The OECD underlines the impact of lifelong learning as a topic of central relevance. Therefore, this topic should be considered in school, as well as university, and throughout the life-span. Self-regulated learning – as the key competence for lifelong learning – gains more and more importance. Despite the large amount of research in this field from the last years, there still remain unanswered questions on how to improve self-regulated learning among learners. New tasks for the school system appeared, but also adult learners have to acquire these competences needed to continue learning throughout their professional life.

The symposium integrates two approaches: improving competencies of adults to foster lifelong learning, as well as focussing on teachers who act as mediators in promoting self-regulated learning.  The symposium presents four papers which deal with lifelong learning during adulthood, including teachers, trainees, postgraduates, as well as university students. Quantitative data of (quasi)-experimental studies will be presented. The first  presentation focuses on the evaluation of a training programme to foster self-regulated learning in higher education (Gradinger, Wagner, Schober, Reimann, Lapka & Spiel). The second paper presents the use and instructional benefit of a self-regulatory model in graduate-level courses of educational psychology (Cardelle-Elawar & Cano). The third presentation deals with a training programme to enhance postgraduate students’ self-regulation (Schmidt & Schmitz). The last presentation focuses on teachers as promotors of self-regulated learning (Dignath).

Self-regulated learning is the important competence to adapt to changing learning conditions, which becomes even more important in times of rapid economic, social and structural changes. Hence supporting academic self-regulation is not only an ambition of the Commission of the European Communities (2000), but also a necessity, since it was shown that this competence decreases with increasing grade (Spiel & Schober, 2002). Therefore the aim of the present study was to test for the effects of a self-regulation training program for students in higher education. The training program is based on the social cognitive model of self-regulation by Zimmerman (2000) and the process model of self-regulated learning (Schmitz & Wiese, 2006), which view self-regulation as composed of three phases, namely forethought, performance and self-reflection. In addition to self-regulation, cooperation and e-competence were also imparted. For the training evaluation a quasi-experimental pre-post-test-design was applied. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected using a questionnaire before and after the intervention from 84 students and 84 matched controls (M_age=24, SD_age=3.98) from Austria. Using analyses of variances the results showed significant better changes in training participants than in control-group participants concerning all program goals. Regarding self-regulation especially processes of the forethought and self-reflection phase were affected, showing effect-sizes between d=.32 and d=46 (p<.05). Training participants also showed better changes than control-group participants concerning cooperation (d=.46, p<.001) and e-competence (d=.26, p<.05). Qualitative data supported quantitative results. All in all, the study shows that self-regulation can effectively be supported in university students and consequently provides a better qualification for lifelong learning. Thus universities are well advised to systematically support these important competences, namely self-regulation, cooperation and e-competence, to not only produce well skilled young adults but also to be competitive in attracting students.

Self-regulated learning is the important competence to adapt to changing learning conditions, which becomes even more important in times of rapid economic, social and structural changes. Hence supporting academic self- regulation is not only an ambition of the Commission of the European Communities (2000), but also a necessity, since it was shown that this competence decreases with increasing grade (Spiel & Schober, 2002). Therefore the aim of the present study was to test for the effects of a self-regulation training program for students in higher education. The training program is based on the social cognitive model of self-regulation by Zimmerman (2000) and the process model of self-regulated learning (Schmitz & Wiese, 2006), which view self-regulation as composed of three phases, namely forethought, performance and self-reflection, with predominantly operating processes. Important processes are for instance goal orientation, incremental implicit theory, interest, self-efficacy and self-concept (forethought phase), task strategies like rehearsal and organisation, then persistence, monitoring, regulation of emotions and time-management (performance phase) and helplessness, dealing with failure and cognitive regulation (self-reflection phase). In addition to self-regulation, cooperation and e-competence were also imparted, constituting the three goals of the intervention. The didactic concept of the intervention was implemented as a blended learning course, with the systematic combination of online modules and traditional face-to-face-units in the lecture hall. Following the recommendation of Schunk and Ertmer (2000) or Hattie, Biggs and Purdie (1996), the training program was totally integrated into a content domain, specifically into a course of research methods and evaluation for university graduate students of Psychology. Consequently we expected participants of the training program to become better self-regulated learners, with more cooperation and higher e-competence and hoped for higher domain knowledge in the content of research methods and evaluation as a distal indicator than untrained students. For the training evaluation a quasi-experimental pre-post-test-design was applied. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected using a questionnaire before and after the intervention with complete data from 84 students and 84 matched controls (M_age=24, SD_age=3.98) from Austria. Data collection took place within the lecture hall and lasted no longer than one hour. For that, time was reserved at the beginning of the first course unit and after the final examination. Student participation was remunerated with course credit. Regarding the baseline, no significant differences could be detected between the two groups before the intervention, F (17, 147) = 1.32, p>.05, η²=.13. To test for program effectiveness pre-post-test-comparisons between and within the groups were performed. Using analyses of variances with “group” as factor and “time” as repeated measurement factor, the results showed significant better changes in the training participants than in control-group participants concerning all program goals. Regarding self-regulation especially processes of the forethought and self-reflection phase were affected. Concerning the forethought phase, significant different changes between the groups could be detected in incremental implicit theory (d=.36), interest (d=.32), self-efficacy (d=.46) and self-concept (d=.43). Concerning the performance phase significant different changes between the groups could be detected in rehearsal (d=.24) and marginally in regulation of emotions (d=.22). Concerning the self-reflection phase significant different changes between the groups could be detected in helplessness (d=.35), dealing with failure (d=.44) and marginally in cognitive regulation (d=.26). Training participants also showed significant better changes than control-group participants concerning cooperation (d=.46) and e-competence (d=.26). Dependent t-tests were used to analyse the change within both groups and revealed the expected increases in the training group. In some variables the training group kept stable (e. g. rehearsal, dealing with failure), while the control group decreased. In sum, qualitative data supported quantitative results. In discussing these results one has to mention that processes of the performance phase, where the learning action is really active, the training was clearly not so effective. This could be due to the general difficulty of changing behaviour, or that not all strategies of action are effective on all tasks, so “more” is not always “better”. All in all, the study shows that self-regulated learning can effectively be supported in university students and consequently provides a better qualification for lifelong learning. Thus, universities are well advised to systematically support these important competences, namely self-regulation, cooperation and e-competence, to not only produce well skilled young adults but also to be competitive in attracting students.

Research Purpose

The purpose of this study is to design a self-regulatory action research approach model (IDEA) that ask participants to identify, define, explore and assess the theory of multiple intelligences to understand the complexity of teaching in addressing their own students’ individual differences in learning. Three research questions guided the study: (1) How do teacher participants construct their views about their strengths and limitations through to regulate their thinking for action? (2) How do teachers learn about and from their students’ strengths and difficulties by using multiple intelligences to address their individual needs and listen to their voices? (3) How do teachers use the self-regulatory instructional approach to improve their own professional development as co-authors of their students’ success?

Theoretical Background

The analysis is based on the research findings on self-regulation defined in the literature as the deliberate planning and monitoring of one’s cognition and emotional process during the undertaking of an academic task, such instruction, and evaluating of one’s outcome (Boekaert & Corno, 2005). It reflects teachers’ self-confidence that extends to the engagement of students who might be difficult or unmotivated and affects their choice of activities, effort, and persistence in overcoming difficulties (Boakaerts, 2008; Woolfolk, 2008;). It may have a causal effect on the development of goal setting and skills. Mastery of a skill may place the teacher in a better position to satisfy the motivation need of being successful (Elliot & Dweck, 2005; Zimmerman & Shunck, 2004; Weiner, 2005). Teachers with a goal and sense of self-efficacy for attaining it are apt to engage in instructional activities they believe will lead to students’ successful performance (Lock & Latham, 2002; Woolfolk Hoy, 2007).

Method and Design of the Study

The IDEA model (see Figure 1) was designed as a self-regulating approach to help students to understand their motivation in acting as problem solvers in the classroom. It started with an introduction that outlines the scenario and purpose of the assignment of a case study project. This consisted of developing a plan using multiple intelligences to address the needs of the typical student failing in their classes. The subsequent tasks and processes were embedded in the WebQuest. The case study project finishes with an evaluation and conclusion that guides students on how to organize and assess the information and transfer the knowledge to their own classrooms.

Figure 1: IDEA Model

Data Collection  and Analysis Procedures

We analyzed the data from (1) a survey of participants in regard to their previous (pre) and current (post) knowledge about multiple intelligences and self-regulation. (2), from a semi-structured interview as a dialogic retrospection to elicit participant’s voice in regard of the value of the self-regulatory tool to reflect about themselves, their students, and ways to improve their teaching effectiveness using multiple intelligences during their case study project. The participants’ narratives represent a phenomenological interpretation of the interviews.

We used an iterative, recursive, and constant-comparison process to analyze the data. The verbatim written interview responses were collated and analyzed for generative themes across all participants for the three research questions. These theme analyses identify the meaning and values attributed by participants within the context of their experiences and their new understanding of teaching and learning.

Results

The overall content of the participants’ verbatim responses can be related to three primary changes:

a)    Becoming a self-reflective teacher, as they become aware that paying early attention to students that have special individual needs can have a larger impact on those students over the course of their lives.

“I have learned a great deal about myself, my students, the curriculum, teaching strategies and methods, assessment and evaluation. My opinions about each of these issues has [sic] changed dramatically now that I have had experience with this IDEA model as guide”

 b)    Identifying students’ individual differences. The teaching of multiple intelligences provided flexibility to think about different ways that their students learn. “I now can understand and appreciate the value of the multiple intelligence theory. This framework has provided me with new insights into student performance, behavior, and success. It has also changed the way that I view students, as well as how I plan for instruction.”

c)   Continuing professional growth, as teachers recognized their motivation to transfer their knowledge to their peers as a way of helping themselves in their own personal growth.

“Now that I have completed this class, I would love to conduct an in-service at my school using the IDEA model and the multiple intelligence theory. I think that most teachers would feel refreshed by a new way of looking at student learning. It is very easy in this profession to shoulder all of the blame when our students do not perform ‘typically’. After all, if students do not learn the way we teach, we must teach the way they learn!

Discussion

The IDEA model designed as an instructional mediator for graduate students to learn about themselves and their students has been successful thus far and its impact is expected to continue as teachers transfer their learning experience using multiple intelligences to their daily lesson plans. This represents a strong shift towards caring about the students as individuals before caring about their test scores. This interactive self-regulatory approach has implications not only for teachers but also for their students as they become engaged in reflecting, thinking, and speaking to deepen their understanding of becoming in control of their own learning.

Teachers used the theory of multiple intelligences to identify ways to engage students in a learning process that is challenging, authentic, integrative and self-perpetuating. The teachers become mediators in their own classrooms by using multiple intelligences to tailor instruction to their students’ needs. The  IDEA model demonstrated the value as a mediator to create a framework for helping students meet the challenges of teaching an increasingly diverse classroom.

This study should provide an insight into different perspectives on teachers’ strategy instruction in real mathematics classroom settings by comparing multi-methods of assessment and multi-perspectives of observers, teachers and students. For this purpose, an assessment instrument was developed to register teachers’ strategy instruction and their creation of learning environments which are conducive to self-regulated learning. Observation data was compared with data from questionnaires asking teachers about their promotion of self-regulated learning, as well as asking students how they judge their teachers’ promotion of self-regulated learning. A comparison of these three perspectives revealed that the perspectives differ among each other with the teachers tending to overestimate themselves. Future research should account for these differences by applying multiple methods to assess the different perspectives.

Introduction

The majority of studies investigating teachers’ promotion of self-regulated learning or the construction of the learning environment are based on survey data, and therefore on teachers’ own perceptions (see Den Brok, Brekelmans & Wubbels, 2006; Seidel, 2006) which might be biased (e.g. Fraser, 1994). From a methodological point of view, recent research on self-regulated learning and the assessment of its effects has emphasized the importance of combining multiple methods (e.g., Patrick & Middleton, 2002; Veenman, 2005). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods to assess teachers’ support of self-regulated learning, as well as assessing three different perspectives on this support – observation, as well as teachers’ and students’ perceptions – meet this demand. Another important point is students’ perceptions of the learning environment and of their teacher’s behaviour as an important source of information (Seidel, 2006). Den Brok, Brekelmans and Wubbels (2006) suggest investigating students’ perceptions when analyzing the effects of learning environments. In addition, they stress the importance of conducting multilevel analyses when assessing different levels of perception: teachers’ and students’ perspectives of the learning environment. Kunter et al. (2007) demand multi-method studies which combine student und teacher data with each other, as well as with external observation data (see also Porter, 2002).

Research Question: A multi-method approach is applied 1. to identify quality and quantity of elements teachers’ support of self-regulated learning and its effects on students’ academic self-regulation competence, as well as 2. to study how teachers’ and students’ perceptions might interact.

Based on a model of self-regulated learning by Boekaerts (1999), which is classifying self-regulation strategies into three areas – cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational strategies – a key assumption of teachers’ instruction of self-regulated learning is his or her teaching, explanation, or modelling of strategies from these three areas. Furthermore, empirical studies revealed the importance of explicit training of strategies in addition to teachers acting as a model by using these strategies (e.g., Brown, 1978; Schraw, 1998). Moreover, recent research has also stressed the impact of the learning environment on supporting self-regulated learning (e.g. Boekaerts & Corno, 2005).

This study investigated teachers’ promotion of self-regulated learning in seventh grade mathematics classrooms by means of multiple methods and multiple perspectives. The following research questions were explored:

Method

Seventeen teachers  and 376 seventh graders took part in the study. The observations took place during mathematics classes. Thirty-three lessons – two per teacher (one teacher was videotaped only once) - were videotaped. The video coding was carried out on the basis of time sampling (one minute time units) and was aggregated on class level.

In a first step, an observation instrument was developed to observe teachers’ instruction of self-regulation strategies as well as their support of self-regulated learning by means of several characteristics of powerful learning environments (Dignath & Büttner, submitted). In a second step, these observations of teachers’ promotion of self-regulated learning were set in relation to teachers’ own perceptions assessed by means of a survey asking teachers to rate several features of their teaching, which was based on two questionnaires. In a third step, teachers’ and students’ perceptions were compared.

According to the model of Boeakerts (1999), a low-inferent part of the observation instrument assessed how often teachers instructed cognitive, metacognitive, or motivational strategies. Interrater Based on the CLIA model of DeCorte et al. (2004), the existence of the following features of the learning environment was rated: quantity and quality of cooperative learning, constructivist learning principles, fostering transfer by situating learning and problem-based learning, self-determination.

Teachers were asked to rate several aspects of their teaching with regard to the promotion of self-regulated learning.

 For students’ ratings, a parallel version of the teacher questionnaires was used to ask students for their perception of the promotion of self-regulated learning during their mathematics classes.

Results and Discussion

To sum up, the most striking result of the analyses was that no explicit strategy instruction at all was observed. If teachers refer to strategies, they mainly do it in an implicit way by using a particular strategy themselves; however, without elaborating that this is a strategy and how it is to be applied.  For most of the survey scales, teachers’ ratings of their own teaching practice ranged above the scale mean. From the students’ perspective, teachers’ activation of cognitive autonomy was rated highest, while the activation of metacognition and self-reflection scored only low.

No significant correlations were found between teachers’ ratings in the questionnaire and the observation data or between students’ ratings and observation data. Significant correlations between teacher and student ratings were found for their perception of teachers’ activation of self-regulation and metacognition.

Overall, the results demonstrated that the different perspectives vary in their rating of self-regulation: Teachers’ estimations in the questionnaires correlate to some extent with students’ ratings concerning teachers’ lack of activating metacognition. Interestingly, the teaching observations did not correlate with any of the ratings – neither from the students’ nor the teachers’ perspective. Teachers have a different perception, prone to overestimate themselves. This is in line with Fraser (1994) and Fisher and Fraser (1983), who found that teachers tend to perceive their classroom management more positively relative to student reports. Students, who perceive their teachers as more supporting with cognitive and metacognitive activation, as well as with instruction for independence, and cognitive autonomy, reported higher grades. However, no significant relationship was found between students’ grades and observation data or teacher ratings. Thus, with regard to the multi-method assessment of teachers’ promotion of self-regulated learning, the study revealed that observations of teachers’ instruction can be analyzed in a reliable way. However, the perception seems to differ between the three perspectives. In general, teachers showed more positive estimations than the observations and students ratings. Furthermore, teacher and student ratings correlated partially, while they did not correlate with the observations. Thus, this might be due to the fact that the questionnaires are rather assessing the promotion of self-regulated learning as a trait, while the video observations measure it as a state (see Winne & Perry, 2000).