of a disorganized student.............................................................9
Chapter two: the literature review.......................................................................12
2.1 Background................................................................................................ 13
2.2 Theories of self-regulated learning.............................................................14
2.3 Cognitive view............................................................................................ 18
2.4 Self-regulated learning in Language acquisition.........................................21
2.4.1 The SLR strategies used by Iranian EFL learners..................................23
2.5 Development of self-regulated learning......................................................27
2.5 Research on improving self-regulation skills...............................................29
2.6 Self-Regulated Learning and Motivation.....................................................31
2.7. Educational implications............................................................................33
Chapter three: the methodology.........................................................................37
3.1. Participant................................................................................................. 37
3.2. Methodology.............................................................................................. 37
3.2.1 Self-regulated learning strategies by teachers.....................................37
3.2.2 Self-regulated learning strategies for students.......................................2
3.3. Instruments and material..........................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Chapter four: Conclusion..................................................................................... 13

2
1
Introdu
ction

3
Chapter one Introduction

1.1 Overview

Intellectual attributes (e.g., long term memory, ability to

think abstractly) and nonintellectual attributes (e.g.,

motivation, self-discipline) both contribute to a students

academic performance.

Considering discipline in educational environments is one of

the important educational goals, which the schools' administers

give special attention and priority. As a result of this, the

students' educational conduct and activity is determined to a

high extent based on this phenomenon.( Houghton and

colleagues, 1990; Galloway & Rongers, 1994). Because when

discipline accompany students' activity and exists in their daily

life, it can be source of success and joy and will result in

flourishing in studetns' lives. (Mazaheri-Seyf, 1998; Afzali-Rad,

1998). Student spend numerous hours in school during a

schools year and their high interaction with their teachers can

have an influential impact on shaping good manner and

behavior in them and can be source of their educational

advancement

4
 Self-regulated learning (SLR) is recognized as an important

predictor of student academic motivation and achievement.

This process requires students to independently plan, monitor,

and assess their learning. However, few students naturally do

this well. Self-regulation is essential to the learning process

(Jarvela & Jarvenoja, 2011; Zimmerman, 2008). It can help

students create better learning habits and strengthen their

study skills (Wolters, 2011), apply learning strategies to

enhance academic outcomes (Harris, Friedlander, Sadler,

Frizzelle, & Graham, 2005), monitor their performance (Harris

et al., 2005), and evaluate their academic progress (De Bruin,

Thiede & Camp, 2011). Teachers thus should be familiar with

the factors that influence a learners ability to self-regulate and

the strategies they can use to identify and promote self-

regulated learning (SRL) in their classrooms.

In addition to self-regulation, motivation can have a pivotal

impact on students academic outcomes (Zimmerman, 2008).

Without motivation, SRL is much more difficult to achieve. In

this review I will present methods and strategies that teachers

can use to promote SRL to help their students become life-long

learners in and out of the classroom.

5
 The general conclusion is that students who display more

adaptive self-regulatory strategies demonstrate better learning

and higher motivation for learning (Pintrich, 2000). Thus, this

study is designed to explore the relationship between

motivational factors, self-regulated learning and language

achievement of Iranian EFL learners in learning English and to

help them develop their self- regulatory strategies and how to

self-regulate their learning in English.

1.2 Definition

Agency

The "sense of agency" (SA) (or sense of control) refers to

the subjective awareness that one is initiating, executing, and

controlling one's own volitional actions in the world. It is the

pre-reflective awareness or implicit sense that it is I who is

executing bodily movement(s) or thinking thoughts.

Self-regulation theory

Self-regulated learning (SRL) is one of six domains of self-

regulation, and is aligned most closely with the interests of

teachers. Broadly speaking, it refers to learning that is guided

6
by metacognition (thinking about one's thinking), strategic

action (planning, monitoring, and evaluating personal progress

against a standard), and motivation to learn. "Self-regulated"

describes a process of taking control of and evaluating one's

own learning and behavior.

Self-regulated learning emphasizes autonomy and control by

the individual who monitors, directs, and regulates actions

toward goals of information acquisition, expanding expertise,

and self-improvement (Paris and Paris 2001). In particular, self-

regulated learners are cognizant of their academic strengths

and weaknesses, and they have a repertoire of strategies they

appropriately apply to tackle the day-to-day challenges of

academic tasks. These learners hold incremental beliefs about

intelligence (as opposed to entity, or fixed views of intelligence)

and attribute their successes or failures to factors (e.g., effort

expended on a task, effective use of strategies) within their

control (Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Dweck, 2002).

Finally, students who are self-regulated learners believe that

opportunities to take on challenging tasks, practice their

learning, develop a deep understanding of subject matter, and

7
exert effort will give rise to academic success (Perry et al.,

2006). In part, these characteristics may help to explain why

self-regulated learners usually exhibit a high sense of self-

efficacy (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). In the educational

psychology literature, researchers have linked these

characteristics to success in and beyond school (Corno, et al.,

2002; Pintrich, 2000; Winne & Perry, 2000).

Self regulated learners are successful because they control

their learning environment. They exert this control by directing

and regulating their own actions toward their learning goals.

Self regulated learning should be used in three different phases

of learning. The first phase is during the initial learning, the

second phase is when troubleshooting a problem encountered

during learning and the third phase is when they are trying to

teach others (Palincsar & Brown, 1984).

1.3 Statement of the problem

Students of all ages struggle with organizational skills for

many reasons and may include:

8
 Failure to learn (or be taught) organizational skills

Immature brain development

General developmental delays

Attention problems

Learning disabilities

Side effects of certain medications

Emotional and behavioral disorders

Differences in cultural norms and family values

Description of a disorganized student

Disorganized students may tend to be forgetful and

complete assignments too quickly and perhaps incorrectly.

Such students be confused about assignments and unsure

of classroom and school rules. They may have poor time

management skills and a messy desk, locker, or backpack.

Some become easily frustrated and might lose needed

materials and supplies (e.g., homework, books, notebooks,

pens, pencils, etc.). On the other hand, some students

9
have messy desks, bookbags, and lockers but manage to

do excellent work.

The appearance of a student whose belongings are

messy can be frustrating for teachers, and students who

exhibit such behaviors may be at risk for poor academic

achievement. However, it is important to understand that

being physically organized does not necessarily equate

with high academic achievement. After all, we have all

known someone whose office was messy but who was

highly productive or a student with a messy desk, but who

has very good grades. While many highly organized

students are more likely to achieve academic success, it

does not always mean that students who appear visibly

disorganized are not also successful students. This

misconception is further exacerbated by the high value

ones society may place on being well organized and how

we tend to view disorganization negatively.

While organizational skills generally are an important

goal, the real goals here are preparedness and

productivity. That is, can a student be prepared,

productive, and successful while appearing to have a

10
messy desk, notebook, or backpack? This is a

question you need to consider before choosing an

appropriate intervention. When a students disorganization

hinders his or her academic performance or that of other

students, you must intervene by helping the student

develop better organizational skills.

11
2
Review
of
literatur

12
Chapter two: the literature review
Educators increasingly are emphasizing self-regulated

learning as a means of raising students' achievement

outcomes. Self-regulated learning (or self-regulation) refers to

learning that results from students' self-generated thoughts and

behaviors that are oriented systematically toward the

attainment of their goals (Zimmerman, 2001). Researchers

have identified several self-regulatory processes that students

instigate, modify, and sustain, such as attending to instruction,

cognitively processing information, rehearsing and relating new

learning to prior learning, believing that one is capable of

learning, and establishing productive work and social

environments. Research shows that increases in self-regulation

result in higher student learning and achievement.

Morrison et. al. (1993) noted that effective interaction

between family, teacher, and school personnel causes up to

67% of students reach their educational goals and will result

changes in students behavior. It is important to note that the

rules and discipline should be clearly identified and objectively

clarified for the students. Therefore the setting up clear

programs is essential (Evans, 1993; Morrison et. al., 1993).

13
Shahmoradi (1999) cited that students without friendly and

constructive rapports are carefree about respecting discipline

and feel that teachers do not pay attention to them. It is

possible that this becomes visible in the student's behavior by

being absent from school or class.Perels.& Cole(2007) showed

that combining training on self-regulation with problem solving

instruction was especially effective in enhancing self-regulation

and achievement. He found that teachers who practiced

collaborative interactive teaching strategies promoted deep-

level cognitive processing in their students.

2.1 Background
The emphasis on self-regulated learning in education

began as an outgrowth of behaviorally oriented research on

self-control in which individuals learned ways to reduce

dysfunctional behaviors such as impulsive or disruptive actions.

Behavioral researchers (e.g., Mace, Belfiore, & Hutchinson)

stress self-regulating processes such as self-monitoring (self-

observation and self-recording of one's own behaviors), self-

instruction (rules or strategic steps that one applies and often

verbalizes during a task), self-evaluation (comparing some

14
aspects of one's behaviors with standards), self-correction

(correcting one's behaviors to better match standards), and

self-reinforcement (rewarding oneself with reinforcers such as

points or free time when behaviors meet or exceed standards).

An issue with behavioral theories is that because they do

not consider learners' internal states such as thoughts, beliefs,

and emotions, they offer incomplete explanations of learning.

Against this backdrop cognitive theories of learning began their

ascendance in the 1960s and soon became the dominant focus

of human learning. But researchers often found that cognitive

skills and abilities did not fully account for students' learning,

which suggested that other factors such as motivation and self-

regulation were important (Zimmerman, 2001). These findings

led to the emergence of cognitive theories of self-regulated

learning.

2.2 Theories of self-regulated learning

Cognitive theories of self-regulated learning differ in many

ways but share some common features (Zimmerman, 2001).

One common feature is an emphasis on learners being

proactive and exerting control on their learning processes and

environments. Self-regulated learners do not passively take in

15
information but rather proactively develop their skills and

strategies. Cognitive theories also assume that self-regulated

learning is a cyclical process in which learners set goals,

implement strategies, monitor their learning progress, and

modify their strategies when they believe they are not

effective. A third common feature is an emphasis on

motivation. Self-regulated learning does not occur

automatically; rather, students approach learning with goals

and the extent to which they self-regulate depends on

motivational factors such as their commitment to their goals,

their beliefs about the likely outcomes of their actions, and

their self-efficacy, or personal beliefs about their capabilities to

learn or perform actions at designated levels.

Although there are various cognitive self-regulated

learning theories, three that have been applied extensively to

school learning are information processing, social con-

structivist, and social cognitive theories. Information processing

theory stresses cognitive functions such as attending to,

perceiving, storing, and transforming information. For example,

Winne and Hadwin postulated that self-regulated learning

comprises four phases: defining the task, setting goals and

16
planning how to reach them, enacting tactics, and adapting

metacognition. Initially learners process information about the

conditions that characterize the task to clearly define it.

Sources of information include task conditions (task information

that learners interpret based on the environment such as a

teacher's directions) and cognitive conditions that learners

retrieve from long-term memory such as how they did on prior

tasks and motivational information (e.g., perceived

competence). In the second phase learners set a goal and a

plan for attaining it to include the learning strategies they will

use. During the third phase learners apply their strategies, and

in the fourth phase they adapt their plans and strategies based

on self-evaluations of their success (this phase is optional if no

adaptation is needed).

Within each phase, cognitive information processing

constructs new information or information products. Information

processing works on existing information and includes

processes characterized by the acronym SMART: searching,

monitoring, assembling, rehearsing, and translating. While

working on a task, students fill in slots in a script that includes

conditions, operations, products, evaluations, and standards.

17
Information processing outcomes are judged against standards

and these evaluations (e.g., progress is on target or too low)

are used to bring new conditions to bear on students' learning

activities.

Vygotsky's theory of development provides a social

constructivist account of self-regulation. Lev Vygotsky (1896

1934) believed that people and their cultural environments

constitute an interacting social system. Through their

communications and actions people in children's environments

teach children tools (e.g., language, symbols) needed for

developing competence. By using these tools within the social

system, learners develop higher-level cognitive functions such

as problem solving and self-regulation. Self-regulated learning

includes the coordination of such mental processes as memory,

planning, synthesis, and evaluation. These coordinated

processes do not operate independently of the context in which

they are formed. A student's self-regulated learning processes

reflect those that are valued and taught in the culture of the

student's home and school.

Vygotsky believed that people learn to self-regulate

through control of their own actions. The primary mechanisms

18
affecting self-regulation are language and the zone of proximal

development (ZPD), or the amount of learning possible by a

student given the proper instructional conditions. Initially

children's actions are directed by the language (speech) of

others but children gradually internalize this self-directing

language and use it to self-regulate. Through interactions with

adults in the ZPD children make the transition from behaviors

regulated by others to behaviors regulated by themselves, or

self-regulated learning.

Bandura's social cognitive theory posits that human

functioning results from reciprocal interactions among personal

factors (e.g., cognitions, emotions), behaviors, and

environmental conditions. Self-regulated learning fits well with

this idea of reciprocal interactions because personal factors,

behaviors, and environmental conditions change during

learning and must be monitored. Such self-monitoring can lead

to additional changes in students' strategies, cognitions,

affects, and behaviors.

This process is reflected in Zimmerman's 2000 three-

phase self-regulated learning model comprising forethought,

performance/volitional control, and self-reflection. The

19
forethought phase precedes performance and refers to

processes that set the stage for action. The

performance/volitional control phase includes processes that

occur during learning and that affect motivation and action.

During the self-reflection phase, learners mentally review their

performances and determine whether changes in behaviors or

strategies are needed.

Various self-regulatory components come into play during

the different phases. Two processes active throughout the

model are goals and self-efficacy, In the forethought phase,

learners set goals and hold a sense of self-efficacy for attaining

them. During the performance phase they implement learning

strategies and cognitively compare their performances with

their goals to determine progress. Their self-efficacy is

sustained when they believe that they are making goal

progress. During self-reflection learners determine whether

their present strategy is effective. If they feel self-efficacious for

succeeding but believe that their present strategy is not

working well enough, they may alter their strategy such as by

working harder, persisting longer, deciding to use a different

20
method, or seeking help from others. These self-regulatory

processes promote learning, motivation, and self-efficacy.

2.3 Cognitive view

The shift from behaviourism to cognitivism in educational

psychology has placed an increasing responsibility on learners

for their own learning, and self-regulated learning has become

a frequent area of educational research (Chen, 2002). A large

number of studies have been done on the links between

learning, motivation, and selfregulation (see Pintrich &

Schrauben, 1992, Chapman & Tunmer, 1995; Pokay &

Blumenfeld, 1990; Schunk, 1996; Schunk & Swartz, 1993;

Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990).

Self-regulated learning strategies refer to actions and

processes at acquisition of information or skills that involve

agency, purpose, and instrumentality perceptions by the

learners (Zimmerman, 1990). Although the concept of

selfregulated learning strategies originated from educational

psychology, recent research suggests its applicability to the

field of language education. To promote SRL in classrooms,

teachers must teach students the self-regulated strategies that

facilitate learning.

21
Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1986) proposed 14 classes of

SRL strategies: self-evaluation, organizing and transforming,

goal setting and planning, seeking information, keeping records

and monitoring, environmental structuring, self- consequences,

rehearsing and memorizing, seeking peer assistance, seeking

teacher assistance, seeking adult assistance, reviewing tests,

reviewing notes, and reviewing texts. All of these strategies are

parts of three cognitive, metacognitive, and behavioural

strategies.

Pintrich and De Groot (1990) explored relations among

self-regulation (use of metacognitive and effort management

strategies), cognitive strategy use (rehearsal, elaboration, and

organizational strategies), and motivation for learning and

performing well in class among seventh graders in science and

English. Using the Motivated Strategies for Learning

Questionnaire (MSLQ), they found that self-efficacy, intrinsic

value (interest in and perceived importance of the learning),

cognitive strategy use (e.g., rehearsal, organization,

elaboration), and selfregulation (effort management,

metacognition) were positively correlated and predicted

achievement. Test anxiety was related negatively to self-

22
efficacy. Regression analyses indicated that self-efficacy, self-

regulation, and test anxiety predicted performance, whereas

intrinsic value did not directly affect performance.

Additional evidence comes from research by Pintrich,

Roeser, and De Groot (1994). The authors administered the

MSLQ to seventh graders to assess motivational beliefs

(intrinsic value, self-efficacy, text anxiety) and selfregulated

learning (cognitive strategy use, self-regulation). Positive

motivational beliefs were related to higher levels of self-

regulated learning. The authors also assessed students

perceptions of classroom experiences (i.e., productive

classroom work, teacher effectiveness, cooperative work).

Intrinsic value later in the school year was related to classroom

experience more strongly than intrinsic value early in the year.

Self-efficacy, cognitive strategy use, and self-regulation were

related positively to classroom experience. The results support

the idea that motivation and self regulated learning bear a

complex reciprocal relation to each other.

Wolters, Yu, and Pintrich (1996) examined the relation

between motivation and self-regulated learning in research with

junior high students. Regression analyses across three subject

23
areas (English, social studies, and mathematics) yielded a

positive pattern of motivational beliefs for a mastery-approach

goal and a performance approach (relative ability) goal

orientation to include adaptive levels of self-efficacy, task

value, and test anxiety, along with higher levels of cognitive

strategy use, self-regulation, and academic performance. In

contrast, an extrinsic goal orientation reflecting a desire to

obtain good grades was linked with motivational and cognitive

outcomes. Research on the relation between self-regulated

learning and academic achievement has generally shown

disparate results. Turan and Demirel (2010) examined the

relationship between self-regulated learning skills and

achievement. The results of their study indicated that if

learners self-regulated learning skills are developed, their

understanding of subject area and efficiency of learning will

improve and their self-efficacy will increase.

Abbasnasab Sardareh, Mohd Saad and Boroomand (2012)

investigated the relationship between the use of SRL strategies

and students academic achievement. The findings of their

study revealed that there is a strong relationship (r = .80)

between the use of SRL strategies and students academic

24
achievement. The findings of the study showed a difference

between males and females as to the use of SRL strategies.

Females did better than males in both academic achievement

and the use of SRL strategies.

2.4 Self-regulated learning in Language acquisition

Attaining high level of foreign language proficiency

depends on self-regulatory skills of a learner (Oxford,

2001).Self-regulated learning, is an active, constructive process

whereby learners set goals for their learning and then attempt

to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation,

and behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the

contextual features in the environment (Pintrich, 2004; Schunk,

2005).

To self-regulate means to change oneself, or some aspect

of oneself, so as to conform to some idea or concept (Forgas,

Baumeister, & Tice, 2009, p. 4). Self-regulation of learning takes

place if students direct their own learning (Boekaerts, & Corno

2005). Self-regulatory control can involve thinking, emotions,

motivation, behavior and environment. The progress of learning

process is evaluated against criterion or standard. Self-

25
regulationprocesses mediate between personal and

environmental characteristics and achievement (Pintrich,

2004). Our capacity to self-regulate various aspects of our life is

probably one of the most important qualities as human. Many

of us, for example, try to be physically fit by doing exercises or

staying away from unhealthy diets. However, the extent to

which individuals self-regulate their own behavior is said to be

determined by why they are doing and what sources of

motivation are available in the context.

The idea of motivation and self-regulation has cast light on

why some students succeed in controlling their English learning

while others do not. The Pintrich model and research conducted

by him and his colleagues support the hypothesized links

between learning, motivation, and selfregulation (Pintrich &

Schrauben, 1992). Others support the predictions of the

conceptual framework by showing linkages between

motivation, self-regulation, and academic learning (Chapman &

Tunmer, 1995; Pokay &Blumenfeld, 1990; Schunk, 1996;

Schunk & Swartz, 1993; Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990).

This linkage is significant not only for theoretical reasons but

also for classroom practices, because it suggests that

26
motivational and cognitive factors interact in complex ways to

lead to learning. However, the fact is that there is an increasing

need for developing students self-regulatory strategies and

self-regulatory system.

2.4.1 The SLR strategies used by Iranian EFL learners

As the findings of this study indicated (Table 1) Iranian EFL

learners use five SRL strategies most frequently, including: 1.

"Making associations between new English and other English I

already know"; 2. " Making sure study English later when I do

not understand it "; 3. " testing regularly my knowledge of

English"; 4. " trying and thinking of ways to make English

learning more enjoyable"; 5. " Keeping records of English I have

and/or havent mastered".

Out of these five strategies, the first and forth ones are

cognitive strategies, the second one is a behavioural strategy,

and the third and fifth ones are metacognitive strategies.

Hence, cognitive and metacognitive SLR strategies such as

organizing and transforming, self-evaluation, keeping records

and monitoring were mostly favoured by Iranian EFL learners.

To be self regulated learners, Pintrich and De Groot (1990) hold

27
that students should acquire the necessary knowledge and skill

to choose and apply cognitive, metacognitive, and behavioural

strategies. Teachers can make students aware of valuable

learning strategies in various types of learning environments

and help students use the proper learning strategies in later

learning situations. Since the self-regulatory process of learning

gives students a sense of control and encourages students to

pay attention to their methods of learning (Zimmerman,

Bonner, & Kovach, 1996), teachers can teach students how to

learn by training students to use different SRL learning

strategies.

6.2. The relationship between motivation and self- regulated

learning

Self-regulated learning is controlled by an interconnected

framework of factors that determine its development and

sustainability (Boekaerts, 1999; Pintrich, 2000; Zimmerman,

2008) and motivation is a critical factor in this framework

(Kurman, 2001; Ommundsen, Haugen & Lund, 2005; Wang &

Holcombe, 2010). As Hadwin (2008) identifies three ways, in

which motivation is involved in self-regulated learning. First,

28
learners motivation knowledge and beliefs influence the types

of goals that are set, the strategies that are chosen, and ones

persistence in a given task. Second, engagement in SRL

produces new motivational knowledge and beliefs that

influence engagement in current and future tasks. Third,

students self-regulate their motivational states during learning.

Based on the findings of the study (table 2) a significant

relationship was found between SRL and motivation, it can be

understood that self-regulation and motivation work hand in

hand to clarify students learning and success in the classroom.

When students are motivated to learn, they are more likely to

devote the necessary time and energy needed to learn and

apply appropriate SRL skills, and when students are able to

successfully employ self-regulation strategies, they are often

more motivated to accomplish learning tasks (Zimmerman,

2000). The findings of the present study are in line with the

study done by Zimmerman (2000) who demonstrated that if

students are motivated to learn, they spend more time to learn

and use more SLR strategies. The results also support a study

by Pintrich, Roeser, and De Groot (1994) that motivation and

self-regulated learning bear a complex reciprocal relation to

29
each other. Hence, it can be concluded that the extent to which

EFL learners self- regulate their own learning is said to be

determined by why they are learning and what sources of

motivation are available in the context of learning English.

6.3. The relationship between self- regulated learning and

language achievement

Self-regulated learning is seen as a mechanism to help

explain achievement differences among students and as a

means to improve achievement (Schunk, 2005). The results of

this study showed no significant relationship between the use

of SRL strategies and L2 achievement, thus, in the case of the

relationship between these two variables the findings are

inconsistent with the findings of previous studies, e.g.

Zimmerman, (1990), who found that selfregulated learners are

distinguished by their systematic use of metacognitive,

motivational, and behavioural strategies; by their responses to

feedback regarding the effectiveness of their learning; and their

self-perceptions of academic achievement.

Labuhn, Zimmerman, and Hasselhorn. (2010) found that

learners who were taught SRL skills through monitoring and

30
imitation were more likely to perform higher on measures of

academic achievement compared to students who did not

receive SRL instruction. Ruban and Reis (2006) indicated that

self-regulated learners have high probability

of success in their academic and professional life.Thus, it can

be concluded that Iranian EFL learners are not self-regulated

learners at least in the contexts of the present study or it can

be realized that there are other factors such as students social

identities (Montalvo & Torres, 2008), educational system,

materials, and teachers that can influence students academic

behaviours and educational goals. As Pintrich (2004) put

forward, self-regulation processes mediate between personal

and environmental characteristics and achievement..

7. Conclusion and implication of the study

Based on the findings of the study, it can be said that

Iranian EFL learners mainly use cognitive and metacognitive

SLR strategies in learning English. Furthermore, self-regulation

and motivation work closely to simplify EFL learners learning

and success in the classroom. Additionally, although self-

regulated learning can be seen as a mechanism to improve

31
achievement, no significant relationship was found between the

use of SRL strategies and L2 achievement of Iranian EFL

learners. Thus, it seems that some other factors such as

educational system, materials, and teachers might affect these

learners academic behaviours and educational goals than SRL

strategies.

The findings imply that involving EFL learners in setting

goals, evaluation criteria and self-evaluating their work gives

them a sense control over learning and assessment outcomes,

which enhance their motivation to try challenging tasks such as

leaning a foreign language. In addition, this involvement might

prompt metacognition and strategic action because it requires

learners to judge qualities of their learning processes and

products and encourages adjustments in behaviours that will

enhance learning and attainment (Winne & Perry, 2000).

Furthermore, EFL teachers can provide instrumental and

responsive scaffolding to help learners acquire skills and

strategies associated with effective learning and SRL. Hence,

Teachers should help students to be more selfregulative in

promoting their L2 achievement, motivation, and learning.

32
2.5 Development of self-regulated learning
The self-regulated learning processes discussed in the

preceding section do not appear automatically in learners.

Rather, students become more proficient self-regulators as a

function of cognitive development and learning.

The development of self-regulation depends heavily on the

use of self-regulatory or private speech (speech that is non-

socially communicative). According to Kopp, increasing self-

regulation involves a transition from responding to the

commands of others to the use of speech and other cognitive

tools to plan, monitor, and direct one's activities. Young

children's actions are directed by adults. The meaning of

actions depends on both the context and the tools (e.g.,

language, symbols) used to describe the actions.

Through interactions with adults in the ZPD, children make

the transition from behaviors regulated by others to behaviors

regulated by themselves. This transition occurs as children

develop the capability for using private speech to direct their

actions. Such speechwhich often may be talking aloud

eventually becomes internalized. The internalization of self-

regulatory speech does not imply the absence of adult

33
influence. Children's private speech may heavily reflect the

directive speech of key adults (e.g., parents, teachers).

Research has identified other developmental changes.

Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons found that between grades five

and eight children increase their use of planning, sequencing,

and goal-setting. Academic studying also undergoes changes.

Meece noted that younger children equate studying with

rereading material, whereas older students make greater use of

note taking and underlining. Younger children also are less

capable of monitoring their comprehension. Older children are

better able to determine inconsistencies in text and when they

find them they act to resolve them such as by rereading the

passage to ensure that they read it accurately or by reading the

broader passage to better determine the context.

Thus, improvements in self-regulated learning involve

cognitive development and learning. As children become older

they are better able to cognitively engage in such self-

regulatory activities as planning, goal setting, monitoring

comprehension, evaluating progress, and adjusting strategies

as needed. But teaching also is important because students can

learn to be better self-regulators, as discussed below.

34
2.5 Research on improving self-regulation skills
As discussed by Schunk and Ertmer, much educational

research shows that children, adolescents, and adults can be

taught self-regulated learning skills, that their use of these skills

improves learning, and that skills can maintain themselves over

time and generalize to new learning settings. For example,

teaching students to use goal setting can improve their self-

regulated learning. There are different distinctions among

goals, but one is between a process goal (what skill or strategy

students are attempting to learn) and an outcome goal (the

intended performance). In algebra a student may be trying to

learn how to use the binomial theorem (process goal) or trying

to finish a problem set (outcome goal). Researchers have found

that focusing students' attention on process goalsespecially

in the early stages of learning improves self-regulated

learning better than focusing on outcome goals. However,

Zimmerman and Kitsantas found benefits from shifting from

process to outcome goals. High school students were taught a

writing revision strategy. Students received a process goal

(following steps in the strategy), an outcome goal (number of

words in sentences), or initially a process goal but then were

advised to shift to an outcome goal. Learners who changed

35
goals as their revision skills developed demonstrated higher

self-efficacy and skill than students who pursued either the

process or the outcome goal.

Self-monitoring and perceptions of progress are key self-

regulated learning processes. Researchers have found that

students can be taught self-monitoring skills and that giving

them feedback on their learning progress improves their use of

self-regulatory skills. Schunk and Swartz found that providing

students with a process goal of learning to use a writing

strategy and feedback that linked strategy use with improved

writing performance led to the highest use of a writing strategy

and that this strategy usage maintained itself over time and

generalized to writing tasks on which students had received no

instruction.

Self-evaluations of progress help students focus on self-

regulation processes and can raise their motivation and self-

efficacy for continuing to improve. Research shows that

allowing students to periodically evaluate their learning

capabilities raises their self-efficacy, motivation to self-regulate,

and use of self-regulated learning strategies. A particularly

effective approach is to give students a learning process goal

36
(e.g., learn to use a strategy to solve problems) and allow them

to self-evaluate their capabilities for using the strategy

successfully.

There are formal programs designed to improve students'

self-regulation skills. Weinstein, Husman, and Dierking

described a university course in strategic learning that teaches

students to use several steps in working on academic material:

set a goal, reflect on the task and one's personal resources,

develop a plan, select potential strategies, implement

strategies, monitor and evaluate the strategies and one's

progress, modify strategies as needed, and evaluate the

outcomes to determine if this approach should continue to be

used. Prior to the course students complete the Learning and

Study Strategies Inventory, and instructors use this information

to help students improve their skills, motivation, self-regulation,

and academic environment.

2.6 Self-Regulated Learning and Motivation

Self-regulated learning is controlled by an interconnected

framework of factors that determine its development and

sustainability (Bandura, 1993; Boekaerts, 1999; Pintrich, 2000;

37
Zimmerman, 2008) and motivation is a critical factor in this

framework (Kurman, 2001; Ommundsen, Haugen & Lund, 2005;

Wang & Holcombe, 2010). For example, during the forethought

and planning phase, when students consider why an activity

should be completed and how much effort to put toward that

activity, their interests and values are factored into the decision

(Simons, Dewitte, & Lens, 2000; Wolters & Pintrich, 1998;

Wolters, Yu, & Pintrich, 1996).

If students do not see value in learning tasks, then they

are less likely to spend much time setting goals and planning

strategies to accomplish those tasks. Additionally, students

efficacy beliefstheir confidence in their ability to successfully

complete tasksalso play a role, especially during the

forethought and planning and performance monitoring phases

(Zimmerman, 2000). Research has found self-efficacy and the

use of self-regulation strategies to have reflexive positive

impacts on one another. Higher self-efficacy beliefs increase the

use of self-regulation strategies (Pajares, 2008) and the use of

self-regulation strategies can lead to increases in self-efficacy

beliefs and academic achievement (Bouffard-Bouchard, Parent,

38
& Larivee, 1991; Schunk, 1984; Schunk & Hanson, 1985;

Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990).

During the performance monitoring phase, students

continuously assess the meaningfulness of the learning task.

Intrinsic motivation and volition guide the level of effort and

persistence used in completing the assignment and use of

other self-regulation strategies. Finally, students causal

attributionsthe factors students attribute to their success or

failure for a specific taskplay a key role in the reflection on

performance phase, as students make decisions of whether or

not they will engage in an activity and utilize self-regulation

strategies for similar activities in the future. In general, self-

regulation and motivation work hand in hand to explain student

learning and success in the classroom. When students are

motivated to learn, they are more likely to invest the necessary

time and energy needed to learn and apply appropriate SRL

skills, and when students are able to successfully employ self-

regulation strategies, they are often more motivated to

complete learning tasks (Zimmerman, 2000).

39
 2.7. Educational implications
The preceding research makes clear the connection between

effective self-regulation and gains in students' learning and

achievement. Research findings also suggest ways to help

students improve their self-regulated learning skills.

One suggestion is that, although students may discover

effective self-regulated learning strategies on their own, they

benefit from sound instruction and models that explain and

demonstrate strategies. This does not imply that strategy

instruction programs must be formally structured, but some

guidance to students is important especially in the early stages

of learning. As students become more proficient they are better

able to construct effective strategies on their own and, as

Zimmerman and Kitsantas found, pursue outcome rather than

learning process goals.

A second point is that self-regulation should be taught in

conjunction with an academic subject and not separately.

Students benefit from seeing how they can use what they learn.

Many self-regulation strategies are generic and can be applied

to different content, but their implementation typically will vary

depending on the content area. Thus, self-monitoring is a

40
general strategy but what students self-monitor will vary

depending whether they are reading passages in text, writing

essays, or solving problems in geometry. When general

strategies are taught it is important also to show students how

the strategy can be adapted for use with other content.

Students should be taught how to evaluate their learning

progress and given opportunities to do so. Typically in school

students have their learning evaluated for them by teachers.

But self-regulation is a cyclical process in which students self-

regulate, check their progress, and adjust their approach as

needed. Students need opportunities for self-evaluation

because they may not do it automatically and it affects their

motivation and self-regulated learning.

Developmental factors must be taken into account in teaching

students to be better self-regulated learners. Self-monitoring is

best kept simple for young children, such as by having them

use a check list or count how many problems they have

completed. With development, students can implement more

elaborate self-regulation strategies; however, they are apt to

benefit from instruction showing how to evaluate progress in

41
areas where progress may be difficult to assess, such as writing

improvement or reading comprehension.

Motivational variables also should be included in self-regulation

programs. Developing effective self-regulation strategies takes

time and effort, and students may not be motivated to self-

regulate unless they see benefits compared with their usual

approaches. They also may not feel self-efficacious about

improving their self-regulation. Providing students with progress

feedback linking strategy use with improved performance can

raise their self-efficacy and motivation and enhance their self-

evaluations of progress.

School learning typically is focused on academic content. Self-

regulated learning skills do not develop automatically, but

these skills will benefit students for life-long learning.

Therefore, it behooves teachers and parents to help students

develop their self-regulatory competencies and encourage

them to practice using them in all facets of their lives.

42
3
Method
and
particip

43
Chapter three: the methodology

3.1. Participant

In the course of my internship 1 experience I found out

that a common problem among students is lack of self-
discipline, during my internship in Samaa junior high I noticed
that the same problem exists among the students of junior
high.

One student in particular seemed to be in need of

assistance. The student in question is a fifteen year old female
student in eighth grade. Interviews with her teachers and the
school staff and my observations indicates she has a quite
weak performance in all subjects, often forgets to turn-in her
homework, forgets due dates, is rarely prepared for the lesson,
does poorly on exams and quizzes and is quite messy.

3.2. Methodology

I am inclined to believe that her being disorganized is one of

the causes of her poor performance in school. Here are a list of
suggestions and procedures to help such students.
3.2.1 Self-regulated learning strategies by teachers

The following flow chart may be of assistance in deciding

when and how you should intervene with a disorganized

student:

44


Messy
Messy desk or
desk or
backpack?
backpack?

Yes
Yes No
No

interferes
interferes with
with Disorganized
Disorganized
academic
academic mentally?
mentally?
performance
performance

Forgets due dates

Forgets due dates
Yes
Yes No
No Forgets material?
Forgets material?
or directions
or directions

explain
explain to
to the
the Interferes
Interferes with
with
student the
student the others'
others' learning
learning Yes
Yes No
No Yes
Yes No
No
benefits
benefits of being
of being or work space?
or work space?
organized
organized

student
student Student
Student doesn't
doesn't Get proffesional
Get proffesional Get
Get proffesional
proffesional
Yes
Yes No
No Don't intervene
Don't intervene Don't
Don't intervene
intervene
improves?
improves? improve?
improve? Consult
Consult Consult
Consult

No
No further
further Get
intervention Get proffesional
proffesional Get
Get proffesional
proffesional Don't
intervention Consult Consult Don't intervene.
intervene.
needed Consult Consult
needed

Set up a classroom signal, or method for getting

students attention.

Establish arrival, dismissal, and re-entry routines.

1
 Use advance organizers to reinforce routines, such a

posting classroom and student schedules.

Set up routines for transitions within the classroom.

Have a plan for where students are to place their

personal belongings.

Have an inbox for work students are turning in and an

outbox for work they are to pick up.

Post and teach classroom rules and expectations.

Teachers often assume that students know what is

expected of them when they may not. Create classroom

rules and expectations that are clear, positively stated,

enforceable, and reasonable. Be sure to include rules for

different situations, such as hallways, bathrooms,

playground, and the lunchroom. In addition, praise and

precorrection can be used universally and with individual

students, especially very young children.

Additionally, the following strategies may be of benefit

to middle childhood and adolescent-age students

struggling with disorganization:

2
 Assignment notebooks

Color-coded folders

Clean out desks, lockers, and backpacks regularly

Subject-specific classroom visual aids (e.g., lists of

commonly misspelled words or grammar rules)

Individual calendars or daily activity schedules

Practice note-taking skills

Checklists (e.g., lists of frequently made student

mistakes or needed homework supplies)

Establishing an uncluttered workspace.

3.2.2 Self-regulated learning strategies for students

To promote SRL in classrooms, teachers must teach

students the self-regulated processes that facilitate learning.

These processes often include: goal setting (Winne & Hadwin,

1998; Wolters, 1998), planning (Zimmerman, 2004;

Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997), self-motivation (Corno, 1993;

Wolters, 2003; Zimmerman, 2004), attention control

(Harnishferger, 1995; Kuhl, 1985; Winne, 1995), flexible use of

learning strategies (van de Broek, Lorch, Linderholm, &

3
Gustafson, 2001; Winne, 1995), self-monitoring (Butler &

Winne, 1995; Carver & Scheier, 1990), appropriate help-seeking

(Butler, 1998; Ryan, Pintrich, & Midgley, 2001), and self-

evaluation (Schraw & Moshman, 1995).

3.2.2.1 Goal Setting

Goals can be thought of as the standards that regulate an

individuals actions (Schunk, 2001). In the classroom, goals

may be as simple as earning a good grade on an exam, or as

detailed as gaining a broad understanding of a topic. Short-

term attainable goals often are used to reach long-term

aspirations. For example, if a student sets a long-term goal to

do well on an exam, then he or she also may set attainable

goals such as studying for a set amount of time and using

specific study strategies to help ensure success on the exam.

Research also suggests that encouraging students to 10

4
set short-term goals for their learning can be an effective way

to help students track their progress (Zimmerman, 2004).

3.2.2.2 Planning
Similar to goal setting, planning can help students self-regulate

their learning prior to engaging in learning tasks. In fact,

research indicates that planning and goal setting are

complementary processes, as planning can help learners

establish well thought out goals and strategies to be successful

(Schunk, 2001). Planning occurs in three stages: setting a goal

for a learning task, establishing strategies for achieving the

goal, and determining how much time and resources will be

needed to achieve the goal (Schunk, 2001). Teaching students

to approach academic tasks with a plan is a viable method for

promoting self-regulation and learning (Pressley & Woloshyn,

1995; Scheid, 1993).

3.2.2.3 Self-Motivation
Self-motivation occurs when a learner independently uses one

or more strategies to keep themselves on-track toward a

learning goal. It is important to the process of self-regulation

because it requires learners to assume control over their

learning (Corno, 1993). Furthermore, self-motivation occurs in

the absence of external rewards or incentives and can therefore

5
be a strong indicator that a learner is becoming more

autonomous (Zimmerman, 2004). By establishing their own

learning goals and finding motivation from within to make

progress toward those goals, students are more likely to persist

through difficult learning tasks and often find the learning

process more gratifying (Wolters, 2003).

3.2.2.4 Attention Control

In order to self-regulate, learners must be able to control their

attention (Winne, 1995). Attention control is a cognitive process

that requires significant self-monitoring (Harnishferger, 1995).

Often this process entails clearing the mind of distracting

thoughts, as well as seeking suitable environments that are

conducive to learning (e.g., quiet areas without substantial

noise) (Winne, 1995). Research indicates that students

academic outcomes increase with focused time spent on-task

(Kuhl, 1985). Thus, teaching students to attend to learning

tasks should be a priority. Teachers can help their students

control their attention by removing stimuli that may cause

distractions, and providing students with frequent breaks to

help them build up their attention spans.

6
3.2.2.5 Flexible Use of Strategies
Successful learners are able to implement multiple learning

strategies across tasks and adjust those strategies as needed

to facilitate their progress towards their desired goals (Paris &

Paris, 2001). However, it is important to note that most

students, especially those in the primary grades, typically do

not have a large repertoire of learning strategies at their

disposal (van de Broek et al., 2001). It takes time for students

to learn and become comfortable with different learning

strategies. By modeling how to use new strategies and

providing appropriate amounts of scaffolding as students

practice, teachers can help learners become independent

strategy users. 12

3.2.2.6 Self-Monitoring
To become strategic learners, students must assume

ownership for their learning and achievement outcomes

(Kistner et al., 2010). Self-regulated learners take on this

responsibility by monitoring their progress towards learning

goals. The process of self-monitoring encompasses all of the

aforementioned strategies. In order for a learner to self-monitor

their progress, they must set their own learning goals, plan

ahead, independently motivate themselves to meet their goals,

7
focus their attention on the task at hand, and use learning

strategies to facilitate their understanding of material

(Zimmerman, 2004). Teachers can encourage self-monitoring

by having students keep a record of the number of times they

worked on particular learning tasks, the strategies they used,

and the amount of time they spent working. This practice

allows students to visualize their progress and make changes

as needed.

3.2.2.7 Help-Seeking
Contrary to popular belief, self-regulated learners do not

try to accomplish every task on their own, but rather frequently

seek help from others when necessary (Butler, 1998). What

sets self-regulated learners apart from their peers is that these

students not only seek advice from others, but they do so with

the goal of making themselves more autonomous (Ryan et al.,

2001). Teachers can promote positive help seeking behaviors

by providing students with on-going progress feedback that

they can easily understand and allowing students opportunities

to resubmit assignments after making appropriate changes. 13

3.2.2.8 Self-Evaluation
Students are more likely to become self-regulated learners

when they are able to evaluate their own learning, independent

8
of teacher-issued summative assessments (Winne & Hadwin,

1998). This practice enables students to evaluate their learning

strategies and make adjustments for similar tasks in their

future (Schraw & Moshman, 1995). Teachers can promote self-

evaluation in the classroom by helping students monitor their

learning goals and strategy use, and then make changes to

those goals and strategies based upon learning outcomes

(Zimmerman, 2004).

In summary, self-regulated learners are able to set short-

and long-term goals for their learning, plan ahead to

accomplish their goals, self-motivate themselves, and focus

their attention on their goals and progress. They also are able

to employ multiple learning strategies and adjust those

strategies as needed, self-monitor their progress, seek help

from others as needed, and self-evaluate their learning goals

and progress based upon their learning outcomes. Teachers at

the primary and secondary levels can use the aforementioned

strategies to promote self-regulation in their classrooms.

However, teachers should understand that learners develop at

various paces, and strategies that work best for one learner

may not always work with the next.

9
3.2.2.9 Encouraging Student Self-Regulated Learning
Creating SRL environments for the complex and diverse

range of backgrounds, skill sets, and personalities that many

students encompass poses challenges to even the most

experienced teachers. Fortunately, a great deal of literature

showcases a variety of effective instructional strategies for

encouraging self-regulation in the classroom (Andreassen &

Braten, 2011; Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Cleary & Zimmerman,

2004; De Corte, Mason, Depaepe, & Verschaffel, 2011; Dignath

& Buettner, 2008; Graham, Harris & Mason, 2004; Souvignier &

Mokhlesgerami, 2006; Stoeger & Ziegler, 2011; Tonks &

Taboada, 2011). Some of these strategies include direct

instruction and modeling, guided and independent practice,

social support and feedback, and reflective practice.

3.2.2.10 Direct Instruction and Modeling

Direct instruction involves explicitly explaining different

strategies to students, as well as how those strategies are used

and what skills are involved in using those strategies

(Zimmerman, 2008). The focus of this kind of instruction is

modeling and demonstration. When teachers model and

explain their own thought processes necessary for completing

activities and assignments, students are more apt to

10
understand and begin to use those same processes on their

own (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005). Though direct instruction may

not be necessary for encouraging SRL in all students, it may be

essential for most studentsespecially younger learnersas

many fail to independently use SRL strategies effectively

(Zimmerman, 2000). Research has shown that this type of

instruction can be the best initial strategy for encouraging

students to be more self-regulative (Levy, 1996).

3.2.2.11 Guided and Independent Practice

Guided practice is another way teachers can help improve

SRL and motivation (Lee et al., 2010). During guided practices,

the responsibility of implementing the learning strategy shifts

from teacher to student. For example, a student might practice

implementing a specific writing strategy while the teacher

carefully observes and offers help when necessary. In a study of

reading achievement, Vidal-Abarca, Mana, and Gil (2010)

examined whether guided practice of SRL strategies could

improve fifth grade students test scores. Findings revealed that

guided practice of SRL strategies increased reading skill test

scores, improved motivation to read, and increased task

engagement. Student-teacher conferencing is one way

teachers can help guide students in setting goals and

11
monitoring their strategy use and progress, as conferences

tend to promote student thinking and learning (Montalvo &

Torres, 2008).

Independent practice should naturally follow guided

practice. During this process, students are given opportunities

to practice the strategy on their own, which can ultimately

reinforce autonomy (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2007). For

example, Stoeger and Ziegler (2008) examined whether

teaching fourth grade students SRL strategies would motivate

them to read independently outside of the classroom, and

whether independent reading practice would improve reading

comprehension scores. The data indicated that once students

were given SRL strategies to use, they were more likely to

practice reading independently. Additionally, results showed

independent reading practice to be a valuable predictor of

students reading comprehension scores across an eight week

period. Although direct and explicit strategy instruction can be

powerful on its own, students are less likely to incorporate the

SRL strategy into their academic routines without guided and

independent practice (Lee, McInerney, & Liem, 2010). Ideally,

strategy instruction incorporates a combination of direct

12
instruction and modeling, as well as guided and independent

practice. It is essential for students to have frequent

opportunities to practice self-regulation to maintain skills over

time (Montalvo & Torres, 2008).

3.2.2.12 Social Support and Feedback

Social support from teachers and peers can serve an

important role as students are learning to be more self-

regulative. Findings from a study with fifth grade students

showed that task engagement and the use of SRL strategies

was more prevalent in students that regularly received support

from their teacher and peers (Patrick, Ryan, & Kaplan, 2007).

Often, social support comes in the form of feedback. Research

indicates that effective feedback includes information about

what students did well (Labuhn et al., 2010), what they need to

improve, and steps they can take to improve their work (Black

& William, 1998; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Sadler, 1998). This

type of feedback is often referred to as progress feedback

(Duijnhouwer, Prins, & Stokking, 2010). Not only can progress

feedback assist students in improving their academic

achievement (Brookhart, 2011), it also can promote student

motivation (Wigfield, Klauda, & Cambria, 2010) and self-

regulation. Labuhn et al., (2010) examined the effects of

13
teacher feedback on the use of SRL strategies to improve

mathematics achievement of fifth grade students. Results

indicated that students who received feedback from their

teachers were more likely to accurately use SRL strategies to

improve their mathematics scores.

3.2.2.13 Reflective Practice

Reflective practice, or adapting and revising pedagogical

styles to accommodate students (Gibson, Hauf, & Long, 2011),

might be the most important and effective tool a teacher can

use. This practice enables teachers to investigate the possible

reasons explaining the effectiveness of a given instructional

strategy used in the classroom. Through thoughtful reflection,

experimentation, and evaluation, teachers can better create

meaningful learning experiences for their students (Gibson et

al., 2011).

3.2.2.14 Challenges to Promoting Self-Regulated Learning in

the Classroom
Though most teachers would agree that teaching students

to be more self-regulative in the classroom would be ideal, the

practice does not come without challenge. Developing lessons

that prepare students to engage in SRL practices and provide

real support and opportunities for implementation is no small

feat (Paris & Winograd, 2003). Many will find that the major
14
obstacle in helping students become self-regulative is the time

required to teach students how to use specific strategies

(Boekaerts & Cascallar, 2006). Although teachers in K-12

settings often are pressed to accomplish many tasks in limited

time spans, it is important to remember that SRL strategies can

help students learn new information and effectively prepare for

those very tasks (Paris & Winograd, 1990). Fundamental

changes at the school level may need to occur for teachers to

be able to allocate the time and resources necessary for

preparing students to be self-regulated learners. Most

importantly, classroom curriculum and accompanying

assessment systems must be organized in ways that support

and value autonomous inquiry and strategic problem-solving

(Patrick et al, 2007).

Understanding that factors outside of the teachers control

can have a major impact on the development of a students

ability to self-regulate also can prove to be a challenge. For

example, how students choose to approach and monitor their

learning is usually consistent with their preferred or desired

social identity (Cleary & Chen, 2009), which can have little to

do with a teachers instruction. Whereas students who believe

15
getting good grades is inappropriate for their social group may

disregard effective SRL strategies such as doing homework

efficiently (Ommundsen et al., 2005), students with identities

consistent with intellectual curiosity may be more apt to

engage in SRL learning (Wang & Holcombe, 2010). Ultimately,

students social identities can influence their academic

behaviors and educational goals (Montalvo & Torres, 2008).

Conclus
ion

16
Chapter four: Conclusion

Motivation, engagement, and self-regulation are the

primary determinants of students learning outcomes, and

whether or not they will persist through challenging tasks

(Harris, Graham, Mason, & Sadler, 2002). By teaching students

to be more self-regulative, teachers may experience greater

success in promoting academic achievement, motivation, and

life-long learning. Spending a marginal amount of time each

day demonstrating how specific self-regulation strategies can

improve students learning can go a long way to helping them

prepare for challenging learning tasks and assessments

(Graham & Harris, 2005). Ultimately, if our goal is to create

successful life-long learners, then we must first ensure that we

teach them the strategies necessary for that journey.

A good teacher is expected to be committed to his work,

would have the ability to take the initiative. Teachers

personality in the attitudinal sense is a significant factor in

teachers behavior and it has great impact on students

character and achievement. The teachers as a professional

must know the art of communication, understanding others and

17
ability to learn from the experiences. They should be able to

facilitate learning effectively. No system of education is better

than his personnel and no system of education is above the

standard of its teacher. It means, the quality of any system

depends upon the standard of its personnel. If the personnel

are well qualified, well trained and have effective behavior, the

organization will achieve its objectives successfully. Particularly

the principal of the schools can improve the quality of their

teachers and students with his effective behavior (Gautheir,

1984).

Study shows that the teacher's friendly manner toward the

students is an effective source in encouraging the students

toward self-regulation. Thus it can be said that the constructive

teacher-student relationship is one of the main elements of

proper behavior in educational environments. Which is

consistent with the findings of some other researches (Shahni,

1991; Crowley, 1993; Wallace, 1994). On the other hand, when

the teacher-student relationship is not in a friendly manner, the

possibility of thedisobeying school rules among students will

increase.(Kennedy, 1995; Galloway & Rogers, 1994; Wallace,

1994).
18
 As the guidance school students are in a crucial period of

their life when they need more affectionate relationships along

with mutual communication, it can be expected that showing

acceptance and respect toward them, having a suitable

behavioral interaction with their behaviour could encourage the

students to show constructive behaviors which will help them to

achieve educational goals. It also help them to have interest

toward self-regulation and pay attention to rules and regulation

and follow them. The outcomes of other studies also show that

suitable interaction with individual's character causes healthy

social behavior among peers, teachers and parents (Jones &

Vensilind, 1995; Sartipi, 1999; Shahmoradi, 1999; Sherrill et.

al., 1996).Also, when from students' point of view, the teacher

is a self-regulative person and is accepted as a model for

following the rules, the students become interested in identify

such characteristics.

Studies also showed that the students interest in self-

regulation has positive significant relationship with the teacher

friendly behavior. The teacher's model and his respect toward

the students' character encourages them in an effective self-

regulation. In addition, the teacher's effort in explaining the

19
lesson content is considered a positive element which has

positive significant relationship with their interest in self-

regulation. Moreover, the teacher's ability and skill in teaching

and explaining the lesson content has positive co-relation with

self-regulation in the students. This result is in line with the

previous researches and shows that the students consider the

teacher's behavior and skill as one united and effective

phenomenon (Parsa,1996, Sherrill et. al., 1996; Crowley, 1993;

Kyle, 1991).

In general, it can be inferred that the students' self-

regulation has to a high extent correlation with the teacher's

educational and social behavior. When there is warm teacher-

student relationship based on mutual understanding and

respect, it may also be expected that such relationship impacts

the teacher's success in clarifying and explaining the lesson

content. In this situation, teacher is considered as a skillful,

experienced, sympathetic, and hard-working individual from

the students point of view. Managing the process of creation of

self-regulation in students by the teacher, could be source of

increasing acceptable and self-regulative behavior in students,

20
appropriate educational and could also strengthen the

student's educational advancement.

21
5
Referen
ce

22
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kopp, C. B. (1982). Antecedents of self-regulation: A developmental
perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18, 199214.
Mace, F. C., Belfiore, P. J., & Hutchinson, J. M. (2001). Operant theory and research on
self-regulation. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and
academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 3965). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Meece, J. L. (2002). Child and adolescent development for educators (2nd ed.).
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2000). Self-regulation and academic learning: Self-
efficacy enhancing interventions. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner
(Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 631649). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schunk, D. H., & Swartz, C. W. (1993). Goals and progress feedback: Effects on self-
efficacy and writing achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 337
354.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Weinstein, C. E., Husman, J., & Dierking, D. R. (2000). Self-regulation interventions
with a focus on learning strategies. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner
(Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 727747). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J.
Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and
practice (pp. 277304). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
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.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic
achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk
(Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical
perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 137). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1999). Acquiring writing revision skill: Shifting from
process to outcome self-regulatory goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 241
250.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated
learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 82, 5159.

Andreassen, R. & Braten, I. (2011). Implementation and effects of explicit reading

comprehension instruction in fifth-grade classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 21,
520-537.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.
Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148.
Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in
Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5, 7-75.
Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational
Research, 31(6), 445-551.

23
Boekaerts, M. & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on
assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2),
199-231.
Boekaerts, M., & Cascallar, E. (2006). How far have we moved toward the integration
of theory and practice in self-regulation? Educational Psychology Review, 18 (3), 199-
210.
Bouffard-Bouchard, T., Parent, S., & Larivee, S. (1991). Influence of self-efficacy on
self-regulation and performance among junior and senior high-school age students.
International Journal of Behavior Development, 14, 153-164.
Butler, R. (1998). Determinants of help seeking: Relations between perceived reasons
for classroom help-avoidance and help-seeking behaviors in an experimental context.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 630-643. 20
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A
theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245-281.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1990). Origins and functions of positive and negative
affect: A control-process view. Psychological Review, 97, 19-35.
Clarebout, G., Horz, H., & Schnotz, W. (2010). The relations between self-regulation
and the embedding of support in learning environments. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 58(5), 573-587.
Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment program: A
school-based program to enhance self-regulated and self-motivated cycles of student
learning. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 537-550.
Cleary, T.J., & Chen, P.P. (2009). Self-regulation, motivation, and math achievement in
middle school: variations across grade level and math context. Journal of School
Psychology, 47 (5), 291-314.
Corno, L. (1993). The Best-laid plans: Modern conceptions of volition and educational
research. Educational Researcher, 22, 14-22.
de Bruin, A.B., Thiede, K.W., & Camp, G. (2001). Generating keywords improves
metacomprehension and self-regulation in elementary and middle school children.
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109 (3), 294-310.
De Corte, E., Mason, L., Depaepe, F., & Verschaffel, L. (2011). Self-regulation of
mathematical knowledge and skills. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.),
Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 155-172). New York:
Routledge. 21
Education & Training, 53 (4), 284-296. 22
Harnishferger, K. K. (1995). The development of cognitive inhibition: Theories,
definitions, research. In F. N. Dempster & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.), Interference and
Inhibition in Cognition (pp. 176-206). San Diego: Academic Press.
Harris, K. R., Friedlander, B.D., Saddler, B., Frizzelle, R. & Graham, S. (2005). Self-
monitoring of attention versus self-monitoring of academic performance: Effects
among students with ADHD in the general education classroom. Journal of Special
Education, 39 (3), 145-156.
Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L. H., & Sadler, B. (2002). Developing self-regulated
writers. Theory into Practice, 41, 110-115.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational
Research, 77, 81-112.
Jarvela, S., & Jarvenoja, H. (2011). Socially constructed self-regulated learning and
motivation regulation in collaborative learning groups. Teachers College Record,
113(2), 350-374.
Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., & Otto, B. (2010). Promotion of self-regulated learning in
classrooms: Investigating frequency, quality, and consequences for student
performance. Metacognition and Learning, 5 (2), 157-171.
Kolovelonis, A., Goudas, M., & Dermitzaki, I. (2011). The effect of different goals and
self-recording on self-regulation of learning a motor skill in a physical education
setting. Learning and Instruction, 21 (3), 355-364. 23Kuhl, J. (1985) Volitional
mediators of cognitionbehavior consistency: self-regulatory processes and action
versus state orientation. In J. Kuhl and J. Beckman (eds) Action Control: From
Cognition to Behavior (pp. 101-128). New York: Springer.

24
Kurman, J. (2001). Self-regulation strategies in achievement settings: Culture and
gender differences. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32 (4), 491-503.
Labuhn, A.S., Zimmerman, B.J., & Hasselhorn, M. (2010). Enhancing students self-
regulation and mathematics performance: The influence of feedback and self-
evaluative standards Metacognition and Learning, 5 (2), 173-194.
Lee, J.Q., McInerney, D.M., & Liem, G.A. (2010). The relationship between future goals
and achievement goal orientations: An intrinsic-extrinsic motivation perspective.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35 (4), 264-279.
Levy, N.R. (1996). Teaching analytical writing: Help for general education middle
school teachers. Intervention in School and Clinic, 32(2), 95-103.
Montalvo, F.T., & Torres, M.C. (2008). Self-regulated learning: Current and future
Directions. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 2(1), 1-34.
Ommundsen, Y., Haugen, R., & Lund, T. (2005). Academic self-concept, implicit
theories of ability, and self-regulation strategies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational
Research, 49(5), 461-474.
Patrick, H., Ryan, A.M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents perceptions of the
classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99(1), 83-98. 24

Pajares, F. (2008). Motivational role of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning. In

D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning:
Theory, research and applications (pp. 111-139). New York: Erlbaum.

Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic
learning and instruction. In B. J. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and
cognitive instruction (pp. 1551). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated
learning. Educational Psychologist, 36, 89-91.
Pintrich, P. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in
learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 544-555.
Pintrich, P. R., & Zusho, A. (2002). The development of academic self-regulation:
The role of cognitive and motivational factors. In A. Wigfield & J. Eccles (Eds.),
Development of achievement motivation (pp.249284). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Pressley, M., & Woloshyn, v. (1995). Cognitive strategy instruction that really
improves children's academic performance (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
Ryan, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., & Midgley, C. (2001). Avoding seeking help in the
classroom: Who and why? Educational Psychology Review, 13, 93-114.
Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in
Education, 5, 77-84.
Schunk, D. H. (1984). Self-efficacy perspective on achievement behavior. Educational
Psychologist, 19, 48-56. 2Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-
regulated learning. In Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.) Self-regulated
Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schunk, D.H., & Swartz, C.W. (1993). Goals and progress feedback: Effects on self-
efficacy and writing achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from ERIC
database (ED359216).
Schunk, D. & Zimmerman, B. (2007). Influencing childrens self-efficacy and self-
regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading & Writing
Quarterly, 23(1), 7-25.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology
Review, 7, 351-371.
Schneid, K. (1993). Helping students become strategic learners. Brookline, MA:
Brookline Books.

25
Stoeger, H., & Ziegler, A. (2008). Evaluation of a classroom based training to improve
self-regulation in time management tasks during homework activities with fourth
graders. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 207-230.

Stoeger, H., & Ziegler, A. (2011). Self-regulatory training through elementary-school

students homework completion. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.),
Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 87-101). New York:
Routledge.
Tonks, S. M., & Taboada, A. (2011). Developing self-regulated readers through
instruction for reading engagement. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.),
Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 173-186). New York:
Routledge.
van den Broek, P., Lorch, R., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of
readers' goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory & Cognition,
29, 1081-1087.
Vidal-Arbarca, E., Mana, A., & Gil, L. (2010). Individual differences for self-regulating
task-oriented reading activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 817-826.
Wang, M.T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents perceptions of school environment,
engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational
Research Journal, 47(3), 633-662. 27 Wigfield, A., Klauda, S. L., & Cambria, J.
(2011). Influences on the development of academic self-regulatory processes. In B. J.
Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and
performance (pp.33-48). New York: Routledge.
Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational
Psychologist, 30, 173-188.
Winne, P. H. (2009). Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information
processing. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and
academic achievement, (2nd ed.) (pp. 153-189). New York: Routledge.
Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998) Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker
& J. Dunlosky (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice, The
educational psychology series. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wolters, C. (1998). Self-regulated learning and college students regulation of
motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 224235.
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized
aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 189-205.
Wolters, C.A. (2011). Regulation of motivation: Contextual and social aspects.
Teachers
College Record, 113(2), 265-283.
Wolters, C. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation
and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms.
Instructional Science, 26, 27-47. 28
Wolters, C. A., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation
and students motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual
Differences, 8, 211238.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: a social cognitive perspective. In
M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. San
Diego: CA: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated
learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 82, 51-59.
Zimmerman, B., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social
cognitive perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 73-101.
Zimmerman, B. (2000). Self-efficacy: an essential motive to learn. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82-91.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Sociocultural influence and students development of
academic self-regulation: A social-cognitive perspective. In D. M. McInerney & S. Van
Etten (Eds.), Big theories revisted (pp.139-164). Greenwhich, CT: Information Age.
Zimmerman, B. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical
background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American
Educational Research Journal, 45(1), pp. 166-183.

26
Shahmohammadi, N.(2013)Review on the Impact of Teachers Behaviour on Students
Selfregulation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 114 ( 2014 ) 130 135
Mahmoodi, M.& Kalantarib, B. & Ghaslanic, R. (2014 ) Self-Regulated Learning (SRL),
Motivation and Language Achievement of Iranian EFL Learners. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences 98 ( 2014 ) 1062 1068
Abbasnasab Sardareh, S. Mohd Saad, M. & Boroomand, R. (2012). Self-Regulated
Learning Strategies (SRLS) and

academic achievement in pre-university EFL learners. California Linguistic Notes, 37,

1-35.

Boekaerts, M. (1999). Motivated learning: The study of student situational

transactional units. European Journal of

Psychology of Education, 14(4), 4155.

Boekaerts, M. & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on

assessment and intervention.

Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 199- 231.

Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (1995). Development of young childrens reading

self-concepts: An examination

of emerging subcomponents and their relationship with reading achievement. Journal

of Educational Psychology, 87, 154167.

Chen, C. S. (2002). Self-regulated learning strategies and achievement in an

introduction to information systems course. Information Technology,

Learning, and Performance Journal, 20(1), 11-25.

Forgas, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Tice D. M. (2009). Psychology of self-regulation.

Cognitive, affective and motivational processes. New York:

Psychology Press Tylor & Francis Group.

Hadwin, A. F. (2008). Self-regulated learning. In T.L. Good (Ed.), 21st century

education: A reference handbook (pp. 175-183). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications.

Hirati, A. (2010). An explanatory study of motivation and self regulation learning in

second language acquisition :

Kanji learning as a task focused approach. Unpublished MA thesis, Massey university,

Manawata, New Zealand.

Kurman, J. (2001). Self-regulation strategies in achievement settings: Culture and

gender differences. Journal of

Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32 (4), 491-503.

Labuhn, A.S., Zimmerman, B.J., & Hasselhorn, M. (2010). Enhancing students self-
regulation and mathematics performance: The influence of

feedback and self-evaluative standards. Metacognition and Learning, 5 (2), 173-

194.

Montalvo, F.T., & Torres, M.C. (2008). Self-regulated learning: Current and future
directions. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational

27
Psychology, 2(1), 1-34.

Ommundsen, Y., Haugen, R., & Lund, T. (2005). Academic self-concept, implicit
theories of ability, and self- regulation strategies. Scandinavian

Journal of Educational Research, 49(5), 461-474.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M.

Boekaerts. P.R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of

Self-Regulation, (pp. 451502) San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Pintrich, P. R.(2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-

regulated learning in college

students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407.

Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning

components of classroom academic performance. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 82, 3340.

Pintrich, P. R., Roeser, R. W., & De Groot, E. A. M. (1994). Classroom and individual
differences in early adolescents' motivation and selfregulated

learning. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14(2), 139.

Pintrich, P. R., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students motivational beliefs and their
cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. In D. H.

Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 149183).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Pokay, P., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1990). Predicting achievement early and late in the
semester: The role of motivation and use of learning

strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 4150.

Oxford, R. (2001). Language learning strategies. In R. Carter, & D. Nunan (Eds.), The
Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other

languages (pp. 166-172). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schunk, D. H. (1996). Goal and self-evaluative influences during childrens cognitive

skil learning. American Educational Research Journal, 33,

359382.

Schunk, D. H. (2005). Self-regulated learning: The educational legacy of Paul R.

Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40, 85-94.

Schunk, D. H., & Swartz, C. W. (1993). Goals and progress feedback: Effects on self-
efficacy and writing achievement. Contemporary

Educational Psychology, 18, 337354.

Turan, Z., & Demirel, O. (2010). The relationship between self-regulated learning skills
and achievement: a case from hacettepe university

medical school. H. U. Journal of Education, 38, 279-291.

Wang, M.T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents perceptions of school environment,

engagement, and academic achievement in middle school.

28
American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 633-662.

Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In P. Pintrich, M.

Boekaerts & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of selfregulation

(pp. 531-566). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Wolters, C. A., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation
and students motivational

beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 211238.

Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An

overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: a social cognitive perspective. In

M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.),

Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego: CA: Academic Press.

Zimmerman, B.J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into

Practice, 41 (2), 64-70.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical

background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American
Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166-183.

Zimmerman, B.J., Bonner S. &Kovach R. (1996). Developing self-regulated learners,

beyond achievement to self-efficacy. Washington: American Psychological Association.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated

learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 82, 5159.

Afzail-rad, Vahid (1998). The last secret for living happily,Tehran; Tabriz Publications.
Crowley, E. Paula. (1993). A qualitative analysis of mainstreamed behaviorally
disordered aggressive adolescents' perceptions of helpful and
unhelpful teacher attitudes and behaviors. Exceptionality, Vol. 4(3):131-135.
Ferguson, Elizabeth., & Houghton, Stephen. (1992). The effects of contingent teacher
praise, as specified by Canter's Assertive Discipline
Programme, on children's on task behavior. Educational studies, Vol.18 (1): 83-93.
Galloway, David, & Rogers, Colin, (1994). Motivational style: A link in the relationship
between school effectiveness and children's behavior?
Educational and Child Psychology, Vol. 11 (2): 16-25.
Gary Arlo, Fransua (1999). Discipline and class management. Education technology
and development, Number 4.
Gautheir,D.,M. Loranger and R.Ladouceur(1984)The Reinforcement of Academic
Behavior; An economic Strategy on the Intervention of a
Scholastic Environment.P.14,22.
Gellman, Estelle, S., & Berkowitz, Mina, (1992). Factors perceived as important in
teacher evaluation. Alberta Journal of Educational Research,
Vol. 38 (2): 219-234.
Gottfredson, Denise, C. Gottfredson: Gary, D., & Hybe1, Lois, G.(1993). Managing
adolescent behavior: A multiyear, multi-school study.
American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 30 (1): 179-215.
Houghton, Stephen; Wheldall, Kevin; Jude, Rod; & Sharp, Anthony.(1990). The effects
of limited private reprimands and increased private
praise on classroom behavior in four British Secondary school classes. British Journal
of Educational Psychology, Vol. 60 (3): 255-265.
Jones, M. Gail, & Versilind, Elizabeth. (1995). Pre-service teachers' cognitive
frameworks for class management. Teacher and Teacher

29
Educations, Vol. 11 (4): 313-330.
Kennedy., Janice, H. (1995). Teachers, students, paraprofessionals, and young adults
judgments about the acceptable use of corporal punishment
in the rural south. Education and treatment of children, Vol.18 (1): 53-64.
Kyle, Patricia, B. (1991). Developing cooperative interaction in schools for teachers
and administrators. Individual Psychiatric Journal of
Adlerian Theory Research on Patricie, Vol. 42 (2): 261-265.
Mazaheri Seyf, Amir-Hossein (1998), The hidden wealth. Tehran:Milad Publications.
Morrison, James, A.; Olivos, Kathy.; Dominguez, George; Gomez, Diane et. al. (1993).
The application of family systems approaches to school
behavior and school problems on a school level discipline board: an outcome study.
Elementary school Guidance and Counseling,
Parsa, Mohammad (1996). Application of psychology in education, Tehran; Be'sat
Publications.
Perle SM, Cole RL (2007). Professionalism and Self-Regulation. Dynamic Chiropractic
2007:25(15)
Sartippi, Siavash (1999). The children-parents relationship.Tehran; Ettela'at
Publication.
Shahmoradi, Namdar (1999). The importance of discipline and methods for avoiding
children's indiscipline. Peyvand magazine, Issue 245.
Shahni Yeylagh, Manizhe (1990). Psychology for education.Tehran; Roshd Publications.
Sherrill, Joel, T.; O'Leary, Susan G.; Albertson, Kelly J.; &Kendziora, Kimberty, T. (1996).
When reprimand consistency may and may not
matter. Behavior Modification, Vol. 20 (2): 226-236.
Vaseghi, Minoo; & Dadashzadeh, Maryam (1999). Discipline without tears. Tehran:
Roshd Publications.
Vol. 27 (4): 258-272.
Wallace, Gary Ray (1994). Discipline that motivates. Journal of Instructional
Psychology, Vol. 21(4): 371-374.

30