Using multiple, contextualized data sources to measure learners’ perceptions of their self-regulated learning

Abstract

As theory and research in self-regulated learning (SRL) advance, debate continues about how to measure SRL as strategic, fine-grained, dynamic adaptations learners make during and between study sessions. Recognizing learners' perceptions are critical to the strategic adaptations they make during studying, this research examined the unique contributions of self-report data for understanding regulation as it develops over time. Data included (a) scores on the Regulation of Learning Questionnaire (RLQ) completed in the first and last few weeks of a 13-week course and (b) diary-like Weekly Reflections completed over eleven weeks. Participants were 263 undergraduate students in a course about SRL. First, exploratory factor analysis resulted in a five-factor model of the RLQ with factors labeled Task Understanding, Goal Setting, Monitoring, Evaluating, and Adapting. Second, latent class analysis of Time 1 and 2 RLQ scores revealed four classes: emergent regulators, moderate regulators, high regulators with emergent adapting, and high regulators. Finally, in-depth qualitative analysis of Weekly Reflections resulted in group SRL profiles based on a sub-sample of participants from each RLQ class. Qualitatively, these groups were labeled: unengaged regulators, active regulators, struggling regulators, and emergent regulators. Quantitative and qualitative SRL profiles were juxtaposed and similarities and differences discussed. This paper explicates and discusses the critical importance of sampling self-reports of SRL over time and tasks particularly in contexts where regulation is developing.

Addressing complexities in self-regulated learning: a focus on contextual factors, contingencies, and dynamic relations

“…courses) within subjects to assess the influence of learning context on SRL processes. McCardle and Hadwin (2015) also examined learning in a specific context and employed a mix of qualitative open-ended questions and self-report surveys that identify the task as an explicit referent in order to develop a rich portrayal of the SRL process within a specific context. Taken together, these articles demonstrate both the distinct advantages of individual methods for assessing relations among specific SRL phenomena, and that it is often necessary to combine multiple methods in order to accommodate the complex structure of the SRL process.…”

“…In this special issue, we extend the consideration of contextual factors beyond the immediate characteristics of the learning task to include characteristics of the larger learning context in which the task is embedded. For example, studies by BenEliyahu and Linnenbrink-Garcia (2015) and McCardle and Hadwin (2015) examine contextual factors at the course-level, as well as the more distal factors that may also affect how individuals self-regulate their learning.…”

“…10 2 to 10 4 ), and include patterns of events, changes in learning strategies (e.g., adaptive metacognitive control strategies; Binbarasan-Tüysüzoğlu and Greene 2015), and fluctuations in motivation (change in self-efficacy; Bernacki et al 2015). These might also include general tendencies or aggregate counts of SRL behavior, as captured in journals (McCardle and Hadwin 2015) or interviews (Lichtinger and Kaplan 2015). Contextual factors in SRL stemming from features of the discipline, course, or school are best observed on a social band; they are relatively enduring features of the environment that, if they evolve, do so slowly over periods of weeks, and months (i.e.…”

“…For example, SRL in specific courses assessed via self-report questionnaires (e.g. favorite/least favorite class; Ben-Eliyahu and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2015) or emerge as aggregate summaries of typical SRL behaviors that accrue over an entire course (McCardle and Hadwin 2015). When a specific course is used as a referent, survey approaches may also account for the hierarchical nestedness of a course (Ben-Eliyahu and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2015) or may improve the accuracy and specificity of students' reporting of SRL tendencies (McCardle and Hadwin 2015).…”

“…The contributors of this special issue are leading international researchers who examine how contextual factors influence SRL (Ben-Eliyahu and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2015;McCardle and Hadwin 2015), how contingent metacognitive processes influence achievement (Binbarasan-Tüysüzoğlu and Greene 2015), and how SRL processes dynamically influence one another as learning unfolds (Bernacki et al 2015;Lichtinger and Kaplan 2015). Two commentaries identify the cross-cutting themes of the special issue (Karabenick and Zusho 2015) and appraise the alignment between the theoretical assumptions, research designs, and analyses in these and other studies of SRL (Dent and Hoyle 2015).…”