Reflections: Literature as data
Nordby, C. J. (2002). Investigating Teacher-Student Interactions That Foster Self-Regulated Learning. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 5.
This article was titled “Investigating Teacher-Student Interactions That Foster Self-Regulated Learning” because it summarizes an experiment that looks at self-regulated learning in “real contexts and in real time.” I liked reading this particular study because they used qualitative techniques to” support their in-depth investigations” and were able to better “link behaviours to teachers and student to contexts and conditions.”
Some of the common issues for students who “demonstrated motivational vulnerabilities” included “negative affect when offered feedback that pinpointed errors in their work, and they chose easy tasks over challenging tasks”. This study identified classrooms that ranked as high or low for self-regulation learning opportunities provided. High-SRL classrooms provided activities that were “open-ended and complex”, offered student choice, and “nonthreatening evaluation practices that emphasized personal progress.” Classrooms that lacked evidence for self-regulation practices had students who were engaged in “simple, closed activities” and limited student choice.
The teachers, from both the high and low ARL classrooms, engaged in professional development where they received “ opportunities for ongoing reflections, plus support and guidance from peers.” This learning community stressed the importance of trust among the group to enable for conversations that prompt critical examinations of their practice and to experiment with new teaching or learning strategies. What resonates with me, when unpacking the results of this particular qualitative study, is that even low-achieving students in classrooms that promote self-regulated learning, had high efficacy for learning and did not shy away from challenging tasks. “In contrast, students in low-SRL classrooms avoided challenging tasks, and communicated perception of low ability and low efficacy for learning.”
