Skip to main content
Log in

Instructional principles for self-regulation

  • Development
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to suggest principles for embedding support in instruction to facilitate self-regulation (SR) in less expert learners. The principles are based on an analysis of the growing body of research on the distinctive self-regulation differences between higher and lower achieving learners. The analysis revealed four instructional principles that designers should consider to provide support for self-regulation. Each principle is supported by research and instructional examples are included.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Belfiore, P.J., & Hornyak, R.S. (1998). Operant theory and application to self-monitoring in adolescents. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 184–202). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biemiller, A., Shany, M., Inglis, A., & Michenbaum, D. (1998). Factors influencing children's acquisition and demonstration of self-regulation on academic tasks. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 203–224). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouffard, T., Boisvert, J., Vezeau, C., & LaRouche, C. (1995). The impact of goal orientation on self-regulation and performance among college students.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 317–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L., Bransford, J.D., Ferrara, R.A. & Campione, J.C. (1983). Learning, remembering and understanding. In P.H. Mussen, (Ed.),Handbook of psychology (Vol. III, pp. 77–166). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C., Hedberg, J., & Harper, B. (1994). Metacognition as a basis for learning support soft-ware.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 7(2), 3–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. (1998). A strategic content learning approach to promoting self-regulated learning by students with learning disabilities. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 160–183). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. & Winne, P.H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis.Review of Educational Research, 65, 245–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L. (1986). The metacognitive control components of self-regulated learning.Contemporary Educational Psychology;11, 333–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L. (1994). Student volition and education: Outcomes, influences, and practices. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman (Eds.),Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 229–254). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L. (1995). Comments on Winne: Analytic and systemic research are both needed.Educational Psychologist, 30, 201–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L. & Mandinach, E.B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation.Educational Psychologist, 18, 88–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L. & Randi, L. (1999). A design theory for classroom instruction. In C.R. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II (pp. 293–318). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Vesta, F.J., & Moreno, V. (1993). Cognitive control functions of study activities: A compensation model.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll, M.P. (2000).Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P.A. & Newby, T.J., (1996). The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective.Instructional Science, 24, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P.A., Newby, T.J., & MacDougall, M. (1996). Student's responses and approaches to case-based instruction: The role of reflective self-regulation.American Educational Research Journal, 33, 719–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R.M. (1985).The conditions of learning (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, R. (1990). When children and adults do not use learning strategies: Toward a theory of settings.Review of Educational Research, 60, 517–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K.R., & Troia, G.A. (1998). Writing and self-regulation: Cases from the self-regulated strategy development model. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 20–41). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadwin, A.F., & Winne, P.H. (1996). Study strategies have meager support; a review with recommendations for implementation.Journal of Higher Education, 67, 692–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, A.S., & Weinstein, C.E. (1995). Achievement goals, self-regulated learning and the role of classroom context. In P.R. Pintrich (Ed.),Understanding self-regulated learning (pp. 43–56). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B.K., Yu, S.L., & Pintrich, P.R., (1998). In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 57–85). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H., & Grabowski, B.L. (1993).Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinzie, M. (1990). Requirements and benefits of effective interactive instruction: Learner control, self-regulation, and continuing motivation.Educational Technology Research and Development 38, (1), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluger, A. & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.Psychological Bulletin, 119(2) 254–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, J.A., & Kulik, C.C. (1991).Developmental instruction; an analysis of the research. Appalachian State University: National Center for Developmental Education.

  • Lan, W.Y. (1996). The effects of self-monitoring on students' course performance, use of learning strategies, attitude, self-judgment ability, and knowledge representation.Journal of Experimental Education, 64, 101–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lan, W.Y. (1998). Teaching self-monitoring skills in statistics. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (86–105). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist values for instructional systems design: Five principles toward a new mindset.Educational Technology Research and Development, 41, 4–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ley, K.L. (1999). Providing feedback to distant students.Campus Wide Information Systems, 16(2) 63–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ley, K. & Young, D.B., (1998). Self-regulation behaviors in underprepared (developmental) and regular admission college students.Contemporary Educational Psychology 23, 42–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B.L. (1989). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A phenomenological view. In B.J. Zimmerman & D.H. Schunk (Eds.),Self regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 51–82). New York: Springer Verlag, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meece, J.L. (1994). The role of motivation in self-regulated learning. In D.H. Schunk and B.J. Zimmerman (Eds.),Self regulation of learning and performance, (pp. 25–44). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nist, S.L. & Holschuh, J.L. (2000). Comprehension strategies at the college level. In R.F. Flippo & D.C. Caverly (Eds.),Handbook of college reading and study strategies (pp. 75–104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orange, C. (1999). Using peer modeling to teach self-regulation.Journal of Experimental Education, 68 (1) 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osman, M.E. & Hannafin, M.J. (1992). Metacogntiion research and theory: Analysis and implications for instructional design.Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(2), 83–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P.R. (1995). Understanding self-regulated learning. In P.R. Pintrich (Ed.),Understanding self-regulated learning (pp. 3–12). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P.B., Wharton-McDonald, R., & Brown, R. (1998). Transactional instruction of comprehension strategies in the elementary grades. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 42–56). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar, S. (1995). Helping students learn ‘how to learn’ from texts: Towards an ITS for developing cognition.Instructional Science 23, 163–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning.Educational Psychologist, 25, 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. (1998). Teaching elementary students to self-regulate practice of mathematical skills with modeling. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 137–159). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D., & Zimmerman, B. (Eds.). (1998).Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin, M. (1998). Promoting students' self-regulation ability: Guidelines for instructional design.Educational Technology, 38(1), 38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, M. & Randall, (2000). Vocabulary development at the college level. In R.F. Flippo & D.C. Caverly (Eds.),Handbook of college reading and study strategies (pp. 43–74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trawick, L., & Corno, L. (1995). Expanding the volitional resources of urban community college students.New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 63, 57–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, C.E. (1994). Strategic learning/strategic teaching: Flip sides of a coin. In P.R. Pintrich, D.R. Brown, & C.E. Weinstein, (Eds.),Student motivation, cognition, and learning. (257–274), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P.H., & Stockley, D.B. (1998). Computing technologies as sites for developing self-regulated learning. In D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman, (Eds.)Self-regulated learning; from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 106–136). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, J.D. (1996). The effect of self-regulated learning strategies on performance in learner controlled computer based instruction.Educational Technology Research, and Development 44(2), 17–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J. (1998). Academic studying and the development of personal skill: A self-regulatory perspective.Educational Psychologist, 33 (203), 73–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Developmental phases in self-regulation: Shifting from process goals to outcome goals.Journal of Educational Psychology 89, 29–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies.American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, (1), 51–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Paulsen, A.S. (1995). Self-monitoring during collegiate studying: An invaluable tool for academic self-regulation. In P.R. Pintrich (Ed.),Understanding self-regulated learning (pp. 13–28). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Risemberg, R. (1994). Investigating self-regulatory processes and perceptions of self-efficacy in writing by college students. In P.R. Pintrich, D.R. Brown, & C.E. Weinstein, (Eds.),Student motivation, cognition, and learning (pp. 239–256). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ley, K., Young, D.B. Instructional principles for self-regulation. ETR&D 49, 93–103 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504930

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504930

Keywords

Navigation