Upload
vanduong
View
222
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Running Head: DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS
Developing Self-Regulated Learning Skills in Kindergarten Writing
Katelyn Deininger
Kennesaw State University
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 1
Abstract
The focus of this study was self-regulated learning (SRL) in kindergarten writing. The
teacher implemented a strategy to promote self-regulation during writers’ workshop in a
kindergarten special needs inclusion classroom. A visual goal chart was implemented for five
kindergarten students, four of which were special needs students. Students used this chart by
selecting specific writing goals and self-monitoring (or rating themselves) based on their own
achievement of the chosen goal. Weekly, students re-evaluated their goal based on how they felt
they were doing. Qualitative data showed positive outcomes, including improved student writing,
positive dispositions towards goal setting when paired with external rewards, and improved
classroom learning behaviors (i.e. working quietly, staying on task, and staying in ones’ seat).
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 2
Introduction
The focus of this study is self-regulatory practices and their impact on young learners.
One problem many young learners have is staying on task, focusing, completing their work
independently, and thinking meta-cognitively about their work habits. Teachers frequently have
to redirect and prompt students to do their work or to focus. Occasionally, there are some
students who teachers find can work independently, without redirection, and perform
successfully on tasks with little help. These are the types of habits teachers hope to promote in
more students. We aim to develop students who are self-controlled, hard workers, behaviorally
sound, and motivated to do well. Why do some students seem to naturally have these learning
skills walking into the classroom while others do not? How can we improve this trait in other
students who do not share these characteristics?
Self-regulation is commonly referred to in two ways: self-regulated learning (SRL) and
behavioral self-regulation. The term is a broad one that covers a lot of territory. SRL concerns
motivation, affect, behavior, self-control, meta-cognition, goal setting, self-monitoring, self-
evaluation. Many kindergarten students come to school as high maintenance learners with a
constant need for adult support and redirection. By the end of kindergarten, these students will
hopefully be considered independent learners who take ownership of their own learning,
responsibilities, and behavior. Thus, SRL is an important skill that educators should try to
promote in young children. Can educators teach young students to be self-regulated learners?
This study sought to implement a strategy that could promote self-regulatory behavior in
kindergarteners during writing. Since kindergarten students respond well to visual stimuli, a
visual reminder self-monitoring strategy was used to promote self-regulated learning (SRL). The
research question at hand is: Can a visual reminder for student self-monitoring improve self-
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 3
regulated learning behaviors? Furthermore, through a weekly conference, the teacher looked to
answer the question: What do students think about their own goals and behaviors when using this
strategy?
Literature Review
Introduction to Self-Regulated Learning
Self-regulation first entered the research scene in the 1980s (Rosen, Glennie, Dalton,
Lennon, Bozick, 2010). Self-regulated learning (SRL) is a concept that is associated with an
array of definitions, explanations, and components. At its simplest, self-regulated learning is the
ability for a learner to play an active role in his/her own learning (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2001).
Self-regulated learning is of contemporary priority in education for two reasons: (1) it maintains
close ties to academic achievement, and (2) it can be developed/learned (Patrick & Middleton,
2002). The former reason is of obvious importance since academic success is a primary goal of
education. The latter reason is arguably even more consequential to educators because it
establishes the teacher’s responsibility, suggesting she is a pivotal conductor in developing this
skill that generates academic success. Studies support the notion that training interventions
during school or after school can increase self-regulation, and ultimately academic achievement
(Leidinger & Perels, 2012). Thus, teachers need to teach learners how to self-regulate. In a
classroom this may look like students doing the following: (1) goal setting, (2) strategic
planning, (3) taking action, and (4) evaluating and reflecting (Clark, 2012; Leidinger & Perels,
2012).
One of the primary questions surrounding self-regulated learning is: How can SRL be
adequately defined? (Butler, 2002). The concept is so pervasive that many researchers attempt
to create categories or subscales to measure self-regulation, honing in on certain aspects of the
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 4
idea. According to Cheng, self-regulated learning can be conceptualized in four dimensions:
learning motivation, goal setting, action control and learning strategies (2011). Drake, Belsky,
and Fearon explain that self-regulation is a type of self-management with intrapersonal aspects
and interpersonal aspects (2014). The intrapersonal component of self-management includes
planning and ability to control impulses; whereas, the interpersonal component lies in the ability
to consider others, trustworthiness, and compliance with social norms and expectations (Drake,
Belsky, & Fearon, 2014). SRL is also construed as a child’s capability to manage emotions,
focus attention, and control behaviors (Rimm-Kauffman, Grimm, Curby, Nathanson, & Brock,
2009). Barry Zimmerman, one of the more noteworthy pioneers in self-regulated learning
research, and one who many subsequent studies have cited and referred back to, defines self-
regulated learning as more of a process that involves students being “metacognitively,
motivationally, and behaviorally active participants in their own learning” (Schunk &
Zimmerman, 2001). Everson describes this model as a simplified three-part cyclical process:
plan it, practice it, and evaluate it (“Learning and the Adolescent Mind,” n.d.). In other words,
the process of self-regulated learning is a cyclical loop in which students set goals, plan
strategies for reaching their goals, monitor learning, self-evaluate, and reflect on their learning
strategies, continually modifying based on experience and feedback (Schunk & Zimmerman,
2001; Leidinger & Perels, 2012).
According to Schunk and Zimmerman, one of the most important research questions in
the study of self-regulated learning is “How does a learner acquire the capacity to self-regulate
when learning?” (2001). This question runs under the assumption and common understanding
that SRL skills can be developed and improved upon, which in turn urges the pedagogically
relevant implication that teachers can and ought to teach learners how to be independent
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 5
learners, or as Cheng put it, “teachers need to teach students both knowledge and skills,” (2011).
Thus, self-regulated learning has significant implications for modern day pedagogy.
Theories of SRL
Research and theories concerning self-regulated learning (SRL) arose in the mid-1980’s
(Schunk & Zimmerman, 2001). For the past 30 years, numerous theories have developed and
evolved in their perspectives, explanations, and emphases concerning SRL. In their book,
Schunk and Zimmerman describe seven theoretical perspectives on the topic which I will
summarize here. These include: operant, phenomenological, information processing, social
cognitive, volitional, Vygotskian, and cognitive constructivist (2001). Operant theorists place
emphasis on environmental factors (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2001). Phenomenological theorists
stress the role self-concept or self-esteem has on SRL (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2001).
Information processing theory asserts that learners continually process feedback (“input”) in
response to SRL strategies to the point that they constantly modify the strategies (“output”) until
the “standard” is met (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2001). Social cognitive theorists maintain that
SRL is developed primarily in social contexts through a series of four levels: (1) obseravation,
(2) imitation, (3) self-control, and (4) self-regulate (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997). Ultimately,
social cognitivists emphasize the importance of modeling self-regulatory behaviors (Schunk &
Zimmerman, 1997). Volitional theorists postulate that a student’s will directs his/her actions,
emphasizing SRL is a matter of the will. Vygotskian theory describes acquisition of SRL in terms
of speech internalization and social contexts. Finally, cognitive constructivist theorists hold that
students construct ways to regulate self-competence, agency and control, academic tasks, and
strategies (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2001).
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 6
It is important to take all theories into account when constructing action research
regarding self-regulated learning. They cannot be entirely isolated from each other; rather, they
all work together to provide a panoramic view of self-regulated learning.
Predictors of SRL
Attachment. A bulk of the research conducted around self-regulated learning surrounds
the question: What internal and external factors act as predictors of self-regulation? Some
findings suggest that factors which influence SRL extend back to even early childhood
experiences. Drake, Belsky, and Fearon studied the impact of early attachment on later self-
regulatory skills, finding that “secure children” (based on Bowlby’s “Strange Situation”
experiment) were less likely to be inattentive, while “insecure children” were avoidant and
disorganized (2014). Furthermore, this study found that children surrounded by more “adverse”
or “stressful” social circumstances tended to be insecure, and they were more impulsive (Drake,
Belsky, & Fearon, 2014). The theory as to why attachment may be directly related to SRL takes
into account the generalization of the “secure base” that a child may take into other contexts. In
other words, it is thought that a more secure child, as a result of their repeated emotionally
supportive experiences, will be better able to represent what they believe their parents’ responses
would be even in their absence (Drake, Belsky & Fearon, 2014). For example, imagine a child at
the school cafeteria who has enough change to purchase ice cream, but knowing that his parents
would disapprove of this, does not buy the ice cream. Even in the parents’ absence, he
cognitively represents his parents’ “supportive response” to the situation, and self-regulates
based on this. Researchers Kiss, Fechete, Pop, and Susa emphasize the importance of attachment
as well as authoritative parenting, which leads to more positive development of independence,
social interactions, and self-regulation (2014).While more research is needed on the impacts
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 7
attachment and parenting styles have self-regulation, it is important for educators to consider that
parent-interactions with children may impact their self-regulatory skills in the classroom. If a
student does not have “repeated supportive experiences” or emotional support at home, then the
teacher needs to aim even more-so to provide this caregiver supportive experience at school. If a
teacher can successfully do this, a student who lacks support at home may find self-regulatory
cognitive representations of his teacher’s responses instead, and react based on those.
Classroom quality. While quality of parent-child interaction has been shown to be
related to behavior problems in the classroom (Drake, Belsky, & Fearon, 2014), otherwise
known as adaptive behavior, another major predictor of self-regulated behavior is classroom
quality (Rimm-Kaufman, Grimm, Curby, Nathanson,& Brock, 2009). Adaptive behavior is
another term for self-regulated behavior. While SRL is primarily concerned with learning skills
and strategies, behaviors are a major component of self-regulation. According to Rimm-
Kaufman, Grimm, Curby, Nathanson and Brock, adaptive behaviors include: (1) behavioral self-
control, (2) cognitive self-control, and (3) positive work habits, and (4) engagement (2009).
Classroom quality (instructional support, emotional support, and classroom management) was
found to be a catalyst for these adaptive behaviors, with classroom management being the
strongest predictor. Operant theorists tend to agree with this and emphasize the role of external
factors (social, environmental) in a learner’s self-regulation skills (Schunk & Zimmerman,
2001). If environment and social context are predictors of self-regulated learning, then teachers
allegedly maintain the lion’s share of responsibility for creating a classroom environment that
fosters the development of self-regulatory behaviors.
Emotions, self-efficacy, and motivation. A students’ ability to self-regulate requires
self-generation of thoughts, feelings, and actions that will mediate their learning goals (Schunk
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 8
& Zimmerman, 2001). Feelings and affect are an important component of self-regulation. In fact,
research suggests not only are positive emotions associated with self-regulation, but positive
emotions also strengthen the relationship between self-regulated learning and academic
achievement (Villavicencio & Bernardo, 2013). Feelings of enjoyment and pride, for example,
play a substantial part in academic achievement, while negative feelings stunt achievement
(Mega, Ronconi, and De Beni, 2013; Villavicencio and Bernardo, 2013.) Furthermore, negative
emotional states that may stem from unsupportive environments can cause lower self-efficacy
and lower motivation, which are both important to SRL (Clark, 2012). Self-efficacy, the belief in
one’s own abilities, is especially fundamental in self-regulation; research suggests that self-
efficacious students tend show concentration on tasks, manage time effectively, and monitor
learning, making adjustments to strategies as needed (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997). Motivation
is also of utmost importance to self-regulation, and can manifest in various ways, including
internal rewards (goal accomplishment) or external rewards (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2001).
Mega, Ronconi, and De Beni’s research suggests that emotions alone do not promise academic
success, but positive emotions do have a positive effect on academic achievement only when
motivation and self-regulation are present (2013). Though emotions are internal, they are
affected by external factors such as environment and social context. For educators, emotional
support needs to be of primary concern in establishing a SRL promoting classroom environment.
ADHD. Yet another predictor of self-regulation is ADHD. It is worth noting that a
connection can be drawn between ADHD and self-regulated learning, for students with ADHD
commonly have a deficit in their self-regulation (Glasney & Connor, 2010). Poor self-regulation
alone does not necessarily suggest a child has ADHD. According to the CDC National Center for
Health Statistics, the number of children in the U.S. who have ever been diagnosed with ADHD
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 9
and fall between the ages of 3 and 17 was 5.9 million in 2012, or 9.5 percent (Center for Disease
Control, 2014). This sizable figure is undeniably significant to educators who will likely have
ADHD students in their classrooms, and thus can and ought to teach self-regulated learning
strategies to these students. Gawrilow, Morgenrot, Schultz, Oettingen, and Gollwitzer set out to
answer the question: “Is it possible to enhance self-regulation in children, who are known to have
self-regulation deficits, by teaching them strategies for goal setting and goal implementation?” -
(2013, p.136). In their study, they focus on a SRL strategy called mental contrasting, which is
when the learner identifies a specific goal, imagines what successful achievement of this goal
would look and feel like, and then determines what is currently hindering or in the way of that
success (Gawrilow, Morgenrot, Schulz, Oettingen, & Gollwitzer, 2013). The strategy heeded
positive results, improving self-regulation in children at risk for ADHD (Gawrilow, Morgenrot,
Schulz, Oettingen, & Gollwitzer, 2013). ADHD poses a challenge to students who have it, their
peers, and their teachers; however, if self-regulation strategies can be taught to even those with
diagnosed deficits in self-regulation, then educators can potentially increase academic
achievement among this population.
SRL and Writing
Writing is a complicated process that requires many demands on a student. In
kindergarten, these demands include proper handwriting, capitalization, punctuation, spacing,
topic focus, planning, sentence structure, word choice, and much more. Limpo and Alves studied
the role of transcription (spelling and handwriting) and self-regulation skills in text generation
(2013). They describe the importance of working memory in the writing process as students
must retrieve “orthographic symbols” while executing fine-motor movements to write them.
According to Limpo and Alves, writing demands self-regulation in order to meet literary goals.
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 10
Zimmerman and Risemberg describe three self-regulatory practices students need to manage the
writing process which can be summarized as environmental (physical or social setting), behavior
(motor activities), and “personal strategies” (cognitive and affective; 2013). Limpo and Alves’
study found that self-regulation can be influenced by transcription for Grades 4-6 (the younger
grades in this study). Limpo and Alves suggest teachers should begin promoting planning and
revising in earlier grades to grow self-efficacy. Finally, Limpo and Alves (2013) state “it has
been widely demonstrated that teaching self-regulatory strategies builds self-efficacy and
enhances writing quality” (p.410). Though the study focused on Grades 4-6, 7-9, the implications
for developing SRL skills can be applied to teachers of all grade levels.
SRL and Qualitative Research
The primary methodologies used to study self-regulated learning are qualitative
approaches. Allan, Hume, Allan, Farrington, & Lonigan (2014) studied the relationship between
inhibitory control and the development of academic skills in preschool and kindergarten
students. Since inhibitory control is a major component of self-regulation, this study offers
valuable insight into best practices for research in this area and with a kindergarten population.
In this study they compared different research approaches and deduced that teacher-reports about
inhibitory control (IC) were closely associated with academic skills. According to Allan et. al.
(2014), “researchers should include both behavior tasks and teacher reports to assess IC as there
appears to be unique information associated with the type of measure used” (p.2375). Butler
argues that qualitative research is best when that which is being studied cannot be separated from
its context (2002). It is a challenge for researchers to classify and code actions since the same
action can be a byproduct of different contextual factors (Butler, 2002). Patrick and Middleton
emphasize the value of qualitative approaches to studying SRL because they offer
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 11
comprehensive descriptions, affirm the social context within which the study takes place, and
they tailor to complexity (2002). It is understood that whichever method is used in research
provides only one angle of the subject, but to use multiple methods would provide a more
holistic view of the phenomena (Butler, 2002; Patrick and Middleton, 2002). Observational
research has the advantage of revealing student’s actions, rather than their own beliefs and
recollections, which is beneficial when looking for behaviors; however, observation is unable to
get insight into students’ thoughts, metacognition, and perspectives; thus, interviews and
observations done in tandem make a dynamic duo (Patrick & Middleton, 2002; Butler, 2002).
Methods
Participants
The action research here focused on self-regulated behavior during the portion of the day
devoted to writing only. Participants were the students of a special needs inclusion kindergarten
class. The research is limited to students who were already able to write sentences. Those
students who were still working on letter identification and fine motor functions like handwriting
and drawing pictures were not included in the study since these students have differentiated work
that does not involve the writing journals the rest of the class uses. This study focused on five
student writers who are able to draw pictures, label them, and write at least one sentence. The
students consisted of four boys, one girl, and four of these participants are special needs students
with SDD. The amount of time students are given for independent journal writing was 25
minutes with a 3 minute break in the middle to get up and walk freely sharing their writing with
peers. During this time, the teacher did guided writing with a small group of students or one-on-
one conferences. The teacher cannot meet with every student every day during writing, which
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 12
makes self-regulated learning all the more important. There were two paraprofessionals in the
room to assist the students during writing when needed.
Procedures
The methodology used for this action research design was a qualitative case study. The
qualitative data included three qualitative means of collecting data: student self-reports, teacher
observation reports, and conference notes (see Appendices A, D and E). Data was collected on
students before implementation of the visual reminder self-monitoring strategy in order to have
baseline data to compare with the data after strategy implementation. Student writing samples
were also collected and analyzed alongside the qualitative data.
Measures & Design
The qualitative measures included student self-reports (how they rate their own daily
writing), teacher observation notes, conference notes, and writing samples. The student rubrics
include a rating of sunny, cloudy, or rainy. The data was collected with the “Student Self-Report
Goal Chart” (see Appendix A) and the corresponding “Teacher Observation Report Data Sheet”
(see Appendix D). The purpose of a teacher observation data sheet was to show whether there
are variances in student/teacher reports of behavior. This may show that teachers observe a
behavior and mark it while students are unaware of their own behavior and do not mark it. Since
the participants are so young, the teacher observation will also act as a model for students
learning to keep track of their own self-monitoring. There was no control group; instead, the data
collected during the implementation of the SRL strategy was examined alongside teacher
observation data taken the week prior to implementing the “Student Self-Report Goal Chart” in
order have a baseline and to track whether the use of the data sheets showed improved behavior
from when students did not use these self-monitoring sheets.
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 13
Before collecting data, students first selected a goal from the “Student Goal Picture
Cards” (see Appendix B). The goals that the students could choose include: (1) To work for all of
writing time; (2) To stay in my seat for all of writing time; (3) To work on writing without
talking; (4) To use proper capitalization; (5) To write three sentences; and (6) To use proper
conventions (spacing and punctuation). Note that the first three goals are behavioral, and the last
three goals are academic. One of the most important parts of self-regulated learning is that the
individual has a goal in mind. Each student’s goal may be different. The students selected a
picture card that stated in words what his/her goal was. The goal card also had a visual picture
that corresponded to the behavior. Once student goals were selected, students also chose a
reward to receive for each day the goal was met. The rewards offered included: (1) 5 Skittles,
(2) Play with toys for 5 minutes, (3) 5 minutes computer time, or (4) 5 minutes in class library
(see Appendix C).
After selecting a goal, the students then received the “Student Self-Report Goal Chart” as
a visual reminder on the table during writing which had both the student’s individual goal and
the reward. Students were taught how to use these sheets and mark them. For the behavior goals,
the student would daily mark tallies for anytime the behavior goal is not met during writing. For
example, if a student’s goal is to stay in his seat during writing, but he gets up two times, then he
must mark two tallies for that day. Students can still receive rewards, but the amount offered
decreases. If a student had 0 tallies, the student earned the entire reward, however, for each tally
the student had, s/he lost one portion of the reward (one less skittle, one less minute on computer,
one less minute with toys, one less minute in library). Likewise, the academic goals, though
scored differently, had the same rewards. For academic goals, students rated themselves on a
familiar rubric based on pictures, rating whether their achievement of the goal that day was
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 14
rainy, cloudy, or sunny. Rainy means there was no evidence of the student attempting the goal.
Cloudy means the student showed progress toward the goal. Sunny suggests the student achieved
the goal that day. For this scale, there was a corresponding amount of rewards. For sunny,
students receive all 5 minutes or skittles (depending on the reward they chose). For cloudy,
students received a partial amount (3 minutes or 3 skittles). For rainy, students will receive no
reward.
The teacher collected baseline data for one week prior to implementing the strategy.
Then, the strategy was implemented for four weeks, during which the students self-reported on
their own goal using their personal rubrics. The teacher met weekly with individual students for
a student-teacher conference. During the student-teacher conference, the teacher discussed the
student’s goal and offered the student a chance to decide if s/he needed to keep the current goal
or change it. These conferences were documented through the “Teacher-Student Conference
Prompts” sheet (see Appendix E). The purpose of this conference was to give the teacher a true
idea of how the student was thinking about his/her behaviors and goals during writing. The
research data was concluded with a “post” week, during which students no longer received a
reward, and had the option of keeping or discarding their personal goal sheets.
Data Analysis
Data were collected through teacher notes and observations, student rubric self-reports,
writing samples, and weekly writing conferences. Data will be examined first in light of student
perspectives of the goal chart, then student achievements with the goal chart, followed by a
comparison teacher scoring and student self-scoring. Last, each of the five students will be
examined separately, focusing on: (1) strengths and weaknesses in writing before and during the
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 15
goal chart implementation, (2) goal achievement with chart implementation, (3) factors
influencing goal achievement, and (4) student perspectives of goal chart.
Student Perspectives
The student’s visual goal chart was a small poster displaying the student’s goal visually
and in wording, as well as the student’s reward visually (See Appendix A, B, and C). Students
also had a visual rubric for self-scoring on this chart (i.e. a picture for rainy, cloudy, and sunny).
Overall, student opinion about the goal chart was positive. Students discussed in conferences
with the teacher if they liked the goal chart and why. All of the students on a weekly basis
commented that they liked having the goal chart. When discussing what they liked about the
chart, three of the five students commented during conferences that they liked the chart because:
“it’s helpful,” or “it helps me to remember what to do.” Three of the five students also
mentioned specifically that they liked the chart because of the reward. One student even said he
likes the chart because he wants to get “sunny,” which is a specific reference to the visual rubric
on the chart. Overall, all five students expressed positive feelings towards the chart. Ultimately,
this positive perspective of the chart seemed to translate to a positive disposition towards writing.
Student Achievements
Overall, the SRL goal chart boosted student motivation and achievement in writing for
four students. It also acted as a visual reminder for self-regulation, keeping students’ thoughts on
their learning process. All students improved during the course of the SRL strategy when
comparing their writing from before implementation (pre) and their writing after the
implementation of the strategy was complete (post; see Appendix F). Three students (C, Y, and
J) showed peak performance within 2-4 weeks of using the goal chart. Student T showed peak
performance after finishing with the goal chart (and no longer using it or receiving rewards).
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 16
Student S also improved by 2 points his first week, but his post score only increased by 1 point.
For the three students who peeked during the goal strategy, but dropped a few points after, their
post scores were still higher than their pre scores. Student C’s post score was 4 points higher than
her pre score; Student Y’s post score was 3 points higher than his pre; and Student J showed a 6
point increase in his post. All students improved from beginning to end.
Table 1
Student Achievement
Total Rainy Total Cloudy Total SunnyT 0 5 9C 0 6 10Y 0 3 10S 2 11 2J 3 5 6
*Rainy = Did Not Meet Goal Cloudy = Progressing Sunny = Met Goal
Student and Teacher Scoring
Students were excited to use the self-scoring rubric which had a visual of a sun, cloud,
and rain. Students would use this rubric at the end of writing to “grade” their work by discussing
their work with the teacher. Students tended to fairly rate themselves, with only two instances
where a student said “sunny” even when the goal was not entirely met and needed teacher
prompting to fix it. Table 1 outlines student achievement by showing the number of rainy,
cloudy, and sunny ratings each student got out of the 19 total days of classroom writing. Three
students (T, C, and Y) had not a single rainy. The other two students (J and S) had only 2 or 3
rainy days. Three students (T, C, and Y) received more sunny ratings than cloudy and rainy
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 17
combined. Student S seemed to consistently receive cloudy (11 days); thus, he did not quite meet
his goals fully except for 2 days.
Factors Influencing Achievement
During the course of data collection, there were three potential factors that were
considered as possible contributors to student achievement, or lack of achievement: (1) student
understanding of goal, (2) days of writing missed, and (3) use of rewards. Student understanding
of personal goals is an important aspect in goal achievement. In most cases, students showed
their understanding of their goals by stating them independently during conferences with the
teacher. However, one student showed a consistent lack of understanding of his writing goals
(Student S; See Table 2.1).
Table 2.1
Factors Influencing Achievement: Student Understanding of Goal
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4
T 3 3 3 3
C 2 3 3 3
Y 3 3 1* _**
S 2 1 1 1
J 3 3 3 3
1 – Does Not Understand 2 – Partly Understands 3 – Clearly Understands
*Student did not remember his goal since he missed the previous Friday and forgot over the
weekend.
**Student was out sick for almost a week and we never had our final conference.
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 18
Another potential impact on student writing achievement could have been attendance, or even
interruptions in daily classroom routines. Some students were absent for numerous days due to
illness, missed writing due to being pulled out of class, or the class may have been participating
in a school-wide event, such as the “100th Day of School” celebration. These various
interruptions may have impacted the student’s achievement of his/her goal. See Table 2.2 for the
number of days students were present for writing, and Table 2.3 to see the number of days
writing was missed.
Table 2.2
Factors Influencing Achievement: Days Present During Writing
Week 1* Week 2 Week 3 Week 4
T 3* 3 4 3
C 3* 5 4 4
Y 3* 3 4 3
S 3* 4 4 4
J 3* 4 3 4
*Week 1 there was no school on Monday due to MLK Jr. Holiday. Thursday that week was the
100th day of school, causing variations to writing time. Thus, no data was collected on this day.
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 19
Table 2.3 Factors Influencing Achievement: Total Number of Days Missed
Number Of Days Missed
T 5
C 3
Y 6
S 4
J 5
One final factor that might have influenced student achievement for the better could be
the use of external rewards. Students discussed in conferences their feelings towards the goal
chart, and on many occasions, students referenced the rewards as being a reason why they liked
it.
Data Analysis by Student
Student T. During the week prior to implementation of the SRL strategy, student T was
observed with challenges that included both behavioral (talking out and being off task) as well as
academic struggles (spacing, punctuation, capitalization, and limited to one sentence). Student
T’s goals were: write 3 sentences (week 1), capitalization (week 2), and work for all of writing
(week 3 and 4). Even when T’s goals were academic, he showed improvements in behavior as
well. Throughout the course of the 4 weeks, T went from writing only one sentence with
mechanical errors to writing 2-3 sentences with fewer errors in punctuation, spacing, and
capitalization. When his weekly writing samples were scored on a scale of 1-15 based on 1, 2, or
3 points for each of 5 writing components (capitalization, punctuation, spacing, 3 sentences, and
behavior), he improved from a baseline of 7 to 14. He showed improvements in all five areas.
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 20
His absolute best writing was the week after rewards ceased (during which time the student still
wanted to hold on to his goal chart).
Student C. During the week prior to implementation of the SRL strategy, student C’s
observed challenges included both behavioral (talking out, getting up and not working the entire
time) as well as academic struggles (inconsistent spacing, punctuation, capitalization, and limited
to one sentence). Student C’s goals were: spacing/punctuation (weeks 1 and 4) as well as write 3
sentences (weeks 2 and 3). Student C’s behavior improved even when her goal was strictly
academic. Throughout the course of the 4 weeks, C went from writing only one sentence with
mechanical errors to writing 2-3 sentences with fewer errors in punctuation and spacing. Her
capitalization never improved, but this was also never one of her self-chosen goals. When her
weekly writing samples were scored on a scale of 1-15 based on a point system of 1(limited),
2(progressing), or 3(proficient) points for each of the 5 writing components (capitalization,
punctuation, spacing, 3 sentences, and behavior), she improved from a baseline of 7 to her
highest score of 13 (during weeks 2-4). She showed improvements in four of the five areas (all
but capitalization). Her post score (after the rewards were no longer implemented) dropped to 11.
This may suggest that this student, unlike the last, still needs some external motivation to
encourage her self-regulation.
Student Y. The week before the strategy was implemented, Student Y was observed
having behavioral difficulties, such as getting up frequently and wasting time during writing
(spending nearly 15 minutes just on his drawing). He also had difficulty with capitalization,
making all of his letters uppercase, spacing, and punctuation. He did write more than one
sentence, but he tended to write the same thing every day (i.e. “I love my mom I love my dad I
love my uncle”). This did not relate to a goal, so he was not marked down on this. However, he
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 21
was encouraged by the teacher to consider new topics, especially topics related to the objective
(informational writing). Student Y’s goals included : write 3 sentences (weeks 1-2),
capitalization (week 3), and spacing/punctuation (week 4). Y’s spaces and punctuation improved
over the 4 weeks, as did his behavior. Before the visual goal chart strategy, Y had a baseline
score of 8. His highest score was 13 in week 3 of the strategy, which dropped back down to 11
during the post week. Y improved in four of the five areas; for 3 sentences, Y stayed the same
until week 4 and post when he showed a decline. Even though Y did not have a behavior goal,
his behavior improved through the duration of the goal chart implementation, (though, it
decreased slightly in the post week, when rewards were no longer offered). It is important to note
that this student specifically mentioned the rewards being a major reason that the goal chart
helped his writing. Like student C, this student also may benefit from a longer period of time
with external rewards to motivate his self-regulation and goal keeping.
Student S. Student S’s pre observation writing showed evidence of difficulty in
academic areas only. S struggled with writing a clear, meaningful sentence, capitalization,
punctuation, and spacing. No concerning behaviors were observed. This student’s goals
included: spacing/punctuation (week 1) and capitalization (weeks 2-4). It is important to note
that, based on teacher-student conferences, this student did not have a clear understanding of his
goal during weeks 2-4. This may have caused him a lot of difficulty with capitalization. He
showed only improvements during week one when he focused on spacing and punctuation (both
of which improved for that week). These skills remained inconsistent once he changed his goal
to something else. He did not show much improvement overall, with a baseline score of 9, a high
score of 11 (in week 1), and then a post score of only 10. It seemed that for this student, the goal
chart did not promote academic achievement. This is likely due to his lack of understanding of
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 22
the goal. The teacher noted that this student’s developmental delay (SDD) also may have
affected his writing more than the other SDD students.
Student J. Student J’s pre-observation in writing suggested that his difficulties were both
behavioral and academic. J especially struggled with staying on task (playing with materials), not
working for most of writing, calling out, getting up, and overall being easily distracted. J’s
academic challenge was primarily writing more than one sentence, with some inconsistencies in
mechanics. J’s goals were: write 3 sentences (weeks 1-2) and spacing/punctuation (weeks 3-4).
He began with a baseline score of 8, achieved a perfect score of 15 during weeks 3 and 4, only
dropping to 14 during the post. This student’s did not only show academic gains with his
academic goals, but he also seemed to improve his behaviors (even though he never had any
behavior specific goals). Even though he still needed some redirection and prompting to get to
work from the teacher, his goal chart seemed to also act as a reminder. While using the chart,
Student J did not get so easily distracted once he began working. Occasionally the teacher noted
that this student would prop up his own chart in front of him against the pencil caddy so that it
was in his direct line of sight. The visual reminder seemed to be helpful for this student.
Furthermore, based on his high post-score, this student may be able to maintain the goal setting
practice without the need for external rewards and still be successful.
Discussion
The improvements seen in four of the five students suggest that the use of a visual goal
chart with a reward can begin to promote self-regulated learning in writing. It is hard to separate
whether the visual stimuli or the rewards were most effective, or to what degree they worked
together. Visual stimuli is so important not only for special needs students, but younger students
in general. Elena Bodrova and Deborah Leong highly recommend offering children “visual and
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 23
tangible reminders about self-regulation,” (Developing Self-Regulation in Kindergarten, 2008).
Kindergarten students especially need the visual stimuli for self-regulation and writing just as
they do in other subject areas, such as pictures in reading and hands-on materials in counting or
math (Bodrova & Leong, 2008). Nevertheless, it is possible that the visual chart was not the
only reason for student success. Some students may rely more heavily on rewards than others, as
was witnessed with Students C, Y, and possibly J. Rewards can definitely encourage success, but
ideally students will ultimately be weaned off of the external rewards.
Not only did this study show improvements in various writing skills and behaviors, but
the strategy implemented also showed a positive response across the board. Writing can be a
daunting task, especially in kindergarten. However, if a strategy like this one can excite students
and promote positive dispositions towards writing, this may in turn affect student achievement as
well.
One important trend noticed in this study that was not anticipated was the improvement
of behavior when an academic goal was in place. Even though most of the students did not select
behavior goals, their maladaptive behaviors decreased as they took on specific academic goals.
This suggests that when students have specific academic goals and are motivated by them, their
learning behaviors can also improve. This is relevant to educators everywhere with students who
struggle to be on task, stay focused, and stay in their work area.
Some limitations in this research include the small participant sample, the limited amount
of time, and the interruptions during the process. Since this environment was not controlled,
there were many possible factors that may have influenced achievement beyond just the goal
charts. The sample in this case was limited to five kindergarten students. Future research should
consider looking at a large sample of students across grade levels. It would be beneficial to find
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 24
out the importance of rewards to self-regulation at different developmental stages. It is
interesting that even though all students were the same age cohort in this study, some tended to
rely more heavily on rewards than others. Last, future research could follow the same students in
writing over a longer period of time to find whether the ceasing of rewards causes a steady
decrease in achievement, or if some students gain the skills and maintain them for an extended
time without tapering off, even without the rewards.
Future research in the area of self-regulated learning is still needed at all levels of
development. It is especially important to continue pursuing the question not of whether children
can learn to self-regulate, but instead what strategies can teachers implement to develop student
self-regulation? Until more research is done in this area, it is important that classroom teachers
remember that students can become more motivated and self-aware of their learning if they
practice the self-regulated learning cyclical process of setting goals, monitoring those goals,
evaluating them, and then making changes. Whether this involves visual aids, rewards, or some
other strategy, it is important educators begin investing in building these skills as early as
possible.
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 25
Works Cited
Allan, N., Hume, L., Allan, D., Farrington, A., & Lonigan, C. (2014). Relations between
inhibitory control and the development of academic skills in preschool and kindergarten:
A meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology, 50(10), 2368-2379.
Bodrova, E. & Leong, D. (March, 2008). Developing self-regulation in kindergarten: can we
keep all the crickets in the basket? Young Children on the Web. Retrieved from:
https://www.naeyc.org/files/yc/file/200803/BTJ_Primary_Interest.pdf
Butler, D. (2002). Qualitative approaches to investigating SRL. Educational Psychologist, 37(1),
59-63.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Center for Health Statistics (2014, May 14).
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/adhd.htm
Cheng, E. C. K. (2011). The role of self-regulated learning in enhancing learning performance.
The International Journal of Research and Review, 6(1), 1-16.
Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational
Psychology Review, 24, 205-249.
Drake, K, Belsky, J, & Fearon, R. M. P. (2014). From Early Attachment to Engagement with
Learning in School: The role of self-regulation and persistence. Developmental
Psychology, 50(5), 1350-1361.
Everson, H. (n.d.) Learning and the adolescent mind: Barry Zimmerman. Retrieved from:
http://learningandtheadolescentmind.org/people_04.html
Gawlrilow, C., Morgenroth, K., Schultz, R., Oettingen, G., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2013). Mental
contrasting with implementation intentions enhances self-regulation of goal pursuit in
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 26
schoolchildren at risk for ADHD. Motivation & Emotion, 37(1), 134-145, doi:
10.1007/s11031-012-9288-3
Glasney, S. & Connor, C. (2010). The association between self-regulation and ADHD in first
grade classrooms. Retrieved from
https://www.sree.org/conferences/2010/program/abstracts/229.pdf
Kiss, M., Fechete, G., Pop, M., & Susa, G. (2014). Early childhood self-regulation in context:
parental and familial environmental influences. Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An
Interdisciplinary Journal, 18 (1), 55-85.
Leidinger, M. & Perels, F. (2012). Training SRL in the classroom: development and evaluation
of learning materials to train SRL during regular mathematics at primary school.
Education Research International, doi: 10.1155/2012/735790
Limpo, T. & Alves, R. (2013). Modeling writing development: contribution of transcription and
self-regulation to Portuguese students’ text generation quality. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 105(2), 401-413.
Mega, C., Ronconi, L., & De Beni, R. (2014). What makes a good student? How emotions, self-
regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 121-131.
Patrick, H. & Middleton, M. (2002). Turning the kaleidoscope: what we see when SRL is viewed
with qualitative lens. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 27-39.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Curby, T. W., Grimm, K. J., Nathanson, L. & Brock, L. L. (2009). The
contribution of children’s self-regulation and classroom quality to children’s
adaptive behaviors in the kindergarten classroom. Developmental Psychology,
45(4), 958-972.
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 27
Rosen, J., Glennie, E., Dalton, B., Lennon, J., & Bozick, R. (2010). Chapter 4: Self-regulated
learning. Noncognitive Skills in the Classroom: New Perspectives on Educational
Research. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International.
Schunk, D. H. & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.) (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic
achievement: theoretical perspectives (2nd ed.). Retrieved from
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.kennesaw.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook/
bmxlYmtfXzYxMDAxX19BTg2?sid=8e88f130-2db3-4b9c-972d-
524c9b9bd453@sessionmgr4005&vid=31&format=EB&rid=6
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory competence.
Educational Psychologist, 32, 195-208.
Villavicencio, F. T., & Bernardo, A. I. (2013). Positive academic emotions moderate the
relationship between self-regulation and academic achievement. British Journal
of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 329-340.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Risemberg, R. (1997) Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social cognitive
perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 73-101. doi:
10.1006/ceps.1997.0919
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 28
Appendix A
Student Self-Report Goal Chart: Academic Goal
Student Self-Report Goal Chart: Behavior Goal
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 29
Appendix B
Student Goal Picture Cards: Academic Goals
Student Goal Picture Cards: Behavior Goal
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 30
Appendix C
Student Reward Picture Cards
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 31
Appendix D
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 32
Appendix E
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 33
Appendix F
Weekly Achievement by Student
Note: Shaded area indicates best weekly performance.
Student T
3 Sentences
Punctuation Spaces Capitalization Behavior Total Score
Pre 2 1 1 2 1 7
Week 1 2 2 2 2 2 10
Week 2 3 2 2 3 3 13
Week 3 2 2 2 2 3 11
Week 4 3 2 2 3 3 13
Post 3 3 2 3 3 14
Student C
3 Sentences
Punctuation Spaces Capitalization Behavior Total Score
Pre 1 2 2 1 1 7
Week 1 3 2 3 1 3 12
Week 2 3 3 3 1 3 13
Week 3 3 3 3 1 3 13
Week 4 3 3 3 1 3 13
Post 3 3 2 1 2 11
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 34
Student Y
3 Sentences
Punctuation Spaces Capitalization Behavior Total Score
Pre 3 2 1 1 1 8
Week 1 3 2 1 1 2 9
Week 2 3 2 1 1 3 10
Week 3 3 3 2 2 3 13
Week 4 2 3 2 2 3 12
Post 2 2 3 2 2 11
Student S
3 Sentences
Punctuation Spaces Capitalization Behavior Total Score
Pre 2 2 1 1 3 9
Week 1 2 2 2 2 3 11
Week 2 2 1 1 2 3 9
Week 3 2 1 1 1 3 8
Week 4 2 2 1 1 3 9
Post 2 1 2 2 3 10
Student J
DEVELOPING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING SKILLS 35
3 Sentences
Punctuation Spaces Capitalization Behavior Total Score
Pre 1 2 2 2 1 8
Week 1 2 2 3 3 2 12
Week 2 2 3 3 3 2 13
Week 3 3 3 3 3 3 15
Week 4 3 3 3 3 3 15
Post 2 3 3 3 3 14