A Theoretical Framework for Considering Self- and Coregulated Learning as Situated in Practice

• In Event: Researching Self- and Coregulated Learning as Situated in Contexts: Implications for Theory, Research, and Practice

Abstract

To frame this session, we will draw on a situated model of self- and co-regulation, presented in Figure 1 (Butler & Cartier, 2004; Cartier & Butler, 2004; Butler et al., 2011). We chose to build from this model in part because it draws from prior research on self-regulation to encompass the wide range of motivational, emotional, cognitive, and metacognitive beliefs, perceptions, and processes implicated in how students engage in learning (e.g., Corno, 1993, 1994; Paris, Byrnes, & Paris, 2001; Pintrich, 2000; Wang, Haertel, & Walberg, 1993; Winne & Hadwin, 1998; Zimmerman, 2000). At the same time, the model is useful in its depiction of how engagement in learning (e.g., emotional responses; persistence; cognitive and self-regulating strategies engaged) emerges from a complex interplay between what individuals bring to an activity (e.g., domain specific knowledge; prior experience with similar tasks or in different cultural settings; conceptions about what learning in that type of task is about; self-perceptions of competence) and features of multiple, nested layers of context, from the broader socioculturally- and historically situated community (e.g., that defines important curricula), to local neighbourhood culture(s) and values, to features of the immediate learning environment (e.g., subject area, activities/tasks, pedagogical practices, evaluation/feedback practices). In the opening presentation, we will draw on this framework to define self-regulation, identify what is needed to study self-regulation as situated, outline contributions in gaps in current research and practice, and overview where and how each of the participating posters takes up questions of how individual-contextual interactions occur to shape and/or support self-regulation (see poster descriptions below for more specificity).

At the same time, in the opening frame we will also foreground methodological challenges in the study of self-regulation as it unfolds dynamically within particular contexts. While a variety of research designs and methodological tools are emerging to support study of self-regulation as a situated activity, for example using quantitative approaches such as path analysis or principle components analysis (e.g., Hadwin et al., 2001; Ross et al., 2003; see also Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011), many of the studies included here (P1-5) were designed to take advantage of and evaluate the particular potential of case study designs in conducting fine-grained analyses of SRL processes in situ (Butler, 2011; Creswell, 2007; Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2003). But, whether within an overall case study design or not, what all of the research projects have in common is pursuit of the methodological goal of developing and field-testing suites of tools and/or approaches that can be juxtaposed to study and relate students’ perceptions, beliefs, conceptions, interpretations and intentions (e.g., using questionnaires, surveys, probes, interviews) to action (e.g., using logs, traces, artifacts, observations, think alouds) to expectations and practices embedded within the environments in which they are working (e.g., using observations, artifacts, interviews). In the opening discussion, we will highlight how these methodological strategies have potential to fill current gaps in understanding about self-regulation as situated, and potentially supported, in relation to the qualities of contexts and learning environments.

Authors

• Deborah L. Butler, The University of British Columbia

• Sylvie C. Cartier, University of Montreal