Self-Regulated Learning E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Bildung
• Serie: J-B TL Single Issue Teaching and Learning
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 235

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2011

Beschreibung

Self-regulation involves students' beliefs about their ownpotential for actions, thoughts, feelings and behaviors that willthen allow them to work toward their own academic goals. Clearly,the need for self-regulation in higher education is crucial, Thisvolume describes the theories, tools, and techniques that can beused to assist in the promotion of self-regulation in studentsincluding areas such as goal orientations, self-efficacy beliefs,social comparisons, self-monitoring, and self-evaluation. Edited by Héfer Bembenutty, assistant professor ofeducaitonal psychology at Queens College of the City University ofNew York, this is the 126th volume of the Jossey-Bass quarterlyreport series New Directions for Teaching andLearning, which offers a comprehensive range of ideas andtechniques for improving college teaching based on the experienceof seasoned instructors and the latest findings of educational andpsychological researchers.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Cover

Title page

Copyright page

From the Series Editor

About This Publication

About This Volume

Foreword

1 Introduction: Self-Regulation of Learning in Postsecondary Education

Objectives of This Volume

What Is Self-Regulation of Learning?

Why Is Self-Regulation of Learning Important for Postsecondary Education?

Overview of Chapters in the Volume

Conclusion

2 Purpose of Engagement in Academic Self-Regulation

Motivation and Academic Self-Regulation

Achievement Goal Theory

Achievement Goals and Self-Regulation

Integrating Achievement Goals and Self-Regulation: Different Types of Engagement

Contextual Nature of Purpose of Engagement and Self-Regulation

Conceptual and Practical Implications

Conclusion

3 Self-Regulation and Achievement Goals in the College Classroom

Case Studies in Motivation and SRL

An Integrative Model of Self-Regulated Learning

Role of Motivation: Achievement Goal Theory

Promoting SRL in the College Classroom

Educational Implications: Practical Tips for Designing Mastery-Oriented SRL Interventions

4 Understanding and Facilitating Self-Regulated Help Seeking

Help-Seeking Process

Help-Seeking Need, Behavior, and Intentions

Help-Seeking Goals

Help Seeking and Achievement Goal Orientations

Influences of the Learning Context

Framework for Improving Adaptive Help Seeking

Cognitive Competencies

Contextual-Emotional Resources

Affective-Emotional Resources—Cognitive Behavioral Systems

Social Competencies—Social Skills Training

Implications and Future Directions for Research

5 Self-Regulation and Learning Strategies

Brief History of the Study of Learning Strategies

Components of Strategic Learning

Types of Learning Strategies

Teaching Learning Strategies

Learning About Learning: Declarative, Procedural, and Conditional Knowledge

Concluding Comment: The Importance of Learning Strategies and Strategic Learning for Academic Readiness

6 Academic Delay of Gratification and Academic Achievement

What Is Academic Delay of Gratification?

Links Between Motivational Factors and Academic Delay of Gratification

Links Between Cognitive Strategies and Academic Delay of Gratification

Links Between Self-Regulatory Strategies and Academic Delay of Gratification

Educational Implications

Conclusion

7 Resistance and Disidentification in Reflective Practice with Preservice Teaching Interns

Reflective Practice as Self-Regulation

Promoting a Cultural Turn in Understanding Self-Regulation

Creating a Context to Encourage Self-Reflection

Case Studies

What Did We Learn from These Case Studies?

Assertions About the Possible Effect of Interns’ Beliefs on Reflective Practice

Implications for Teacher Education

8 Professional Development Needs and Practices Among Educators and School Psychologists

Motivation and Self-Regulation Defined

Motivation and Self-Regulation Research Within School Psychology

Perceived Importance, Interest, and Need

Knowledge and Professional Practices

Educational Implications and Conclusions

9 Transitioning from College Classroom to Teaching Career: Self-Regulation in Prospective Teachers

Learning Self-Regulation Through Students’ and Teachers’ Work

Prospective Teachers’ Self-Regulated Learning Strategies

Career-Oriented Course Assignments

Conclusion

10 The Role of Web 2.0 Technologies in Self-Regulated Learning

What Is Self-Regulated Learning?

What Is Web 2.0?

Supporting Student Self-Regulation with Social Software: Selected Examples

Conclusion

11 Self-Regulation of Learning with Computer-Based Learning Environments

What Are the Various Types of Computer-Based Learning Environments?

Challenges of Learning Complex Topics with Computer-Based Learning Environments

Importance of Self-Regulation When Using Computer-Based Learning Environments

Student Characteristics that Influence How Students Self-Regulate Their Learning with Hypermedia

Scaffolding Self-Regulated Learning in Computer-Based Learning Environments

Conclusion

12 New Directions for Self-Regulation of Learning in Postsecondary Education

Major Contributions of This Volume on Self-Regulation

Concerns and New Directions in Self-Regulation of Learning

Conclusion

Index

SELF-REGULATED LEARNING

Héfer Bembenutty (ed.)

New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 126

Catherine M. Wehlburg, Editor-in-Chief

Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, [phone], fax [phone]. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, c/o John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River St., Hoboken, NJ 07030; [phone], fax [phone], http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Microfilm copies of issues and articles are available in 16mm and 35mm, as well as microfiche in 105mm, through University Microfilms, Inc., 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346.

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING (ISSN 0271-0633, electronic ISSN 1536-0768) is part of The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series and is published quarterly by Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company, at Jossey-Bass, 989 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103-1741. Periodicals postage paid at San Francisco, CA, and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Jossey-Bass, 989 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103-1741.

New Directions for Teaching and Learning is indexed in CIJE: Current Index to Journals in Education (ERIC), Contents Pages in Education (T&F), Current Abstracts (EBSCO), Educational Research Abstracts Online (T&F), ERIC Database (Education Resources Information Center), Higher Education Abstracts (Claremont Graduate University), and SCOPUS (Elsevier).

SUBSCRIPTIONS cost $89 for individuals and $259 for institutions, agencies, and libraries in the United States. Prices subject to change.

EDITORIAL CORRESPONDENCE should be sent to the editor-in-chief, Catherine M. Wehlburg, [email protected].

www.josseybass.com

ISBN: 978-1-1180-9163-0

ISBN: 978-1-1181-5914-9 (eMobi)

ISBN: 978-1-1181-5915-6 (ePDF)

ISBN: 978-1-1181-5916-3 (ePUB)

From the Series Editor

About This Publication

Since 1980, New Directions for Teaching and Learning (NDTL) has brought a unique blend of theory, research, and practice to leaders in postsecondary education. NDTL sourcebooks strive not only for solid substance, but also for timeliness, compactness, and accessibility.

The series has four goals: to inform readers about current and future directions in teaching and learning in postsecondary education, to illuminate the context that shapes these new directions, to illustrate these new directions through examples from real settings, and to propose ways in which these new directions can be incorporated into still other settings.

This publication reflects the view that teaching deserves respect as a high form of scholarship. We believe that significant scholarship is conducted not only by researchers who report results of empirical investigations, but also by practitioners who share disciplinary reflections about teaching. Contributors to NDTL approach questions of teaching and learning as seriously as they approach substantive questions in their own disciplines, and they deal not only with pedagogical issues, but also with the intellectual and social context in which these issues arise. Authors deal on the one hand with theory and research and on the other with practice, and they translate from research and theory to practice and back again.

About This Volume

Self-regulation involves students’ beliefs about their own potential for actions, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that will then allow them to work toward their own academic goals. Clearly, the need for self-regulation in higher education is crucial. This volume describes the theories, tools, and techniques that can be used to assist in the promotion of self-regulation in students including areas such as goal orientations, self-efficacy beliefs, social comparisons, self-monitoring, and self-evaluation.

Catherine M. Wehlburg

Editor-in-Chief

CATHERINE M. WEHLBURG is the assistant provost for Institutional Effectiveness at Texas Christian University.

Foreword

In the days when behaviorism dominated psychological theory, our actions were thought to be strictly controlled by their consequences—rewards and punishments. As cognitive psychology came into play, the individual’s role in making choices in terms of long-term goals and short-term goals became evident. As this volume makes evident, self-regulation of learning to minimize costs in energy expenditure and undesirable consequences is a key factor in the effectiveness of one’s activities.

Self-regulation of learning is not a familiar concept to many teachers and college instructors, and even researchers often are ignorant of the body of research and theory that has been built up over the last three or four decades since Bandura’s seminal contributions. As this volume attests, self-regulation of learning is particularly important in postsecondary education, where students need to master their own learning process, often in the absence of parental or insufficient institutional support. In colleges and universities, students need to be proactive learners by initiating behavioral processes, sustaining positive motivational beliefs, and delaying gratification. In postsecondary education, students need to be in charge of their own learning experiences by seeking help from appropriate sources, socializing with mindful peers, and setting and implementing learning strategies or methods designed to attain academic goals.

As it is evident in this volume, teachers and college instructors can instill in their students the importance of self-regulation for achieving goals by creating programs and by imparting instruction in which the students can engage in strategic planning, develop self-efficacy, sustain intrinsic motivation, and monitor their own academic progress. This volume fills an important gap and provides a convenient resource for teachers, college instructors, and researchers to learn the current state of this important field. Students, too, will find this volume to be an accessible guide to their learning.

Wilbert J. McKeachie

WILBERT J. MCKEACHIE is professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. He is a past president of the American Psychological Association (APA), the American Association of Higher Education, the American Psychological Foundation, the Division of Educational Instruction and School Psychology of the International Association of Applied Psychology, and APA’s Divisions 2 and 15.

1

Introduction: Self-Regulation of Learning in Postsecondary Education

Héfer Bembenutty

The chapter introduces this volume on self-regulation of learning by providing a look at the soundness of the theories, techniques, and tools readily available to instructors and students that could serve to facilitate self-regulation.

Self-regulation of learning occupies a fundamental place in postsecondary education. It is hard to think about the academic success of students in our colleges and universities if the students are not self-directed and self-motivated and cannot sustain cognition, affect, and behavior in order to assist in pursuing their academic and professional goals (Bembenutty, 2009; Schunk and Zimmerman, 2008). Self-regulation of learning refers to learners’ beliefs about their capability to engage in appropriate actions, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in order to pursue valuable academic goals while self-monitoring and self-reflecting on their progress toward goal completion (Zimmerman, 2000). The need for self-regulation of students enrolled in postsecondary education institutions is undeniable. Consequently, the focus of this volume on self-regulation of learning is on the specific knowledge that educators and students must acquire in order to secure effective acquisition of skills necessary in our demanding society.

Objectives of This Volume

The chapters making up this volume provide a look at the soundness of the theories, techniques, and tools readily available to instructors and students that could serve to facilitate self-regulation. The authors have synthesized theory, research, and practice from multiple areas in which self-regulation has been tested and implemented successfully. I anticipate that the readers of this volume will find that these chapters are enjoyable, informative, practical, and thought-provoking for those interested in postsecondary education.

What Is Self-Regulation of Learning?

The seminal work of Albert Bandura promoted self-regulation of learning as a pivotal component of any major academic endeavor (Schunk and Zimmerman, 2008). Over the past three decades, self-regulation of learning has emerged as an important area of research helpful in explaining academic success. Researchers have made substantial progress in understanding how children and adults learn how to exercise psychological and behavioral control in order to direct efforts and remain goal-focused despite distraction. Self-regulation affects motivation, emotions, selection of strategies, and effort regulation and leads to increases in self-efficacy and improved academic achievement.

Motivational and Regulatory Processes of Self-Regulation.

Self-efficacy is related to successful academic performance. Self-efficacy refers to learners’ beliefs in their ability to organize and execute actions necessary to attain specific goals (Bandura, 1997). Students with high self-efficacy may decide to continue working on an important assignment even when test anxiety arises and/or a temptation to stop calls for attention. However, students with low self-efficacy beliefs may not only succumb to temptation, they may let disruptive thoughts interfere with performance.

Self-regulation also influences outcome expectation, which refers to individuals’ beliefs that their course of action will result in the attainment of desirable outcomes (Bandura, 1997). Self-regulation of learning has been found to be effective in most major areas of human development and learning, such as in school, college, and medical settings; sport and industrial organizational tasks; and direct classroom instruction as well as online instruction.

Self-regulation influences, and is influenced by, learners’ intrinsic interest, which is students’ enjoyment of participating in a task for the sake of learning, and by extrinsic interest, which refers to students’ engagement in a task for reasons other than the task itself (Deci and Ryan, 1985; Pintrich and others, 1993; Schunk, Pintrich, and Meece, 2008). Students may possess intrinsic but not extrinsic motivation, have extrinsic but not intrinsic motivation, have both, or neither.

Self-regulation is a function of learners’ future time perspective, which is individuals’ perception of how far psychological distance they are from reaching future goals (Husman and Lens, 1999). Students with adaptive future time perspectives highly value future academic outcomes in spite of highly attractive immediate rewards. They indeed are able to delay gratification for anticipated valuable rewards attainable only in the future (Bembenutty, 2009). Psychologically, for them, the conflict between a small immediately available reward and a large one reached only after a voluntary waiting period is less difficult because of their future time orientation. In this regard, Zimmerman (2000) observed that in light of the obstacles that exist, learners need to delay gratification.

Self-regulated learners exercise effort regulation, which is construed as students’ intentions to put forth resources, energy, and time to secure completion of important academic tasks (Pintrich and others, 1993). Skilled self-regulated learners are those who generate extraordinary motivational beliefs in order to secure goal accomplishments. They are also those who, when conflicts arise between pursuing important academic goals and alternative tempting options, learn how to remain task-focused despite immediate impulses to succumb to attractive temptations.

Cyclical Processes of Self-Regulation.

Zimmerman (2000) proposed that learners have the capacity to engage in a cyclical self-regulated learning process in which they establish standards, set academic goals, regulate their beliefs and motivation, select learning strategies to be used, monitor their academic progress, and evaluate their progress toward goal completion. According to Zimmerman (2000), self-regulation of learning involves three cyclical phases. Self-regulation of learning is cyclically initiated when learners set valuable academic goals, select learning strategies, and assess their feelings and motivational beliefs necessary to attain the goals.

1. Forethought phase. During the forethought phase, learners, as proactive agents, engage in self-generating goals, strategic planning, intrinsic interest on tasks, and sustaining self-efficacy beliefs.

2. Performance phase. During the performance phase, learners initiate actions by which they enact volitional control and use strategies such as self-instruction, imagery, self-monitoring, and attention control.

3. Self-reflective phase. During the self-reflective phase, the process of self-regulation ends with learners’ self-reflection of their level of satisfaction with task completion and self-evaluation of task completion itself. During this phase, learners initiate self-evaluation of their performance, examine their attributions and self-reactions, and adapt their performance according to their successes or failures.

Why Is Self-Regulation of Learning Important for Postsecondary Education?

Contrary to students’ experiences during elementary schools and to some degree in secondary schools, postsecondary education requires students to be proactive and self-disciplined and engage in self-creation, self-initiation, and self-evaluation of academic tasks. During elementary and secondary education, teachers and parents primarily guide students, for the most part students take classes with the same peers, homework assignments are checked often, notes to parents are often sent about good academic progress, and children are to some extent protected from distractions and competing alternatives to education. In postsecondary education, however, students are expected to exercise control of their conduct, maintain motivation, develop plans for the future, exercise delay of gratification, and put into effect goals and learning strategies.

Unfortunately, many students arrive at colleges and universities lacking basic self-regulatory skills, exhibiting difficulties such as the ability to set academic goals and failure to identify appropriate learning strategies. These limitations seriously handicap some students despite their high intelligence, academic ambitions, prior knowledge, and high school performance. Thus, those with inadequate self-regulatory skills begin their postsecondary educations at a disadvantage.

Less discussed but equally important, some students also lack the willingness and the ability to delay gratification, as indicated by their preferential choice for an immediately available, less valuable reward rather than waiting for a more valuable reward that is temporally distant, such as getting their dream job after graduation or gaining acceptance to desired graduate school or professional programs. Academic delay of gratification refers to students’ postponement of immediately available opportunities that would satisfy impulses in favor of pursuing important academic rewards or goals that are temporally remote but ostensibly more valuable (Bembenutty and Karabenick, 1998, 2004). In education at the postsecondary level, it is likely that students would have to overcome greater obstacles than in elementary and secondary schools in order to be academically successful, and they may have fewer resources with which to do so. That is why self-regulation of learning is an important aspect of learning that deserves the attention of educators, researchers, and policy makers interested in promoting academic success of students in postsecondary education.

Overview of Chapters in the Volume

The contributors to this volume have done a laudable job at examining aspects of self-regulation of learning that truly need the attention of students, educators, and policy makers of postsecondary education. Four major themes guide the chapters in this volume: motivation, use of strategies, professional training, and technology.

Motivation.

Lichtinger and Kaplan argue that self-regulated learning involves students’ different purposes of engagement. They observe that motivation and self-regulation are important for the adaptive engagement of students in postsecondary education.

Zusho and Edwards, after reviewing the literature on self-regulation of learning and motivation through the lens of achievement goal theory, offer practical tips to educators who struggle with unmotivated learners.

Use of Strategies.

Self-regulation depends on effective help seeking. On this topic, Karabenick and Dembo point out that to be self-regulated learners, students need to seek help strategically when they need it.

The chapter by Weinstein, Acee, and Jung focuses on the critical roles that learning strategies play in both academic readiness and the self-regulation of learning necessary for academic success in all categories of higher education.

Bembenutty posits that the ability to delay gratification is the cornerstone of all academic achievement and education. His chapter provides a review of research on the association between academic delay of gratification and students’ motivational beliefs and use of self-regulated learning strategies.

Professional Training.

Middleton, Abrams, and Seaman examine case studies of student teaching interns to identify contextual factors that may enhance or inhibit their use of self-reflective practices. They argue that self-reflective practice could be considered a form of self-regulation by which individuals monitor and change their own beliefs, motivation, and behavior.

Cleary observes that interest in student motivation and self-regulation among educators and school psychologists has increased in recent years because of the impact of school-based professionals on student academic success.

Randi, Corno, and Johnson explore how preservice teachers prepare for the transition from college classroom to career through assignments and features of the learning environment designed to approximate the demands of work settings and job-related tasks.

Technology.

This volume provokes reflection and dialogue within the academy to consider contemporary instructional tools that could serve to enhance self-regulation of learning. The chapter by Kitsantas and Dabbagh discusses the role of Web 2.0 technologies in self-regulated learning. They urge educators to identify effective educational applications for these technologies important for higher education institutions and to ensure that faculty members have the training and resources necessary to create learning environments that promote and support student self-regulation.

Greene, Moos, and Azevedo observe that, increasingly, university faculty are presenting course content and complex topics to students via computer-based learning environments, such as hypermedia.

Conclusion

The purpose of this volume is to engender reflection and dialogue among educators and students about the important role of self-regulation of learning for postsecondary education. This volume provides evidence that educational psychologists not only can carry out interesting research but that their scholastic work has significant educational and practical implications for postsecondary education. This volume attests that with regard to self-regulation, we have come a long way during the last few decades and that more exciting work and contributions to postsecondary education are under way.

References

Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman, 1997.

Bembenutty, H. Academic delay of gratification, self-regulation of learning, gender differences, and expectancy-value. Personality and Individual Differences, 2009, 46, 347–352.

Bembenutty, H., and Karabenick, S. A. Academic delay of gratification. Learning and Individual Differences, 1998, 10(4), 329–346.

Bembenutty, H., and Karabenick, S. A. Inherent association between academic delay of gratification, future time perspective, and self-regulated learning: Effects of time perspective on student motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 2004, 16(1), 35–57.

Deci, E., and Ryan, R. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press, 1985.

Husman, J., and Lens, W. The role of the future in student motivation. Educational Psychologist, 1999, 34(2), 113–125.

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

Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., and Meece, J. L. Motivation in Education: Theory, Research, and Applications (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Education, 2008.

Schunk, D. H., and Zimmerman, B. J. (eds.). Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning: Theory, Research, and Applications. New York: Taylor and Francis, 2008.

Zimmerman, B. J. Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R., Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, Calif.: Academic Press, 2000.

HÉFER BEMBENUTTY is an assistant professor of educational psychology at Queens College of the City University of New York. His research interests include self-regulation of learning, delay of gratification, and homework.

2

Purpose of Engagement in Academic Self-Regulation

Einat Lichtinger, Avi Kaplan

This chapter argues that self-regulated learning is not a unitary construct. Rather, students’ different purposes of engagement in the task meaningfully distinguish between different types of self-regulation.

Academic self-regulation refers to the self-generated, reflective, and strategic engagement in academic tasks (Zimmerman, 2000). Self-regulation is crucial for academic success, particularly in higher education, where students are required to take increased responsibility for their learning and where the diversity of courses and activities may require various types of engagement. Indeed, a growing body of literature highlights the importance of self-regulation in the college classroom (Bembenutty, 2007; Pintrich and Zusho, 2007; VanderStoep, Pintrich, and Fagerlin, 1996; Wolters, 1998). This literature emphasizes how self-regulation beliefs, attitudes, and skills can assist students in coping effectively with tasks that range from managing tensions between social and academic goals to engaging effectively in the requirements of academic tasks in different subject domains. However, as with every body of knowledge, developments in theory and research in the domain of self-regulation continue to provide insight and evidence that improve our understanding of the ways by which motivation and self-regulation affect students’ engagement and success.

Motivation and Academic Self-Regulation

Pintrich (2000a) defined self-regulation in academic settings as the “active, constructive process whereby learners set goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the contextual features in the environment” (p. 453). Research in past years has focused on identifying general and domain-specific components of self-regulation, including cognitive, meta-cognitive, motivational, and behavioral strategies by which students can actively and strategically control and modify their learning in order to achieve desired academic outcomes (Butler and Winne, 1995; Zimmerman, 2000).

Researchers have postulated several different models of self-regulation in academic settings (Zimmerman and Schunk, 2001). These models emphasize different aspects or components of the self-regulatory action. However, most of them also share important key characteristics. One important assumption in most models of self-regulation is that students’ motivation plays a crucial role in their adaptive self-regulation (Schunk and Zimmerman, 2007). Zimmerman (2000) argued that “[s]elf-regulatory skills are of little value if a person cannot motivate themselves [sic] to use them” (p. 17).

Early theories conceptualized motivation as based in biological mechanisms, unconscious stable personality dispositions, or conditioned behavioral responses to stimuli in the environment (Graham and Weiner, 1996). In contrast, contemporary motivation theories emphasize the role of people’s perceptions and beliefs (Graham and Weiner, 1996; Kaplan, 2008a). In the past two decades, a large body of research supported the important role of motivational beliefs and perceptions, such as perceived self-efficacy for the task and for the use of self-regulation strategies, expectations about outcomes of action, and beliefs about the value of the task, in students’ self-regulated engagement and in their achievement (Zimmerman, 2000).

Achievement Goal Theory

One fruitful line of research on motivation and self-regulation in the past two decades has been in achievement goal theory (Pintrich, 2000a). Achievement goal theory focuses on the underlying reasons or purposes that students adopt for engagement in the task (Anderman and Maehr, 1994; Kaplan and Maehr, 2002, 2007). Unlike the specific outcome goals or objectives that students set when planning their engagement, which refer to what students are aiming to achieve (e.g., a passing grade, winning a competition, the understanding of a specific concept), achievement goal theory focuses on why students are engaging in the task and are pursuing these objectives (e.g., in order to learn and develop, in order to appear smart, in order to proceed to more advanced studies, in order to stay out of trouble) (Anderman and Maehr, 1994).

Most research in achievement goal theory focused on two types of achievement goals, labeled mastery goals (sometimes referred to as “learning goals” or “task goals”) and performance goals (sometimes referred to as ability goals or ego goals) (Ames, 1992). Mastery goals refer to engagement in the task with a purpose of developing one’s ability. These goals are manifest in students engaging in the task with a focus on learning, understanding, and mastering the material and skills. Performance goals refer to engagement with a purpose of demonstrating one’s ability. Thus they are seen in students engaging in the task with the concern of appearing smart and able and not appearing unable. Researchers also make a distinction between purposes that aim at the possibility of success—approach goals—and purposes that aim at the possibility of failure—avoidance goals (Elliot, 1999). Mastery-approach goals refer to engagement with the purpose of developing competence; mastery-avoidance goals refer to engagement with the purpose of avoiding the decline of competence or avoiding missing opportunities for learning. Performance-approach goals refer to engagement with the purpose of demonstrating high ability; performance-avoidance goals refer to engagement with the purpose of avoiding demonstrating low ability (Elliot, 1999; Pintrich, 2000a).

Achievement Goals and Self-Regulation

Students’ achievement goals are considered an important motivational factor that affects their self-regulation. In Zimmerman’s (2000, 2002) model of self-regulation, for example, achievement goals constitute one of the four motivational processes that students draw on in the initial phase of self-regulation: the forethought phase. In elaborating on this motivational process, Zimmerman (2002) argued that a mastery (learning) goal for engagement promotes adaptive self-regulation whereas a performance goal does not.