A Review of the Self-Regulation Strategy Inventory—Self-Report (SRSI-SR)

Abstract

This work presents a systematic review of the Self-Regulation Strategy Inventory-Self Report (SRSI-SR). Theoretically grounded in Zimmerman's three-phase model of self-regulated learning (SRL), the SRSI-SR provides information about learners' use of three broad types of self-regulation strategies. Google Scholar, PsycINFO, and ProQuest were searched to identify studies referencing the SRSI-SR; 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were coded based upon: 1) Likert scale type employed, 2) type of study conducted, 3) student grade level, 4) school subject area, and 5) other constructs also examined, such as motivation and achievement. Overall, the SRSI-SR is emerging as a sound measure of SRL strategy use. Validity and reliability information, gaps in current knowledge about the measure, and future research recommendations are also discussed in more detail.

Psychometric Properties of Self-Regulated Learning Strategies in Learning English Grammar and English Grammar Self-Efficacy Scales

“…Three factors were yielded from the confirmatory factor analysis: seeking/learning information (8 items: α = 0.84), environment and behavior management (12 items: α = 0.88), and maladaptive regulatory behaviors (8 items: α = 0.72). A systematic review of Cleary (2006) SRSI-SR questionnaire conducted by Tise et al (2019), which includes 18 studies and covered various disciplines (science, biology, history, math, English-language learning, and reading) highlights that overall reliability for the SRSI-SR among these studies is high, with Cronbach's alpha value ranging from 0.82 to 0.92. The internal consistency of this scale was also reported to be high (0.82) for the study in English language learning.…”

A multilevel framework for assessing self‐regulated learning in school contexts: Innovations, challenges, and future directions

“…Given that greater specificity in the SRL assessment process can enhance school-based practitioners' ability to link SRL assessment data to intervention planning, the current paper expands and updates the original SREP diagnostic model in several ways. In addition to providing more detailed information about the operation and sequence of the SREP assessment process, the current paper provides evidence supporting the utility and psychometric rigor of specific tools emphasized within the SREP diagnostic framework (e.g., self-report questionnaires, teacher rating scales, SRL microanalysis, think-aloud protocols; Cleary et al, 2021;Tise et al, 2019). This paper also serves as a roadmap that school psychologists can use to increase the frequency and quality of school-based SRL assessments.…”

“…It has also been adapted for postsecondary populations (Follmer & Sperling, 2016; Thomas et al, 2020), translated into multiple languages, and applied to different learning environments (e.g., in‐person vs. online; Khodarahmi & Zarrinabadi, 2015; Madjar et al, 2011; Zambrano et al, 2018). In terms of psychometric characteristics, there is evidence to support the reliability of scores and the validity of inferences regarding internal factor structure, and convergent and predictive validity (Cleary, 2006; Cleary et al, 2015; Tise et al, 2019). Although less attention has focused on the SRSI‐PRS and SRSI‐TRS, research has revealed similar levels of strong psychometric quality (Chen et al, 2015; Cleary & Callan, 2014).…”

“…However, they did not provide specific information about the sequence of the assessment process, nor did they convey data regarding the utility and psychometric quality of the most common and relevant SRL assessment approaches. Over the past couple of decades, there has been substantial and rapid growth in the overall quality and innovativeness of SRL assessments, specifically in schools (Cleary et al, 2021; Schunk & Greene, 2018; Tise et al, 2019). Given that greater specificity in the SRL assessment process can enhance school‐based practitioners' ability to link SRL assessment data to intervention planning, the current paper expands and updates the original SREP diagnostic model in several ways.…”