Self- Regulated Learning (SRL) Strategies on Engineering Faculty Members, Executives, And Students
Thanikachalam Vedhathiri
National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research, Chennai.
vthani2025@yahoo.in
 |
Keywords: Self-Regulated Learners (SRL), Performance Management, Faculty Development
Programs (FDP), Planning Executive Development
Programs (EDP), Metacognition, & Intrinsic
Motivation.
1. Introduction
|
Thanikachalam Vedhathiri which relates to the use of cognitive processes such as critical thinking, taking-action, metacognition, behaving and engaging in purposeful professional activities. The
engineering students are self-directed, |
Most of the
engineering students displayed maximum academic achievement at the time of
entry into the engineering programs, but their performance decreased after
joining the engineering college. Even some of the high achievers failed in many
basic and core courses. The problem is due to self-regulation autonomous, and
independent. They carefully plan their education so that they can transfer to
the workplace.
The executives
of various companies were deputed to engineering colleges for training and
development programs so that they can reduce the cost of production, accidents,
energy consumption, improve quality and productivity.
The faculty
members of the engineering colleges need to be trained in planning various
courses for selfdirected learners from novice students to executives of
industries. The fast-developing country, India, needs high-quality professional
trainers and educators.
2. Literature
Survey
According to
Zimmerman (1994), self-regulated learning (SRL) is learners' “self-generated
thoughts, feelings, and actions which are systematically oriented toward
attainment of their goals”. Hence, it's a self-direction process through which
the participants can transform their mental skills into professional skills.
According to Zimmerman (2002), selfregulated learning is a cyclical process,
wherein the participants plan for a learning task, monitoring their performance,
and then reflecting on the outcome. The cycle then repeats as the learner uses
the reflection to adjust and prepare for the next task. The process should be
tailored for individual learners and for specific learning tasks.
Butler and
Carter's (2004) “Socio-Constructive Model of Self-Regulation” enables the
investigation of the interplay between metacognitive knowledge and
metacognitive control within the context learning activity
Markus Dresel
et al. (2015) have proposed a structural model that differentiates SRL
competencies in terms of descriptive, procedural, and conditional knowledge
regarding different types of self-proposed model.
The Cycle of
Self-Regulated Learning
[Zimmerman, (2002); Zumbrunn et al. (2011)] for
training and development programs of in-service participants like industry
executives
Many
organizations approach engineering colleges to train their executives and
employees to modernize their manufacturing processes. The executives have their
self-regulated learning concepts. They need to be counselled and trained. The
following are the instructional design processes in conducting executive
development.
1.Plan, Set Goals, and Layout Strategies,
2. Use strategies and monitor their performance,
3. Self-Reflect on Their Performance
According to Zimmerman (2002) the three stages of
self-regulated learning are:
1. Planning Stage- The participants establish their
goals and performance standards.
2.Performing Stage- The participants demonstrate
their commitment to their learning experience; they compare their progress with
the standards established at the planning stage.
3.Reflection Stage- They evaluate their learning
experience, reflecting over feedback, storing the concepts, rules, and
cognitive strategies for use in future learning.
Three Layered
Conceptual Model of SRL Boekaets (1999) proposed the three-layered conceptual model of
self-regulated learning is presented in Table-1.
Table 1 : Three
Layered Model of SRL
|
Layer |
Representation |
|
Regulation of the processing modes |
Choice of cognitive strategies or learning styles or deep approach |
|
Regulation of learning process |
Use of \\\\\ metacognitive knowledge and skills to direct learning (monitoring, and evaluating and correcting skills) represents the future utility of leaning style like metacognitive knowledge |
|
Regulation of self |
Choice of goals and resources (regulation of self and motivation) |
How do organizations adapt to changing contexts?
Due to
continuous improvements in contextual knowledge and emerging technology, the
organizations improve their skills and competencies of their employees in
planning, designing, and manufacturing by using high performing machines,
training their shop floor- employees and supervisors using software, and
ensures high quality and competitive products.
Due to this, the employees must be trained by appealing to their
self-regulated learning process. They select the most suitable trainers, with
an appropriate environment, motivate them to improve their skills and
abilities. This is presented in Table
2.
Table 2 : SRL of the Employees
|
Changing Workplace |
Employees
|
Focus-Self
Regulated
Learning |
|
Advanced Production Methods |
Senior Executives |
Goal Setting, Strategic Planning, Self-reflection. |
|
High Productivity |
Middle - Level Managers |
Performance, Attention focusing, & task strategies |
|
Use of Software |
Operators |
Planning to acquire new skills |
|
Improved Quality |
Shop Floor Employees |
Acquiring new Abilities |
This leads to planning employee development programs, improved performance, and assessment of the improvements and quality contribution. The employees are guided to undertake self-regulated learning. They assess their self-efficacy and set goals to master new skills. They evaluate the learning strategies and choose the best. They improve their performance under the encouragement of qualified trainers. They continue to self-regulate their learning. The employees can be described as self-regulated to the degree that they are metacognitively, motivationally, and behaviorally active participants in their learning process. It is in line with a social cognitive perspective (Bandura, 1986), self-regulated learning occurs.
Singer and
Bashir (1999) have described selfregulated learning as a meta construct defined
as a set of behaviors that are used flexibly to guide, monitor, and direct the
success of one's performance' and 'to manage direct interactions within the
learning environment to ensure success'.
Vermetten,
Vermunt, and Lodewijks (1995) presented evidence of associations between a deep
approach to learning and a preference for opportunities for the internal
regulation of learning, and between a surface approach to learning and a
preference for external regulation. Coffield et al. (2004) and Rayner (2007)
represented the future pedagogical utility of learning style approaches, i.e.
to develop metacognitive knowledge and awareness.
Ning Fang et
al. (2016) conducted a summer program focused on engineering education research
on self-regulated learning. They offered a variety of activities catered, and
designed for students, including orientation, seminar series, and a final
symposium. The students tend to be ready to learn what they believe they need
to know (Albert Kamp, 2016, David Beanland & Roger Hadgraft, 2013). Their
learning orientation is problem-centered, task-oriented, and life-focused
(Graham J Davies et al. 2007). They are
internally motivated, and the students must manage their cognition, motivation,
and behavior after passing through certain self-regulatory processes. The
students must set realistic goals, strategizing to achieve these goals.
Metacognition is the knowledge of individuals about their cognitive processes
and the strategies they use to control these processes (Michael Bassis, 2015).
Criteria
Suggested by Zimmerman to apply across most self-regulated learning
perspectives
1. Purposive use of specific processes, strategies, or
responses by participants to improve their professional achievement.
2.
Use of a self-oriented feedback loop involving
participants monitoring the effectiveness of their learning strategies and
responding to feedback with changes in self-perceptions or learning strategies.
3. A motivational dimension-involving self-efficacy
belief-which determines the choice of selfregulatory processes, strategies, or
responses.
These criteria
are to be considered whenever new methods are to be introduced in the colleges
or industries to improve performance.
Needs of the Engineering Faculties
The
engineering faculties are to be exposed to the cognitive system, cognitive
knowledge, self-system, intrinsic motivation, students' perceived value of
learning tasks, students' metacognitive system, selfguidance system, learned
helplessness, and at-risk learners. This research is centered around these
concepts and develops guidelines for the faculty for a systematic instructional
design.
According to
Linda Nilson (2019), self-regulated learning is about one's relationship with
one's ability to exert the effort, self-control, and critical selfassessment
necessary to achieve the best possible results.
3. Andragogy
Malcolm S.
Knowles' Theory of Andragogy is a learning theory that is developed on the
specific needs of adults. Knowles emphasizes that executives are
Table 3 : Andragogy
|
Factor |
Self-Directed Learning (Butler &Cartier’s Model) |
Andragogy (Malcolm S. Knowles’ Theory) |
|
Selfconcept |
Ready to
meet the challenges |
Increasing selfdirectedness |
|
Experience |
Trying to gain experiences. |
Learning
is a rich resource for learning |
|
Readiness |
Ready due to self-perceptions |
Development Tasks of social roles |
|
Time Perspective |
Self-regulating |
Problem centered |
|
Learning Climate |
Students engage in
learning |
Mutually respectful, Collaborative & Informal |
|
Planning |
Based on contexts, strengths, and interests. |
Mutual selfdiagnosis |
|
Objectives |
Personal objectives |
Mutual negotiation |
|
Design |
Self-regulating activities |
Sequenced in terms of readiness problem units |
|
Activities |
Cognitive strategies |
Experiential techniques (Inquiry) |
|
Evaluation |
Compare outcomes
with internal or external standards |
Mutual re-diagnosis |
self-directed and expect to take responsibility for
decisions. Executive development programs must accommodate this basic aspect.
The following table summarizes the processes of self-directed learning and
andragogy (Table-3).
4. Objectives
of Research
1.
To identify the possible reasons for large failures of
the engineering students in the basic and core courses even though they have
achieved very well in their higher secondary examinations.
2.
To assess the students' learning process, selfsystem,
learning and belief, the perceived value of the learning tasks, and
metacognitive system.
3.
To suggest guidelines to the faculties on students'
self-system, counseling the students on the utilities of core and basic courses
in engineering, and use the principles of andragogy in the instructional
design.
4.
To review the self-regulated learning strategies of the
faculty members
5.
To review the self-regulated learning strategies of
employees of industries
Part-1 Research Methodology
To develop the
skills of engineering faculty in planning needed instructional design and
delivery based on SRL the following instructional activities have been
undertaken:
A set of six
engineering colleges in the southern region have been selected and the around
30 faculty members in each college have been trained on the principles of
self-directed learning (SRL), andragogy, a cognitive system, metacognitive
system, a cognitive knowledge, self-system, students' learning process, learned
helplessness system, andragogy, and
at-risk learners, and perceived value of tasks. The faculties have been requested
to identify the learning difficulties of their students, the performance of the
students on the basic and the core courses in the semester examinations. They
have been guided to redesign the courses and the instructional methods. The
needs for various courses, their utility in engineering projects, planning,
design, prototype, testing and improving, program educational objectives, and
the planned outcome are discussed.
They revised and improved the courses and included
many field-specific cases. Further, the impact of new technologies on
engineering is also discussed. The
career planning of the students has been evaluated. This created a purposeful
learning environment. They communicated the value of learning the basic and
core courses and why the engineers need to learn. This helped the students to
focus on their cognitive system, learning process, intrinsic motivation, and
improved performance. The outcomes of this methodology have been assessed
through the results of the semester examinations. The students were given case
studies to investigate and offer solutions. This is like offering jobs in
fast-growing companies. This has motivated them to concentrate on the needed
skills and competencies. They desired to undertake fieldspecific problems.
Many desired to
choose a design-oriented project, and some desired manufacturing jobs. Their
motivation was highest. This methodology is almost like project-based learning
or problem-based learning. The major differences are the learners' motivation
and achievement goals are tapped. They also incorporated their projects in to
their portfolio. They actively participated in the industrial exposures.
A few got internships in leading companies.
5. Analysis
of The Performance
|
Table 4 : Increase in Performance in the Examinations
|
The performance
of students of six institutes are presented as outcomes in basic courses, core
courses, and advanced courses in Table-4 below:
Inferences and Discussions
Average
pass per cent increases in the Basic Courses (Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics)
after improvements in the instructional design = 16.17%
It is inferred
that the changes in the instructional design and delivery substantially
improved the performance of the first-year students. It is further inferred
that the needs of the basic courses have been well received by the students and
they have understood the needs of these courses and studied well.
Average pass
per cent increase in the Core Courses (Drawing, Engineering Courses) = 17.3%.
The updated
instructional design has improved 17.37% pass percent increase on the average.
Average per
cent increase in the Advanced Courses = 5.99.
It is inferred
that the students have understood the needs of the advanced courses even before
the improved instructional design. Hence, the average pass per cent increase is
only 5.99.
Role of Faculty in SRL
The following
steps must be taken by the faculty members to achieve the goals of SRL:
· Counselling, Coaching, and Mentoring of the
participants in the planning stage.
Ÿ
Assisting on the growth of the job market
Ÿ
Skills and competencies needed
Ÿ
Choosing the courses to meet the career goals
Ÿ
Reviewing the performance
Ÿ
Aiding to improve the performance
Ÿ
Suggestions for undertaking research projects
Ÿ
Planning publications
Ÿ
Suggestions to undergo industrial training
Ÿ
Suggestions for preparing portfolios and campus
interviews, and
Ÿ
Guidance for postgraduate programs.
Part-2: Focus on Self-Directed Faculty Development
Programs
Many graduates
join the teaching profession as soon as they graduate. Later after serving for
about five years, they avail the leave to pursue postgraduate programs. Again,
after another five years, some would plan to undergo Ph.D. programs. This
process of updating their skills and competence can be modeled under
self-regulated learning as follows:
i). Planning Stage (Metacognitive learning
strategies)
Ÿ
Changing contexts in higher education (their
growth demands higher degrees like master's and Doctoral degrees),
Ÿ
They self-evaluate their mental capability,
Ÿ
They choose to self-regulate their further
learning,
Ÿ
They plan, and set goals to acquire a
postgraduate degree in the desired field of specialization,
Ÿ
Choose appropriate institute/ university which
offers desired advanced courses or change to another institute or choosing
another guide,
ii). Performance Stage (Cognitive learning
strategies: Deep learning and transformation)
Ÿ
They allow the time for classes, assignments,
field visits, etc.) (Time Management)
Ÿ
Choose desired courses, an internship in
industry, taking prescribed tests and submitting the assignments, topic for
dissertation or thesis, (Motivational Orientations)
Ÿ
Undertake projects and publishing papers to get
desired grades (Situational Motivation state) iii). Reflection Stage
Ÿ
Monitor their progress like grades, and
publication of original papers in desired outstanding journals,
Ÿ
They evaluate their performance against the
standards prescribed for graduation or employment
Ÿ
Acquire needed competence for guiding the
students or undertaking sponsored research projects or to bid projects under
Multinational National Companies (MNCs) International Development Agencies
(IDAs).
This process
can be modeled as similar to Boekaets' (1997 &1999) model since the action
of the participant encompasses motivation, cognitive and metacognitive aspects.
Barriers to Self-Regulated Learning
Ÿ
Approval to pursue the planned courses was
denied by many educational administrators.
Ÿ
Improper course schedules
Ÿ
High course fees
Ÿ
Conflicts with the guides/supervisors
Ÿ
Lack of laboratory resources
Ÿ
Lack of desired electives
The educational
leaders must ensure that the goals are achieved due to systematic efforts of
the training and development process.
Part-3: Opposition to Implement Certain Advances in the
Curriculum and Instruction to Implement by the Faculty Members
Many faculty
members have Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) based on the available resources,
management support and the feasibility of implementing the advances need in the
curriculum, instructional methods, evaluation, and industrial exposure. Some of
the resistances brought forwarded are as follows (Table-5):
Table 5: Changes and Faculty Reactions
|
Changes Contemplated |
The
Reaction of the Faculty Members |
|
Introduction of IndustrySpecific Curriculum in Engineering Programs |
The
faculty felt that there is no response from the industry; the management will
not modernize the facilities in the labs and workshops; there is no active
partnership between the institute and industry;
and no need to support the industry when they pay less salary to the
graduates. |
|
Improvements to the
instructional methods like to use case study, blended
methods, industrysponsored dissertation, etc. |
There i s no need to change the current instructional
methods; there are no proper case
studies to supplement the classroom teaching; industries are not interested
in sharing the data and
information to undertake the dissertation works; there is no benefit to the
faculty; there is a large shortage o f faculty; the institute is
located in a rural area, etc. |
|
Part-time programs |
Additional work; can’t find spare time; there is no reward;
promotion is based on non academic criteria, etc. |
|
Development self- instructional of modules and MMLPs |
Shortage of supporting staff, shortage of Software like Director, Toolbook, and Authorware, etc .
for developing multimedia learning packages. |
Suggested Solutions
Improve the
resources and infrastructure, salary, and recruit and promote faculty based on
their academic credentials, initiate active collaboration between the Institute
and industry, and implement strategic planning. The mere introduction of
changes will not improve performance in such poor academic environments. There
is a need for capacity development, quality improvement, and efficiency
improvement. Self-regulated learning of the faculty reflects the poor resources,
motivation, recognition, and rewards. Until the academic ecosystem is improved,
implementation is not possible. There
is a need for constant interactions between the trainers and the sponsors in
planning, reviewing, and improving the development programs.
Part 4: Development Programs for Executives of
Companies
These development
programs could be planned by the organization to inculcate the needed skills
and abilities. 12 short-term programs have been conducted for 208 executives of
private companies and government engineering departments and presented in
Table-6.
Table-6 Executive Training
|
Context |
Type of
the Training Program |
|
Improving skills and
competencies that are related to current occupation. |
Short-term courses on contextual knowledge and skills. Sponsored customized in-house
programs. |
|
Acquiring advanced skills and professional
competencies for promotion or new jobs in another company |
Part-time
graduate and postgraduate programs; Flexible sequential summer and winter
schools; massive online open courses. |
|
Advanced production processes based on upgrading the manufacturing to
world-class standards |
Training in similar companies,
Corporate universities, Training in the collaborator’s plants. |
|
Advanced knowledge in creating a moder n
manufacturing plant. |
Focused
postgraduate programs and internship s in the modern production units which
is similar to the proposed manufacturing units. |
|
Consultant to industry |
Full-time or Part -time Doctoral Program |
There is a
need for constant interactions between the trainers and the sponsors in
planning, reviewing, and improving the development programs.
Characteristics of Executive Learners
Based on the
discussions, the following information has been obtained. Most of the
executives have their self-regulated learning strategies and have an
identifiable mission. Further, the following characteristics need to be
considered in planning development programs:
Ÿ
Bringing the past experiences to the classroom/
training organization.
Ÿ
Pursuing self-direction based on the personal
and organizational mission.
Ÿ
Coming to the classroom to resolve the doubts
and to get solutions
Ÿ
Ready to learn the advances in his/her areas
which are needed to fulfill his/her goals
Ÿ
Learner's educational interest should meet his/
her career goals
Ÿ
Values the program when it meets his/her
areas of concern.
The Motivation of Executive/ In-Service Learners
Almost all the
executives have the motivation to perform very well in a challenging
environment. Some of the issues are as follows:
Ÿ
Social relationships, associates with similar
professional experiences,
Ÿ
Ready to meet the classroom challenges,
Ÿ
Ready to undertake social work,
Ÿ
Plans to upgrade his professional advancement,
Ÿ
Looks for advances in the theories related to
his current works,
Ÿ
Looks for new knowledge and higher-order
cognitive development.
Barriers to Pursuing the Needed Training Programs
From the feedback of executives, the following
barriers are received:
Ÿ
Too short courses
Ÿ
The course objectives are too shallow
Ÿ
Lack of practice sessions
Ÿ
Lack of guidance to select the training
institutes
Ÿ
Lack of qualified trainers
Ÿ
Lack of coaching and mentoring
Ÿ
Lack of quality manuals and job-aids
These barriers have to be eliminated in future
courses.
Part-4: Planning and Implementing Executive Development
Programs who are deputed by organizations for improving the performance of the
organization based on the Self-Regulated Learning
208 Executives of various companies and government
departments have been trained in SRL. The focused areas are:
1.
Reducing the Manufacturing Cost of Auto- Ancillary
Components,
2.
Reducing the Power Consumption for Cement companies,
3.
Improving the Environment Quality around Cement Plants,
4.
Improving the Safe Work Practices in a set of 25 Cement
Companies,
5.
Improving the Skills of Agricultural Students in Fruit
Processing in a developing country,
6.
Improving the Skills in Trekking for the instructors in
a mountaineering institute,
7.
Improving the Performance of Hotel Managers established
by a state,
8.
Improving Managerial Skills in Small Business Units of
local entrepreneurs.
9.
Certifying the skills acquired by the experienced
workers through skill testing based on the NVEQF Model.
10.Developing skills in video
production.
Instructional Development Process
Ÿ
Conduct needs assessment survey based on the
improvements to be introduced in the workplace.
Ÿ Evaluate the existing practices, leadership,
tools, ergonomics, resources available, prevailing environment of the
organization, interpersonal relationships in the workplace.
Ÿ
Evaluate the reasons for poor performance.
Ÿ
Evaluate the existing skill levels of the
employees/ workers/ students.
Ÿ
Analyze the learning tasks.
Ÿ
Set the goals, objectives to meet the planned
developments.
Ÿ
Assess the needed equipment, tools, resources,
operating manuals, job aids, work-place environment, instructional manuals,
case studies, action research problems, & participant activities.
Ÿ
Plan the instructional package to improve the
skills.
Ÿ
Counsel the participants on the program.
Ÿ
Get the feedback and input so that the needed
changes can be introduced.
Ÿ
Improve the motivation by describing the outcome
and benefits to the organization as well as to the participants.
Ÿ
Conduct participative skill development/ or
knowledge development programs with a planned instructional method with
appropriate learning aids, on-the-job practice, and safe work practices, to
reach preplanned outcomes.
Ÿ
Clarify their doubts.
Ÿ
Focus on skill transfer.
Ÿ
Ensure the needed resources in the organization
after completion of the training.
Ÿ
Get a evaluation of the participants'
performance by the sponsoring agency.
Ÿ
Discuss and make changes desired.
Ÿ
Observe the performance of the participants and
interact.
Ÿ
Train them to overcome the obstacles in the
workplace in consultation with the managers of the organization.
Ÿ
Monitor the improved performance and progress.
Ÿ
Get the feedback on the resources, tools, job
aids, manuals, leadership, interpersonal relationships, environment,
appreciative inquiry on their performance.
Ÿ
Coach the participants wherever required.
Ÿ
Guide them on time management.
Ÿ
Adopt proper planning, needed strategies, and
suggest self- monitoring.
This training
helped the senior faculty members to plan and implement many training and
development programs for the MSMEs and local government executives.
6. Conclusion
The faculty of the
engineering colleges need exposure and training on the socio-cognitive learning
theory, self-regulation, self-system, metacognition, self-regulatory process,
motivation, and behavior, setting realistic goals, self- evaluation, designing
instructions to appeal to the self-system of the students, achievement
motivation. They must be councilors, coaches, and mentors to the learners. The
instructional design should be based on the self- regulated learning of the
engineering students.
This approach has
improved the pass percentages as follows: Basic Courses: 16.17%; Core Courses:
17.37% and Advanced Courses: 5.99%.
It is
concluded that instructional design based on self-regulation and
self-efficiency would enhance the performance and competence of the engineering
students and they will become industry-ready.
The faculty
need to be trained in planning executive development programs which are
sponsored by various companies in the state. The outcome assessed after 5 years
shows a substantial improvement in the performance of the organization.
References
[1] Ana-Maria
Cazan. (2010). Teaching Self-Regulated Learning Strategies for Psychology
Students, Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences,
78, 743-747.
[2] Bandura,
A. (1986). Social Foundation of Thought and Action. A Social Cognitive Theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
[3] Boekaerts,
M. (1997). Self-regulated Learning: A New Concept Embraced by Researchers,
Policymakers, Educators, Teachers, and Students. Learning and Instruction,
7(2), 161-186.
[4] Boekaerts,
M. (1999). Self-regulated Learning: Where We are Today? International Journal
of Educational Research, 31, 445-457.
[5] Butler,
D.L., and Cartier, C., (2004). Learning in Varying Activities: An Explanatory
Framework and a New Evaluation Tool Founded on a Model of Self-Regulated
Learning”, Annual Conference of the Canadian Society of Education, Toronto, ON.
[6] Coffield,
F., Moseley, D., Hall, E. and Ecclestone.K. (2004). Should We be using Learning
styles? What Research has to say to Practice. London: Learning Skills Research
Center.
[7] Exploring
Your Mind. (2019). Self-Regulated
Learning: What is it and Why is it Important?
Retrieved from: https://www.exploring
yourmind.com/self-regulated-learning-
important/
[8] Jahanshir
Tavakolizadeh, Hassan Yadollahi B, and
Hadi Poorshafeic. (2012). The Role of SelfRegulated
Learning Strategies in Psychological Well-Being a Condition of Students.
Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 60, 807-815.
[9] Jika
Jakesova and Jan Kalenda. (2015). Self-regulated Learning: Critical-realistic
Conceptualization, Procedia- Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 171, 178-1
[10] Knowles, M. (1975).
Self-Directed Learning. Chicago: Follet
[11] Knowles,
M (1984). The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species, (3rd Ed.). Houston: Gulf
Publishing.
[12] Knowles, M.S., et al.
(1984) Andragogy in Action. Applying Modern Principles of Adult Education, San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
[13] Markus Dresel, et al.
(2015). Competencies for Successful Self-regulated Learning in Higher
Education: Structural Model and Indications Drawn from Expert Interviews,
Journal on Studies in Higher Education, 10(3),454-470.,
[14] Masoud Gholamali Lavasani,
et al. (2011). The Effect of Self-regulation Learning Strategies Training on
the Academic Motivation and Selfefficacy, Procedia- Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 29, 627-632.
[15] Ning Fang, Oenardi Lawanto, Wade H.
Goodridge, and Idalis Villanueva. (2016).
SelfRegulated Learning in Engineering Education: A Research Experiences
for Undergraduates (REU) Site Program, ASEE's 123rd Annual Conference and
Exposition, New Orleans, LA, Paper ID#14431
[16] Rayner, S. (2007). A Teaching
Elixir or Best-fit Pedagogy? Do Learning Styles Matter? Support for Learning,
22(1), 22-30.
[17] Simon Cassidy (2012) Conducted Research on Self-regulated Learning in Higher Education: Identifying Key Component Processes.
[18] Singer, B.D., Bashir, A.S.
(1999). What are Executive Functions and Self-regulation and
What do They have to do with LanguageLearning Disorders?
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 30, 265-273.
[19] Vermetten,Y.J.M., Vermunt, J.D.H.M
and Lodewijks, J.G.L.C. (1995). Changes in Learning Styles because of
Student-Oriented Education. Paper presented at the Biannual Meeting of the
European Association of Learning and
Instruction, Nijmegen.
[20] Zimmerman, B.J. (1994).
Dimensions of Academic Self-Regulation: A Conceptual
Framework for Education, In Schunk, D.H. and Zimmerman, B.
J (Eds). Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance: Issues and Educational
Applications, Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
[21] Zimmerman, B.J. (2002).
Becoming a Selfregulated Learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2),
64-70.
[22] Zumbrunn. S., Tedlock, J., & Robert, E.D.
(2011)
Encouraging Self-regulated Learning in the Classroom:
A Review of the Literature.
Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium
(MERC)
Brief CV of the Author
Thanikachalam Vedhathiri, B.E., (1968, Civil Engineering, University of Madras), M. Tech. (1970, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, IIT Madras), Ph.D., (1975, Filter Design for Earth and Rockfill Dams, University of Madras), M.S. (1988, Instructional System Technology, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA)., FIGS., FIE., FFIUCEE. FMR Professor and HOD, Center for International Affairs, National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research, Chennai-India. FMR Senior Researcher under the Fulbright Scheme at Indiana University,
Bloomington, Indiana, USA, 1988.
Komentar
Posting Komentar