Contenido principal del artículo
AutoresJorge Gómez Gómez
Research shows that students with high and low academic performance are different in their approaches to learning, that is, they have their own systematic way of transforming information into knowledge. Good students, for example, are able to employ a range of positive strategies for learning, such as performance monitoring and the use of an active task approach (Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons, 1986). These students are also more aware of the strategies they use and why they use them (Pintrich, 2000). Self-regulated learning (SRL) is defined as an active process in which students accept autonomy and responsibility for their own learning by actively setting goals and thereby planning, monitoring, regulating, and evaluating their learning progress (Boekaerts, Pintrich, and Zeidner, 2000). Self-regulated learning is a complex concept that includes several elements. According to (Zeidner et al., 2000) self-regulated learning involves various components: cognitive, affective, motivational, and behavioral, which provide the individual with the ability to adjust his or her actions and goals in order to achieve the desired result in the face of variable environmental conditions. Therefore, students are considered self-regulated to the extent that they are metacognitively, motivationally and behaviourally active in their own learning processes (Zimmerman, 1989a). These processes describe how learners pose problems, apply strategies, monitor their performance and interpret the results of their efforts (Paris & Winograd, 2001). Elements considered to be part of self-regulated learning, such as cognition, metacognition, motivation, behaviour and context, are described below (McKeachie et al., 1987; Zimmerman, 2000; Pintrich, 2000).
Detalles del artículo
Zimmerman, B. J., & Pons, M. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American educational research journal, 23(4), 614-628.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). Academic Press.
Zeidner, M., Boekaerts, M., & Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Self-regulation: Directions and challenges for future research. In Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 749-768). Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of educational psychology, 81(3), 329.
Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (2003). The Role of Self-Regulated Learning in Contextual Teaching: Principals and Practices for Teacher Preparation.
McKeachie, W. J. (1987). Can evaluating instruction improve teaching?. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1987(31), 3-7.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). Academic Press.
McCombs, B. L., & Whisler, J. S. (1989). The role of affective variables in autonomous learning. Educational Psychologist, 24(3), 277-306.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and psychological measurement, 53(3), 801-813.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Routledge.
Schneider, W., & Pressley, M. (2013). Introduction to memory development during childhood and adolescence. Psychology Press.
McCrindle, A. R., & Christensen, C. A. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performance. Learning and instruction, 5(2), 167-185.
Desoete, A. (2008). Multi-method assessment of metacognitive skills in elementary school children: How you test is what you get. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 189.
Winne, P. H. (1995). Self-regulation is ubiquitous but its forms vary with knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 223-228.