My
Task is to write about 6 different concepts, two from each of the three
articles we were assigned to read. My goal is to complete this highly complex task
before deadline which is Tuesday 10.11.2015. I believe that I will be able to
meet this deadline because of my high level of dedication and determination to
this course and to the whole LET program in general. The concepts I would like
to tackle in this task are; self-regulated self-observation, self-judgement,
top-down self-regulation, bottom-up self-regulation, co-regulated and socially
shared regulated learning.
Just
before I jump into concepts and explain, provide examples and criticize I would
like to draw the attention of the reader to the fact that some of these
concepts are merely a reproduction of other concepts or ‘just another
description’. In my opinion, it is not bad to rephrase and reframe our concepts
in order to isolate and study certain phenomena separately, yet it is too
overwhelming to reproduce and overload concept with unnecessary variations when
it is just one single idea.
Self-Regulated
Learning
According to Zimmermann (1986), in
order for a student to be classified as a ‘self-regulated’
they are required to be metacognitively, motivationally, and behaviorally
active participants in their own learning process, also they are required to
personally initiate and direct their own efforts to acquire knowledge and kill rather
than relying on teachers, parents, or other agents of instruction. That means
in order for students to self-regulate their own learning they need to take
control of the whole process of learning, to be a student and a teacher at the
same time, the self-discipline factors that changes the situation. This in
itself requires students to actively develop certain ‘study skills’ and use certain ‘learning
strategies’ to achieve good results, for example, they need to set certain
goals for what they need to achieve and how to achieve it, including deadlines.
On the other hand, this definition is
too rigid and strict that does not allow for those who do not have these well-developed
‘study skills’ or ‘learning strategies’ to be included in
the self-regulated learners’ category. Another issue is that, it describes the
self-regulation as a static and stable stage of development for learners and I
believe it should be a dynamic process where learners are learning on their own
how to organize their studies and achieve their goals.
Self-Observation
Social
cognitive theorists discuss three subprocesses in self-regulation; self-observation,
self-judgment, and self-reaction (Bandura,1986). They also assume that these subprocesses
can interact with each other in reciprocal fashion to help learners regulate
their learning. For me I can relate to this concept as I have been learning languages
for over 12 years in my life and when it comes to learning pronunciation, I always
observe the way I pronounce and compare it to the way native speakers pronounce
same words then make my own conclusion on what to improve and keep motivating
myself this way.
The
biggest challenge here is that these processes can apply in social sciences and
humanities however in other fields like aviation and aerospace reality is
different. For example the skills required to fly a helicopter does not leave
any room for self-observation or self-judgements. Learning how to fly a
helicopter requires strict adherence to certain procedures and action with
little to do, or almost nothing to do, with reflection and improvement as one little
mistake leads to life casualty and potentially death.
Top-Down Self-Regulation
The
top-down self-regulation is about beginning with the end in mind; that is
having certain goals to achieve as a student in order to regulate your learning
effectively. Not only that, but there are other characteristics to be taken into
consideration while thinking of this concept; Winne (1995) described the cognitions,
feelings, and actions of top-down SR as characteristic of self-regulated learners:
self-regulated learners set goals for extending knowledge and sustaining
motivation. They are aware of what they know, what they believe, and what the
differences between these kinds of information imply for approaching tasks.
(Winne, 1995, p. 173).
While
delivering language teaching classrooms, it is highly suggested by several
teacher training programs to draw the attention of students, or teach them if
necessary, on how to set-up learning objectives and outcomes to achieve. That
in itself is a good example for applying the top-down self-regulation in
classroom teaching by encouraging students to adopt goal-setting approach to
their learning. The challenge is that not all students respond to this approach
positively, the ones who are not proactive enough they enjoy learning to happen
as a result for the interaction rather than actively and proactively setting up
goals for their learning.
Bottom-Up Self-Regulation
Bottom
up strategies are quite the opposite of the top-down ones, as Boaekaets &
Corno explained; “When SR is triggered by cues from the environment it is bottom
up. Instead of beginning work with goals that are firmly established, it is
feedback from the task and classroom reward structures that help to establish
work orientations and generate changes in work styles.” (Boekaerts and Corno
2005).
In
my previous classroom practice often times I observed that, when giving positive
feedback to the students who are goal-oriented, the other students who usually were
not setting up goals for their learning started thinking about it. For some reason
some of them started adopting this practice as they saw the positive response
of the teacher’s reinforcement for such kind of behavior in learning. In my
opinion, this is just a different motivation strategy when students learn how
to self-regulate their learning from the feedback others are getting.
Co-Regulated Learning (CoRL)
In
Hadwin et al. (2011), CoRL is defined as “jointly negotiated, recognizing that
SRL expertize arises through interactions where each participant brings
different SR challenges and expertise to the emergent regulation…” this is a
very interesting approach to investigate the influence of students on each
other’s SRL when co-operating & collaborating yet, how does CoRL works,
there is still much room for research and investigation on how does interaction
influence SR.
Socially Shared
Regulated Learning (SSRL)
Socially
shared regulation of learning (SSRL) is a regulatory process model of
collaborative learning (Hadwin et al., 2011). Hadwin defines SSRL as
“interdependent or collectively shared regulatory processes, beliefs, and
knowledge orchestrated in the service of a co-constructed or shared
outcome/product” (p. 69). In SSRL, learners are collaboratively planning,
monitoring, and evaluating their learning together.
It
seems that there is not much difference between CoRL & SSRL, as both
highlight the collaboration and interaction factors.
No comments:
Post a Comment