Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Unit
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Annual Meeting Registraion, Housing and Travel
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Objective
Despite advances in academic skill SRL interventions (i.e., reading, mathematics, writing) over the past decade (Graham & Harris, 2013; Montague, Enders, & Dietz, 2014; Tonks & Taboada, 2011), there remains a need to develop and refine applied, school-based (K-12) services that support students’ motivation and SRL skills during completion of classwork, long-term assignments, or ambiguous situations, such as studying for exams. This presentation focuses on the theoretical foundation and emerging empirical evidence supporting the efficacy and social validity of such an intervention called the Self-Regulation Empowerment Program (SREP; Cleary & Platten, 2013; Cleary et al., 2017).
Theoretical Foundation
SREP is a theoretically-grounded, multi-component intervention designed to empower academically at-risk middle school and high school students to take assume greater responsibility and strategic control over their academic behaviors. Although SREP draws from social-cognitive, information processing, constructivist paradigms, it is primarily grounded in two specific social-cognitive models: (a) three-phase model of SRL (i.e., forethought, performance, self-reflection) and, (b) four-level model of SRL development (observation, emulation, self-control, self-regulation; Cleary, Kitsantas, Pape, & Slemp, 2018; Zimmerman, 2000). Collectively, these frameworks espouse the premise that SRL skills develop optimally through guided practice and other socially-mediated experiences and that students become effective regulators when multiple SRL processes (i.e., planning, self-monitoring, evaluation) operate in a coordinated, complementary way.
Method
This presentation reviews existing literature on SREP and recent findings supporting its social validity (i.e., perceived acceptability, importance). Participants were 42 academically at-risk middle school students who were randomly assigned to a SREP condition (n = 22) or comparison group (n = 20). Although both groups received an identical amount of instruction (approximately 12 hours), the nature of instruction differed: SREP group received instruction to support motivation and SRL skills (with minimal mathematics supports), whereas the comparison group received an academic intervention focusing primarily on providing mathematics supports, coaching, and instruction (no motivation or SRL).
Data Sources
Quantitative data pertaining to the social validity of SREP (i.e., student perceptions of acceptability and importance) were collected using established measures (Social Validity Questionnaire; Cleary et al., 2008, 2017). Qualitative data were also gathered during post SREP debriefing activities with students.
Results
Independent t-tests revealed a statistically significant and large difference in student self-perceptions at both posttest (Welch’s t(29.38) = 3.05, p < .05, d = 1.01), and 2-month follow-up (Welch’s t(28.63) = 2.99, p < .05, d = .95), with results favoring SREP student perceptions. Follow-up t-tests at an individual item level revealed large differences for several items (e.g., “I think about myself in a more positive way”; and “The class helped me become more aware of the reasons why I sometimes struggle in school”). Qualitative data gathered from post-intervention debriefing activities with SREP students revealed several themes supporting the quantitative data: enhanced confidence to learn, enhanced ability to control their learning, and increased self-awareness.
Significance
This presentation conveys the importance and value of concurrently collecting both efficacy and social validity data in school-based intervention research, with social validity measures adding critical information about overall intervention acceptability and utility.