Advertisement

Fostering creative performance in art and design education via self-regulated learning

  • Jeffrey A. Greene
  • Rebekah Freed
  • R. Keith Sawyer
Original Research

Abstract

There is a lack of research and practice focused on how to foster higher-order processing, such as creative performance, within higher education settings. To address this gap in research, we chose to study pedagogical practices in schools of art and design, where one of the intended learning outcomes is creativity. Based upon data gathered as part of a larger study (Sawyer in Thinking Skills and Creativity, http://doi.org/10.1016/J.TSC.2018.08.002, 2018), we found that among a large number of creative performance pedagogical practices we identified, a subset seemed to foster self-regulated learning (SRL). Therefore, the goal of our study was to identify the ways art and design professors enacted practices that foster their students’ self-regulation during learning and performance. We found these professors utilized a number of direct and indirect methods of fostering their students’ SRL, all intended to enhance students’ ability to enact creative performance. In addition to revealing interesting comparisons between SRL in art and design and other more commonly studied contexts such as science or history, our findings suggested numerous directions for expanding SRL models, including a greater focus on process as the outcome of SRL, a need to continue research into SRL during higher-order processing, and gaps regarding the development of SRL.

Keywords

Self-regulated learning Creativity Art and design education Qualitative research 

References

  1. Alexander, P. A. (2003). The development of expertise: The journey from acclimation to proficiency. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, P. A. (2013). Calibration: What is it and why it matters? An introduction to the special issue on calibrating calibration. Learning and Instruction, 24, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexander, P. A., Dinsmore, D. L., Parkinson, M. M., & Winters, F. I. (2011). Self- regulated learning in academic domains. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 393–407). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Alexander, P. A., Sperl, C. T., Buehl, M. M., Fives, H., & Chiu, S. (2004). Modeling domain learning: Profiles from the field of special education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azevedo, R. (2005). Computer environments as metacognitive tools for enhancing learning. Educational Psychologist, 40, 193–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Azevedo, R. (2014). Issues in dealing with sequential and temporal characteristics of self- and socially-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 9, 217–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Azevedo, R., & Jacobson, M. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: A summary and critical analysis. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56(1), 93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bandura, A. (1980). Gauging the relationship between self-efficacy judgment and action. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4(2), 263–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ben-Eliyahu, A., & Bernacki, M. L. (2015). Addressing complexities in self-regulated learning: A focus on contextual factors, contingencies, and dynamic relations. Metacognition and Learning, 10(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Binbasaran Tüysüzoğlu, B., & Greene, J. A. (2015). An investigation of the role of contingent metacognitive behavior in self-regulated learning. Metacognition & Learning, 10, 77–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bol, L., & Hacker, D. J. (2012). Calibration research: Where do we go from here? Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bol, L., Hacker, D. J., Walck, C. C., & Nunnery, J. A. (2012). The effects of individual or group guidelines on the calibration accuracy and achievement of high school biology students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37(4), 280–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science Press.Google Scholar
  14. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Chen, P. P., & Bembenutty, H. (2018). Calibration of performance and academic delay of gratification: Individual and group differences in self-regulation of learning. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 407–420). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Cleary, T., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Self-regulation differences during athletic practice by experts, non-experts, and novices. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. New York: Berg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cross, N., Dorst, K., & Roozenburg, N. (1992). Research in design thinking. Delft, Netherlands: Delft University Press.Google Scholar
  20. De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Masui, C. (2004). The CLIA-model: A framework for designing powerful learning environments for thinking and problem solving. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(4), 365–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dent, A. L., & Koenka, A. C. (2016). The relation between self-regulated learning and academic achievement across childhood and adolescence: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 28(3), 425–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dinsmore, D. L. (2017). Strategic processing in education. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dinsmore, D. L., & Parkinson, M. M. (2013). What are confidence judgments made of? Students’ explanations for their confidence ratings and what that means for calibration. Learning and Instruction, 24, 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dweck, C. S. (2015). Growth. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 242–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dweck, C. S., & Master, A. (2008). Self-theories motivate self-regulated learning. In D. Schunk & B. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Efklides, A. (2011). Interactions of metacognition with motivation and affect in self-regulated learning: The MASRL model. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 6–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Enyedy, N. (2005). Inventing mapping: Creating cultural forms to solve collective problems. Cognition and Instruction, 23(4), 427–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ericsson, K. A. (2015). Acquisition and maintenance of medical expertise: A perspective from the expert-performance approach with deliberate practice. Academic Medicine, 90(11), 1471–1486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ge, X., Law, V., & Huang, K. (2016). Detangling the interrelationships between self-regulation and ill-structured problem solving in problem-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(2), 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  31. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  32. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory (pp. 1–19). London: Weidenfield & Nicolson.Google Scholar
  33. Greene, J. A. (2018). Self-regulation in education. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Greene, J. A., Bolick, C. M., & Robertson, J. (2010). Fostering historical knowledge and thinking skills using hypermedia learning environments: The role of self-regulated learning. Computers & Education, 54, 230–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Greene, J. A., Bolick, C. M., Jackson, W. P., Caprino, A. M., Oswald, C., & McVea, M. (2015). Domain-specificity of self-regulated learning processing in science and history. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 111–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Greene, J. A., Hutchison, L. A., Costa, L., & Crompton, H. (2012). Investigating how college students’ task definitions and plans relate to self-regulated learning processing and understanding of a complex science topic. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Greene, J. A., Yu, S., & Copeland, D. Z. (2014). Measuring critical components of digital literacy and their relationships with learning. Computers & Education, 76, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hadwin, A., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2018). Self-regulation, co-regulation, and shared regulation in collaborative learning environments. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 83–106). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Haimovitz, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). What predicts children’s fixed and growth intelligence mindsets? Not their parents’ view of intelligence but their parents’ views of failure. Psychological Science, 27(6), 859–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hall, R., & Stevens, R. (1994). Making space: A comparison of mathematical work in school and professional design practices. The Sociological Review, 42(S1), 118–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hoyle, R. J., & Dent, A. L. (2018). Developmental trajectories of skills and abilities relevant for self-regulation of learning and performance. In D. H. Schunk, & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd Ed.) (pp. 49–63). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Järvenoja, H., Järvelä, S., & Malmberg, J. (2015). Understanding the process of motivational, emotional and cognitive regulation in learning situations. Educational Psychologist, 50(3), 204–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jay, E. S., & Perkins, D. N. (1997). Problem finding: The search for mechanism. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), The creativity research handbook (pp. 257–293). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  45. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology, Research, and Development, 45(1), 65–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Karabenick, S. A., & Gonida, E. N. (2018). Academic help seeking as a self-regulated learning strategy: Current issues, future directions. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 421–433). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., Otto, B., Dignath-van Ewijk, C., Büttner, G., & Klieme, E. (2010). Promotion of self-regulated learning in classrooms: Investigating frequency, quality, and consequences for student performance. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), 157–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Koriat, A. (2012). The relationships between monitoring, regulation and performance. Learning and Instruction, 22(4), 296–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kramarski, B. (2018). Teachers as agents in promoting students’ SRL: Research and implications. In. D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd Ed.) (pp. 223–239). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Lee, N. (2009). Project methods as the vehicle for learning in undergraduate design education: A typology. Design Studies, 30(5), 541–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D. M., Josselson, R., & Suárez-Orozco, C. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report. American Psychologist, 73(1), 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lichtman, M. (2012). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  53. Lodewyk, K. R., Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. L. (2009). Implication of task structure on self-regulated learning and achievement. Educational Psychology, 29(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mace, M. A., & Ward, T. (2002). Modeling the creative process: A grounded theory analysis of creativity in the domain of art making. Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), 179–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Malmberg, J., Järvelä, S., & Kirschner, P. A. (2014). Elementary school students’ strategic learning: Does task-type matter? Metacognition and Learning, 9(2), 113–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structures, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Moos, D. C., & Ringdal, A. (2012). Self-regulated learning in the classroom: A literature review on the teacher’s role. Education Research International, 2012.Google Scholar
  58. Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., & Sager, C. E. (2003). Picking the right material: Cognitive processing skills and their role in creative thought. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical and creative thinking (pp. 19–68). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.Google Scholar
  59. National Education Association. (2014). Preparing 21st century students for a global society: An educators guide to the “Four Cs”. Washington, DC: National Education Association.Google Scholar
  60. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states (Vol. 1: The standards). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  61. OECD. (2013). Trends shaping education 2013. Paris, France: OECD.  https://doi.org/10.1787/trends_edu-2013-en.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Oh, Y., Ishizaki, S., Gross, M. D., & Do, E. Y.-L. (2013). A theoretical framework of design critiquing in architecture studios. Design Studies, 34(3), 302–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational psychologist, 36(2), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pieschl, S. (2009). Metacognitive calibration—An extended conceptualization and potential applications. Metacognition and Learning, 4, 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Pieschl, S., Stahl, E., Murray, T., & Bromme, R. (2012). Is adaptation to task complexity really beneficial for performance? Learning and Instruction, 22(4), 281–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Poitras, E. G., & Lajoie, S. P. (2013). A domain-specific account of self-regulated learning: The cognitive and metacognitive activities involved in learning through historical inquiry. Metacognition & Learning, 8, 213–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Poitras, E. G., & Lajoie, S. P. (2018). Using technology-rich environments to foster self-regulated learning in social studies. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 166–180). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  68. Powers, M. N. (2017). Self-regulated design learning: A foundation and framework for teaching and learning design. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Rotgans, J. L., & Schmidt, H. G. (2009). Examination of the context-specific nature of self-regulated learning. Educational Studies, 35(3), 239–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rubenstein, L. D., Callan, G. L., & Ridgley, L. M. (2018). Anchoring the creative process within a self-regulated learning framework: Inspiring assessment methods and future research. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 921–945.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9431-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rutherford, T. (2017). Within and between person associations of calibration and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49, 226–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Sawyer, R. K. (2017). Teaching creativity in art and design studio classes: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22, 99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sawyer, R. K. (2018). The role of failure in learning how to create in art and design. Thinking Skills and Creativity. http://doi.org/10.1016/J.TSC.2018.08.002
  75. Schon, D. A. (1984). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol. 5126). New York: Basic books.Google Scholar
  76. Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36(1–2), 111–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Schunk, D. H., & Greene, J. A. (2018). Historical, contemporary, and future perspectives on self-regulated learning and performance. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 1–15). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  78. Simon, H. A. (1973). The structure of ill structured problems. Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sinatra, G. M., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2018). The self-regulation of learning and conceptual change in science: Research, theory, and educational applications. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulated learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 153–165). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  80. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research (Vol. 15). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  81. Thiede, K. W., & De Bruin, A. B. H. (2018). Self-regulated learning in reading. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 109–123). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  82. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  83. Weiner, B. (2010). The development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: A history of ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Winne, P. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 153–189). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  85. Winne, P. H. (2017). Theorizing and researching levels of processing in self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.
  86. Zepeda, C. D., Richey, J. E., Ronevich, P., & Nokes-Malach, T. J. (2015). Direct instruction of metacognition benefits adolescent science learning, transfer, and motivation: An in vivo study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(4), 954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Zimmerman, B. (1986). Becoming a self-regulated learner: Which are the key subprocesses? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 307–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zimmerman, B. J. (2006). Development and adaptation of expertise: The role of self-regulatory processes and beliefs. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 705–722). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). From cognitive modeling to self-regulation: A social cognitive career path. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 135–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations