In the second period of solo phase, I will describe nine (three from each article) Self-regulated Learning (SRL) concepts, two ICE-notes, and one reflection in my blog based on the lecture and three reading materials on motivational sources for SRL. The reading materials are listed in the confluence under the headings of the same topic. After attending the class lecture and reading the materials carefully, I will describe three main concepts of each material briefly. Moreover, I will write two ICE-notes from the related lecture and reading materials, which will include- what key ideas and thoughts are important to me which I learnt from the materials?, which ideas or concepts are related to my previous knowledge?, and how these skills and knowledge can be used in real life? At the end of this task, I will reflect my performance based on my planning versus achievement in the assignment. I will reflect how successful I was, what sort of challenges I faced, how I managed those challenges, and what could improve my learning assignment. Based on the previous reflections, I will either keep the same planning, or change or modify some planning for better outcome in the next assignment. This assignment is related to the motivational sources for SRL.
I have three specific goals in the second working period-
– to know what kind of motivational challenges students experience during their solo and collaborative tasks?
– to learn different types of motivational strategies learners use during their learning period.
– to know in details how students’ self-motivational beliefs can influence their self-regulation processes?
I think, I am hard-working, self-motivated, and always ambitious to do better in my study as well as in my job. Therefore, I am confident that I will achieve the goals I have set for the second working period, and will complete the task according to my plan.
1. Emotion control in collaborative learning situations – do students regulate emotions evoked from social challenges?
A. Socio-emotional challenges in collaborative learning
Motivations and emotions have been considered as the most necessary pre-requisites in a collaborative learning situation, where learners have to work together to attain a common goal, or to build shared understanding. In an ideal collaborative learning situation, the collaboration process creates positive emotions and supports motivation, and students interact and communicate among the members more actively to reach their common goal. However, in some cases, conflict can take place for different characteristics, goals and demands among the students, which can negatively affect students’ emotions and motivation. Students’ emotions are closely related to personal, social and environmental aspect of learning. They face more socio-emotional challenges in collaborative learning situation than in traditional learning. These challenges affect learners’ motivation and can hinder the involvement and interaction at different phases of collaboration. One of the most important criteria of collaborative learning is shared or common goal of the group members. In some cases, members of a group may have different goals and aims for the same task, which may create conflicts among the group members. Sometimes, personal interest or communication pattern can also act as obstacle, for example, there are five members in a group working together to accomplish an academic task, two of them have aims of leadership in the group, this kind of situation can make emotional challenges not only for those two members but for all of the members of the group.
B. Emotion regulation in collaborative learning
Regulation of emotions and motivation is critical for successful collaboration. Emotion regulation is learners’ ability to monitor, evaluate, and change the occurrence, intensity, or duration of a particular emotional experience. It is an active strategy for the regulation of motivation learners need to accomplish a task (Wolters, 2003). In collaborative environment, students’ have to work towards a common objective; they need to define their aim and working process towards a shared goal, and share their responsibilities among the group members. Members in a group have to participate in the group’s common ground and emotional stability, they have to negotiate, compromise, consider, explain, and listen to other members’ opinions. Individual members have to regulate their cognition, motivation and emotions together in order to ensure the participation of all members in all phases of the collaborative task. If any member fails to control the emotionally challenging situation, instead of focusing on the assigned task, he/she will be focused to cope up with the situation. Regulation of emotions and motivation at individual level may be insufficient; controlling emotional experiences are required at group level.
C. Adaptive Instrument for Regulation of Emotions (AIRE)
AIRE was designed to investigate what types of socio-emotional challenges students experience during their collaborative learning, how they interpret the challenges, and how they control or regulate these challenges. After each collaborative task, students were asked to complete a set of task-specific questions using AIRE. Before applying this instrument, students were instructed about the structure, and the procedure of completing it. There were four sections in this instrument; the first section identified students’ personal task specific goal, the second section identified situations experienced as socio-emotional challenges during collaborative learning from 14 possible scenarios, the third section focused on the regulation of emotions in specific situations identified in the second section, the fourth section included their goal attainment and reflection on the group work.
2. Regulation of Motivation: Evaluating an Underemphasized Aspect of Self-Regulated Learning.
A. Strategies for regulation of motivation
Students might use different types of strategies to regulate their motivations; some of those are as follows-
Self-reinforcement or punishment: Sometimes, students decide to reinforce or punish themselves for a specific short or long term goal, or completing a task. Suppose, a student may offer himself, “if I can complete all the assignments within next Friday, then I can go to movie in this weekend”. Or, a student can alert himself, “if I fail to solve the mathematics task, I could not go to play volleyball with my friends. Research revealed that students who offered themselves rewards did better than those who offered punishments for their failure, or who did not consequence themselves.
Goal-oriented self-talk: Students may talk with themselves about their goal for a specific academic task. Why they will spend time and efforts for this task? What is the reason for achieving this target? It may be good academic grade, doing better than others, showing own ability, or to meet own curiosity, gather knowledge, increase skill, and so on.
Interest enhancement: Students may use different strategies to increase their interest in accomplishing a repetitive or boring task. This type of strategy makes the task difficult, but enhances students’ motivation by making the task more enjoyable, challenging and interesting.
Environmental structuring: Students can also control the noisy learning environment by selecting a calm place for reading in a library, or classroom, requesting classmates to be quite. They may take a break, have a cup of coffee, and listen to music during the work, to increase their attention in and focused on the task.
Self-handicapping: For the regulation of motivation, students may intentionally or unintentionally make their learning situation more challenging or difficult to complete academic tasks. They create a situation, where they forced themselves to keep focused, more attentive, and dedicated to complete their academic tasks. There are evidences that a significant number of students, mostly the college students use this strategy. However, motivational benefits of using this strategy are somewhat equivocal.
B. Metacognition Vs regulation of motivation
Metacognition is often described as a combination of atleast two theoretical concepts including knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition. Knowledge about cognition includes students’ understanding and information regarding the thinking and learning process. Regulation of cognition includes students’ planning of completing the task successfully, selecting the cognition strategy for the task, monitoring the effectiveness of the selected strategy, and if the selected strategy does not work effectively then modifying or changing it.
The regulation of motivation and the regulation of cognition are conceptually similar, but the purpose, object or target of these two regulatory processes is different.
Regulating cognition is a process of monitoring and evaluating students’ cognitive strategies, or examining the learning processes-
– how students are planning, executing, understanding, improving their tasks?
– how successful or effective are the strategies they are using?
– do the strategies need to be changed or modified? If yes, then student either change or modify their cognitive strategies.
On the other hand, regulating motivation is a process of enhancing students’ willingness to-
– Accomplish their academic tasks
– Give continuous efforts until the task end.
Using strategies for regulation of motivation does not necessarily influence how the students are accomplishing their tasks, instead why they will complete it, or how long they will continue it. A student may regulate his motivation, and may engage himself in the task, but he may not regulate his cognition strategy.
Although, regulation of motivation and regulation of cognition are conceptually different, both of these regulation processes are included in self-regulation. These two regulation processes are closely related with each other. For example, when a student regulates his motivation, and increases his willingness to complete the assigned task, he might engage himself in regulating his cognitive process.
C. Motivation Vs regulation of motivation
Motivation and the regulation of motivation are likely to have a complex and interdependent relation. Regulation of motivation is needed when students experience problem in their motivation, learning or performance. Sometimes, students may begin their task with high level of motivation, and complete the task with the same level of motivation. In this type of situation, student may not need any regulation activities for their motivation. However, students having positive level of motivation may experience motivational obstacle during completing the task, for example, the task may be complex, there may have emotional conflict, or contextual affect. This type of situation needs strategies to regulate motivation.
Students need some initial level of motivation, for engaging themselves in any kind of regulation. Regulation of motivation is also an action, and to perform this action, students must have minimal level of willingness to complete the task. The students who do not have any expectation or confidence to be successful, or to whom the task is not worthy anyway, or who do not have any reasons to complete the task, will not apply any strategy to activate their motivation.
The theoretical relation between motivation and regulation of motivation is reciprocal and curvilinear. It is reciprocal because when a student is motivated, he will engage himself in regulating his motivation, and when a student uses any strategies for regulating his motivation, it influences his motivation. It may curvilinear because this relation might be very strong in case of students with medium level of motivation, but weaker in case of students with very low or very high level of initial motivation.
3. Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning and performance. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance.
A. Self-efficacy and outcome beliefs in SRL
Two types of expectancies have been identified by the researchers, i.e., for self-efficacy and for outcomes. Students’ self-efficacy expectancies refer to the beliefs of their personal competencies regarding the execution and continuation of the task, whereas, outcome expectancies refer to their confidences about the result or feedback of the task. Task persistence, task choice, effective study activities (Zimmerman, 2011), skill acquisition, and academic achievement (Zimmerman, 1989) are positively related to the students’ self-efficacy perceptions.
Students with high level of self-efficacy use better cognitive and metacognitive strategies, spend more time to execute the task and give continuous efforts than the students with low-level of efficacy. Regardless of level of ability and skill, students who are in high efficacy monitor their study time more accurately, continue even when they face any challenge, choose best strategies (Bouffard-Bouchard, Parent and Larivee, 1991), complete more problems correctly, and solve more previous tasks (Collins, 1982) than the students in low efficacy.
Outcome expectancies are regarded as the second important element for students’ motivation. When students take part in a mathematical competition, those who expect to win the prize usually work hard, and give continuous effort to solve the problems. Although, outcome expectancies can be differentiated from self-efficacy theoretically, practically outcome expectancies are usually depend on strong efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997).
B. Interest and SRL
According to the contemporary researches (Hidi & Ainley, 2008), interest is a psychological predisposition to re-engage with particular classes of objects, activities, and ideas. Interests may be of different types. For example, situational interest is activity-specific form of motivation that does not usually transfer to the next context. A student, having interest in video gaming, may have little interest in reading something about video games. A second type of interest, called personal interest, is comparatively long-term tendency to choose and engage in any specific object, task, or idea.
These two types of interests have been categorized into four phases of progression leading to self-regulation. In the first phase, situational interest is triggered spontaneously, and in the second phase, situational interest is maintained by the environment. In the third phase, learners begin to seek repeated engagement with the task or activity, at this point in development of interest SRL becomes possible. In the fourth phase, a well-developed interest leads the learners to proactively seek out opportunities to engage in the task or activity. This phase is considered as highly supportive of self-regulated efforts to learn. Research showed that both situational and individual interests are positive precursors to SRL.
C. Cyclical view of motivation in SRL
A social cognitive perspective divided SRL into three phases; forethought, performance and self-reflection.
Forethought phase: In forethought phase, there are two major sets of elements of self-regulation; task analysis and self-motivation feelings/ beliefs. Task analysis includes two key aspects; goal setting and strategic planning. Self-regulated students set clear and specific short term goal, and set strategies for the completion of the tasks or execution of their plans, whereas poorly regulated students may not have any clear goal or strategies for the task. The initiation and continuation of goal setting and strategic planning also depend on the motivational feelings/beliefs of the students. Self-motivation beliefs include self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, task interest, and goal orientation. Self-efficacy and outcome expectancies not only influence the forethought phase but also the performance phase. Learners’ forethought phase motivation is influenced also by their interest or enjoyment in the task for its inherent properties, rather than its possible outcome. Goals orientation (learning goal and performance goal) also influence learners’ forethought phase motivation. Learning goal orientation increases one’s academic competences, whereas performance goal orientation seeks to avoid challenging learning experiences.
Performance phase: In this phase, SRL processes have been divided into two major classes; self-control strategies and self-observation. Highly self-regulated students can use strategies for self-control like task strategies, volition strategies, self-instruction, imagery, time management, environmental structuring, help seeking, interest enhancement, self-consequences for their learning, whereas poorly self-regulated learners are not strategic in approach to learning. The second major class of this phase of SRL process, i.e., self-observation includes metacognitive monitoring, and self-recording in which highly self-regulated learners engage.
Self-reflection phase: Self-judgment and self-reaction are two major classes of self-reflection phase. Self-judgment refers to self-evaluating student’s learning performance and attributing casual significance to the results. During the self-reflection phase two types of self-reflections can take place; self-satisfaction/affect, and adaptive/defensive. Students’ self-satisfaction can influence their motivation leading to continuous efforts in their task, or even can increase depression. Self-reaction involves adaptive or defensive interferences, which are conclusions about altering student’s approach during subsequent efforts to learn.
The reactions in the self-reflection phase influence students’ motivational beliefs which lead into forethought goal setting, and strategic planning regarding further efforts in their assigned tasks.
ICE NOTE 1
Socio-emotional challenges can hinder the learning process of an individual as well as of a group. For example, Jewel was a university student and was not solvent financially enough to bear his living and educational expenses. When his peers went to have coffee in a restaurant, he had to avoid them to save his money. After few days, he heard that, his father was sick, and his family was suffering for money to pay the bills of hospital. He badly needed a job, and was searching for a job during the whole day and could not attend his classes regularly. Most of the time, he was late for the classes, and he could not participate in the group works. He did not have expectation of having better grade, or learning something deeply. He just wanted to pass the courses quickly and get a certificate which could help him to get a job. Jewel’s financial crisis and his father’s sickness affected his emotions and motivation hardly. As a result, he had different goals than his peers in the group, which affected the collaboration among the group members.
ICE NOTE 2
Research showed that a significant number of college student use self-handicaping strategy for their regulation of motivation. For example, Munna is a high achiever student, but is not regular in his study. He usually attends his classes regularly, takes notes in the classes, but he does not complete his tasks and assignments until the last moment. Actually, after the university time, he plays cricket with his friends, and listens to music. He usually plans regularly that, I will start my study from tomorrow, but he cannot begin because of his involvements in other activities. He has high perceptions of self-efficacy and outcome beliefs. He knows that if he can work with full attention, he can complete the task quickly, and will achieve a good grade. When he counts he has only one month of his final examination, he starts to handicap himself. Then he tries to finish his all wishes like playing all of his favorite games and watching movies, and complete small non-academic tasks like repairing his bike, cleaning the room and clothes, organizing his books and notes on his reading table. He tries to close the doors of all of his non-academic activities, so that when he will start his study these activities cannot make any disturbance. Finally, he begins his study when his final examination is after seven days. At this point, he is very much self-regulated until the end of his examination.
In my first task, I mentioned some challenges I experienced during the completion of the task, which I did not face in my second solo task. Although the articles were long enough, it was easy to read and explore ideas from those texts. I think, the reproduction quality of the texts may have an effect on the time needed to retrieve information from the texts. According to my plan and goal I was successful in the second solo task also. I have explored the socio-economic challenges learners experience during their collaborative tasks, learnt different types of motivational strategies students use, and the influence of students’ self-motivational beliefs in their SRL processes. Comparing to the first period, I was more successful in time management in this period. In the previous task, I read the article and wrote the assignment at the same time, which I found difficult to think about different concepts deeply. In this phase, firstly, I read one article thoroughly and highlighted the keywords for further reading, then during the second time reading, I started taking notes on the article and wrote three concepts from that article. This technique helped me to understand the key concepts deeply and took less time to write down the key concepts. For completing my next two assignments, I will apply the same tactic.
Järvenoja, H., & Järvelä, S. (2009). Emotion control in collaborative learning situations – do students regulate emotions evoked from social challenges? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 463-481.
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of Motivation: Evaluating an Underemphasized Aspect of Self-Regulated Learning. Educational Psychologist, 38 (4), pp. 189-205.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning and performance. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 49–64). New York: Routledge.