Academic self-regulation is a competence students need to meet the requirements of life-long learning and academic achievement. Therefore, it is important to analyse which factors affect students’ academic self-regulation in order to find possibilities to support self-regulated learning in classroom. In this symposium, we present four different approaches, which focus on different aspects of academic self-regulation and achievement in the context of classroom learning.  

The symposium starts with two studies which analyse the impact of schooling and academic instruction on students’ self-regulatory learning skills: Nurmi et al. describe in their presentation how students impact their teachers’ instruction and Michel et al. investigate the effects of schooling on the development of self-regulatory skills with one aspect being executive functioning in the cognitive domain. The third reported study also refers to classroom learning and focuses on a more specific topic of the effects of graphed feedback on calibration accuracy and performance in mathematics (Labuhn et al.). We close the symposium with a study which examines the relationship between self-regulated learning, academic achievement and supplementary tutoring (Otto & Perels).

Although the impacts of teacher practices and classroom instruction on students’ learning, academic achievement and motivation have been extensively investigated during past decades (for a review, see Perry & Weinstein, 1998), only few efforts have been made to conceptualize and examine the possibility that students also play a role in initiating and impacting teachers’ behavior and classroom instruction (as exceptions, see Pianta & al., 1997; Rutter and Maughan, 2002; Skinner and Belmont, 1993). This is surprising given that in developmental psychology children have been considered to be important agents in their interpersonal relations (Scarr & McCartney, 1983), such as family relationships (Stattin & Kerr, 1992). In this presentation I will first introduce a model that emphasizes students’ active role in classrooms. The model suggests that (1) a particular student’s initiatives and characteristics impact teachers’ instruction and classroom practices. (2) The extent to which children’s characteristics impact teachers’ behavior and instruction vary between teachers, and (3) this variation can be explained by teacher-related characteristics (experience, stress, teaching practices, etc.).

The present study made an effort to test this model by investigating the following research questions: (1) Do students’ levels of performance in reading and mathematics, and task-motivation concerning these subjects, predict how much the teacher  teaches or provides support for a particular student in classroom context? (2) Do teachers differ in respect to how much students’ academic performance and motivation impact their teaching and support for their students?  (3) What teacher characteristics (experience as a teacher, teaching goals, burnout, teaching practices, SES, etc.) predict these differences?

          To examine these research questions a total of 304 children (160 girls, 144 boys; 6-year-old in the 1^st measurement), participating in the FIRST STEPS Study, were examined in April (Time 1) of their kindergarten year in respect to their performance in reading (the Letter Knowledge Test, the Reading Words and Sentences Test, and the Sentence Comprehension Test) and math (the Diagnostic Test for Basic Mathematical Concepts), as well their task-motivation in relation to the same subjects (the Task-Value Scale for Children).  In September (Time 2) of the first elementary school year, the teachers rated each child on a five point scale according to what extent they pay attention to and give support for a particular child in respect to reading, writing and mathematics    (-2=”Substantially less than to other students”, 2=”Substantially more than to other students”). In March, of the same year teachers filled in also a questionnaire measuring their experience as teacher, teaching practices, burnout, efficacy beliefs, and their educational goals.

          The preliminary results of the multilevel modelling showed that students’ reading skills at the end of kindergarten year predicted how much the teachers invested effort to teach a particular child in reading  (Beta=-.57***).  Similarly, children’s math skills at same time predicted how much the teachers invested effort to teach a particular child in math (Beta=-.32***). The worse the children were doing at the end of kindergaten, the more teacher invested effort to teach them academic skills at the beginning of first school year.  Task-motivation did not, however, contribute to teachers’ efforts. 

          The results showed also that that there were differences between teachers in the extent to which children’s performance in the spring of kindergarten year predicted their focus and support to a particular student.  The analyses of what teacher-related variables predict these differences are in progress, as the data were gathered in the Spring of 2008.

          Overall, the results of this study suggest that student’s characteristics play an important role in teachers’ instruction and classroom practices.  They further reveal that there is an evident need to further examine students’ agency as one important determinant of classroom dynamics.

To date, little is known about the influence of formal schooling and academic instruction on children’s self-regulatory learning skills, with one aspect being executive functioning in the cognitive domain. Children’s ability to plan, sequence, monitor and control complex cognitive operations undergoes a protracted development in childhood, however, with marked improvements between 5 and 7 years appearing highly regular and seemingly uniform. Because in most countries, all children enter formal instruction at about this age, little is known about the relative impact of internally driven development and effects of formal schooling.

The to-be-presented study addresses this question by realizing a quasi-experimental approach with a longitudinal perspective. From a Swiss sample of N = 461 6-year olds, a matched sample is drawn (n = 114) with half of the children being in the 2^nd year of regular kindergarten (no formal instruction) and the other half being in the 2^nd year of a school with individualized transition to formal instruction in age-mixed classes (within a national school evaluation project). Matching was based on non-verbal intelligence, language proficiency and parents` SES.

To date, little is known about the influence of formal schooling and academic instruction on children’s self-regulatory skills, or executive functioning. It has repeatedly been shown that children’s ability to plan, sequence, monitor and control complex cognitive operations undergoes marked improvements between 5 and 7 years, with developmental progression appearing to be highly regular and seemingly uniform. But even though development of these skills appears to be internally driven and to follow a relatively strict developmental timetable, learning experiences are likely to shape and possibly accelerate development. In fact, recent research points to the role of experience influences, by indicating that young children’s executive control skills can be improved with training programs (e.g., Diamond, Barnett, Thomas, & Munro, 2007; Dowsett & Livesey, 1999; Rosario Rueda, Rothbart, McCandliss, Saccomanno, & Posner, 2005). However, because in most countries, all children enter formal instruction at about this age, little is known about the relative impact of internally driven development and effects of formal schooling.

The to-be-presented study addresses the question of contextual influences on executive functions by combining a quasi-experimental (cross-sectional) approach with a longitudinal perspective. The cross-sectional part includes the comparison of children in regular Swiss kindergarten, receiving no formal instruction, with children in schools with age-mixed classes (within a national school evaluation project). In these classes, transition to formal instruction is adapted to the child’s individual developmental progression.

The total sample consists of N = 461 children from two age groups (5- and 6-year-olds in 2008) in German speaking Swiss cantons. The longitudinal part of the study includes three measurement points, in the spring of 2008, 2009, and 2010. At each measurement point, children are tested in two 40 min-sessions with a variety of cognitive and motor tasks.  Paper-and pencil as well as computerized tasks are used to examine the three most frequently studied aspects of executive functioning (i.e., inhibiting dominant responses, updating working memory representations, and shifting between task sets). Executive functions were assessed using the Fruit Stroop test, backwards colour span, rapid naming task, and cognitive flexibility task. Short-term memory was assessed with the digit span task. Motor coordination was measured with subtests of a standardized test battery (M-ABC 2, Henderson, Sugden, & Barnett, 2007). Parents and teacher rated children’s self-regulatory skills with questionnaires. Children’s socioeconomic background (SES) was measured as a composite score including parental education and occupational status. Additional variables were assessed to control for differences in fluid intelligence, language, and physical health.

The data to be presented refer to a matched sample (n = 114), with half of the children being (in 2008) in the 2^nd year of regular kindergarten and the other half being in the 2^nd year of a school with individualized formal learning. Matching was done based on non-verbal intelligence, language proficiency and parents` SES. Data from the first two measurement points (2008 and 2009) will be presented.

Results of the first measurement point in the spring of 2008 revealed that children in the different institutional contexts did not differ from one another in basic cognitive functions: with regard to information processing speed, motor coordination, and simple counting skills, there were no differences between the two groups. However, individualized formal instruction proved to have a substantial influence on performance in tasks that involved executive demands: children in the individualized formal classroom settings outperformed their age- mates in kindergarten in terms of response switching (computerized task), inhibition / interference control (accuracy in the Fruit-Stroop test) working memory (digit span) and lexical access (rapid serial naming task). Further, both teachers and parents rated some aspects of emotional self-regulation higher for children in the individualized classroom settings, compared to children in regular kindergarten.

The results provide interesting insights into the influence of school contexts on the development of executive control skills. The development of self-regulatory skills that has long been considered to be mainly internally driven seems to be substantially influenced by contextual factors. Data from the first measurement point indicate that earlier transition to formal instruction might foster the acquisition of self-regulated learning skills. The data from the second measurement point in the spring of 2009, when children will have spent nearly 3 years in different school contexts, are expected to strengthen these conclusions.