Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Promoting preservice teachers’ dual self-regulation roles as learners and as teachers: effects of generic vs. specific prompts

  • Published:
Metacognition and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Researchers have recently suggested that teachers must undertake important dual self- regulation roles if they want to become effective at improving their students’ self-regulation. First, teachers need to become proficient at self-regulated learning (SRL) themselves, and then teachers need to learn explicitly how to proactively teach SRL – termed self-regulating teaching (SRT). Considering that both roles are difficult to attain by novice teachers, supports (prompts) are essential. We examined an intervention comparing the usefulness of two prompting conditions – generic versus specific – for developing both SRL (as learners) and SRT (as teachers) among 90 preservice science teachers engaging in explicit self-regulation instruction and reflective group discussion about learning/teaching experiences (observed learning clips, in-action teaching). We compared the two group conditions by using two SRL assessments and two SRT assessments. Mixed methods indicated that, as expected, the specific-prompts condition outperformed the generic-prompts condition on self-awareness of own SRL, skills for accurately noticing authentic videotaped students’ SRL, and explicit usage of SRT during actual teaching experiences. As expected, no differences emerged between generic and specific prompts in applying SRT to a novel lesson-design task (far-transfer measure). These findings, supported by two case studies’ sequential pattern analysis, offered an important contribution to theoretical and practical understanding of novice teachers’ self-regulation prompting approaches, practice modes, and multidimensional assessments of teachers’ professional development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aleven, V., Pinkwart, N., Ashley, K., & Lynch, C. (2006). Supporting self-explanation of argument transcripts: Specific vs. generic prompts. Retrieved from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~hypoform/ITS06_illdefinedworkshop_AlevenEtAl.pdf .

  • Azevedo, R. (2014). Issues in dealing with sequential and temporal characteristics of self- and socially-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 9, 217–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2010). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods (pp. 93–114). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bembenutty, H. (2013). The triumph of homework completion through learning academy of self-regulation. In H. Bembenutty, T. J. Cleary, & A. Kitsantas (Eds.), Applications of self-regulated learning across diverse disciplines (pp. 153–197). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated learning: where we are today. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 445–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bol, L., Hacker, D. J., Walck, C., & Nunnery, J. (2012). The effect of individual or group guidelines on the calibration accuracy and achievement of high school biology students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 280–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolhuis, S. (2003). Towards process-oriented teaching for self directed lifelong learning: a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 13, 327–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. L., Novak Lauscher, H. J., Jarvis-Selinger, S., & Beckingham, B. (2004). Collaboration and self-regulation in teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 435–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buzza, D., & Allinotte, T. (2013). Pre-service teachers’ self-regulated learning and their developing concepts of SRL. Brock Education, 23(1), 58–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, C. A., & Trivedi, P. K. (2013). Regression analysis of count data (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Caspi, A., Gorsky, P., & Privman, M. (2005). Viewing comprehension: students’ learning preferences and strategies when studying from video. Instructional Science, 33, 31–47. doi:10.1007/s11251-004-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(5), 537–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleary, T. J., Callan, G., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2012). Assessing self-regulation as a cyclical, context-specific phenomenon: overview and analysis of SRL microanalytic protocols. Education Research International. doi:10.1155/2012/428639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S., Chi, M. T. H., & VanLehn, K. (2009). Improving classroom learning by collaboratively observing human tutoring videos while problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 779–789. doi:10.1037/a0016601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: generic and directed prompts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 91–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A. (2006). Characterizing productive reflection among preservice elementary teachers: seeing what matters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(3), 281–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration: prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 819–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dembo, M. H. (2001). Learning to teach is not enough: future teachers also need to learn how to learn. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(4), 23–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, S. C., Dembo, M. H., & Hocevar, D. (2007). Do teachers’ own learning behaviors influence their classroom goal orientation and control ideology? Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2010). The measurement of learners’ self-regulated cognitive and metacognitive processes while using computer-based learning environments [Special issue]. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A., Costa, L.-J., & Dellinger, K. (2011). Analysis of self-regulated learning processing using statistical models for count data. Metacognition and Learning, 6, 275–301. doi:10.1007/s11409-011-9078-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. A. C., & Yates, G. (2014). Visible learning and the science of how we learn. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ifenthaler, D. (2012). Determining the effectiveness of prompts for self-regulated learning in problem-solving scenarios. Educational Technology and Society, 15(1), 38–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, M. J., & Archodidou, A. (2000). The design of hypermedia tools for learning: fostering conceptual change and transfer of complex scientific knowledge. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 145e199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, D. F., Ge, X., Xie, K., & Chen, C. H. (2008). Prompting in web-based environments: supporting self-monitoring and problem solving skills in college students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(2), 115–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., Otto, B., Dignath-van Ewijk, C., Buttner, G., & Klieme, E. (2010). Promotion of self-regulated learning in classrooms: investigating frequency, quality, and consequences for student performance. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 157–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koedinger, K. R., & Aleven, V. (2007). Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 239–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 21, 94–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohen, Z., & Kramarski, B. (2012). Developing self-regulation by using reflective support in a video-digital microteaching environment. Journal for Education Research International. doi:10.1155/2012/105246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohen, Z., & Kramarski, B. (2016). Promoting mathematics teachers’ pedagogical metacognition: A theoretical-practical model and case study. In J. Dori, Z. Mevarech, & D. Baker (Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education. Springer: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B. (2008). Promoting teachers’ algebraic reasoning and self-regulation with metacognitive guidance. Metacognition and Learning, 3(2), 83–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B. (2016). Teachers as agents in promoting students’ SRL and performance: Applications for teachers’ dual-role training program. In J. Greene & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed.).

  • Kramarski, B., & Kohen, Z. (2015). Promoting the dual roles of teachers as self-regulated learners and self-regulated teachers. Paper presented at the AERA Conference, Chicago, USA.

  • Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2009). Investigating pre-service teachers’ professional growth in self-regulated learning environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2010). Preparing preservice teachers for self-regulated learning in the context of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 20, 434–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B., & Revach, T. (2009). The challenge of self-regulated learning in mathematics teachers’ professional training. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(3), 379–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B., Desoete, A., Bannert, M., Narciss, S., & Perry, N. (2013a). New perspectives on integrating self-regulated learning at school [Special issue]. Education Research International, 498214, 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B., Weiss, I., & Sharon, S. (2013b). Generic versus context-specific prompts for supporting self-regulation in mathematical problem solving among students with low or high prior knowledge. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 12(2), 197–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krauskopf, K., Zahn, C., & Hesse, F. W. (2012). Leveraging the affordances of YouTube: the role of pedagogical knowledge and mental models of technology functions for lesson planning with technology. Computers & Education, 58, 1194–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (2008). Assessing middle school students’ content knowledge and reasoning through written scientific explanations. In J. Coffey, R. Douglas, & C. Stearns (Eds.), Assessing science learning: Perspectives from research and practice (pp. 101–116). Arlington: National Science Teachers Association Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1997). IMPROVE: a multidimensional method for teaching mathematics in heterogeneous classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 34(2), 365–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (2014). Critical maths for innovative societies: The role of metacognitive pedagogies. Paris: OECD. doi:10.1787/9789264223561-en.

  • Michalsky, T., & Kramarski, B. (2015). Prompting reflections for integrating self-regulation into teacher technology education. Teachers College Record, 117(5), 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molenaar, I., & Järvelä, S. (2014). Sequential and temporal characteristics of self and socially regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 9(2), 75–85. doi:10.1007/s11409-014-9114-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muldner, K., Lam, R., & Chi, M. T. H. (2013). Learning from observing an expert’s demonstration, explanations and dialogues. In J. J. Staszewski (Ed.), Expertise and skill acquisition: The impact of William G. Chase (pp. 1–28). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nückles, M., Hübner, S., & Renkl, A. (2009). Enhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols. Learning and Instruction, 19(3), 259–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (2003). The role of self-regulated learning in contextual teaching: Principles for teacher preparation [Commissioned Paper]. Preparing teachers to use contextual teaching and learning strategies to improve student success in and beyond school project. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

  • Peeters, E., Backer, F. D., Reina, V. R., Kindekens, A., & Buffel, T. (2013). The role of teachers’ self-regulatory capacities in the implementation of self-regulated learning practices. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(21), 1963–1970. Retrieved from http://www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia .

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, N. E., Hutchinson, L., & Thauberger, C. (2008). Talking about teaching self-regulated learning: scaffolding student teachers’ development and use of practices that promote self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 97–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. 451–502). San Diego: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randi, J. (2004). Teachers as self-regulated learners. Teachers College Record, 106, 1825–1853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randi, J., & Corno, L. (2000). Teacher innovations in self-regulated learning. In P. Pintrich, M. Boekaerts, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 651–685). Orlando: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saldana, J. (2015). Thinking quality: Methods of mind. Los Angeles: Arizona University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer: rethinking mechanism of a neglected phenomenon. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 113–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santagata, R., & Guarino, J. (2011). Using video to teach future teachers to learn from teaching. ZDM International Journal of Mathematics Education, 43(1), 133–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2010). How we think: A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its education applications. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting generic prompts metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26, 113–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidel, T., Blomberg, G., & Renkl, A. (2013). Instructional strategies for using video in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 56–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spruce, R., & Bol, L. (2014). Teacher belief, knowledge, and practice of self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 10(2), 245–277. doi:10.1007/s11409-014-9124-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, J. R., & Strickland, S. K. (2008). Learning to observe: using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 107–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Beek, J. A., de Jong, F. P. C. M., Minnaer, A. E. M. G., & Wubbels, T. (2014). Teacher practice in secondary vocational education: between teacher-regulated activities of student learning and student self-regulation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 40, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Es, E., & Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531–566). Orlando: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, L., & Looi, C.-K. (2012). Agent prompts: scaffolding for productive reflection in an intelligent learning environment. Educational Technology and Society, 15(1), 339–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: an overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A. (2006). The nature and development of teachers’ metastrategic knowledge in the context of teaching higher order thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 331–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, 52900, Israel

    Bracha Kramarski & Zehavit Kohen

Authors
  1. Bracha Kramarski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zehavit Kohen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bracha Kramarski.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest

Appendix

Appendix

Sample Snapshot of Prompted Interface with Ready-Made Authentic Clip for Noticing Videotaped Authentic Students’ Self-Regulated Learning (SRL)

figure a

1 One of the following two sets of prompts appeared: Generic prompts: Stop the recording every few minutes, and give your opinion regarding the learning effectiveness of the segment you watched. Specific prompts: What SRL elements do you notice in students’ engagement in learning? How can learning be improved? And why? Explain and give examples.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kramarski, B., Kohen, Z. Promoting preservice teachers’ dual self-regulation roles as learners and as teachers: effects of generic vs. specific prompts. Metacognition Learning 12, 157–191 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9164-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9164-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation