Tài liệu Time management in self regulated learning of first year student majored in english education in can tho university

CAN THO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION ENGLISH DEPARTMENT TIME MANAGEMENT IN SELF-REGULATED LEARNING OF FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS MAJORED IN ENGLISH EDUCATION IN CAN THO UNIVERSITY B.A. Thesis Supervisor Lê Thị Huyền, M.A Student Nguyễn Kim Tiền Student’s Code: 7075870 Class: NN0752A1 Course: 33 Cần Thơ, April 2011 Luận văn tốt nghiệp với đề tài “TIME MANAGEMENT IN SELF-REGULATED LEARNING OF FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS MAJORED IN ENGLISH EDUCATION IN CAN THO UNIVERSITY” do sinh viên Nguyễn Kim Tiền thực hiện dưới sự hướng dẫn của Thạc sĩ Lê Thị Huyền tại Trường Đại học Cần Thơ. Ý kiến của cán bộ hướng dẫn khoa học Thạc sĩ Lê Thị Huyền i Luận văn tốt nghiệp với đề tài “TIME MANAGEMENT IN SELF-REGULATED LEARNING OF FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS MAJORED IN ENLISH EDUCATION IN CAN THO UNIVERSITY” do sinh viên Nguyễn Kim Tiền thực hiện và báo cáo đã được hội đồng chấm luận văn thông qua. Ủy viên thư ký Ủy viên (Ký tên) (Ký tên) Cán bộ phản biện thứ nhất Cán bộ phản biện thứ hai (Ký tên) (Ký tên) Cần thơ, Ngày tháng năm 2011 Chủ tịch Hội đồng (Ký tên) ii LỜI CAM ĐOAN Tôi xin cam đoan đề tài luận văn Tốt nghiệp Đại học này là công trình nghiên cứu khoa học của bản thân tôi. Các số liệu và kết quả được trình bày trong luận văn là hoàn toàn trung thực. Tác giả luận văn Nguyễn Kim Tiền iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to express my really deep gratitude to Mrs. Le Thi Huyen, my supervisor, who has instructed me whole-heartedly from “my first step” on my thesis. Your instructions, advice, suggestions and particularly encouragement have led me not only to finish my thesis but also to reinforce me in every step of my life. I will never forget the hardest time of my thesis, some moments when I got stuck; you enlightened my mind again and again. It seems that you understand me a lot and you always appear to help me at the needy time. Actually, I can become mature in certain aspects that I cannot express in words here. My greatly sincere thanks would be sent to Mrs. Pham Thi Mai Duyen and Mr. Nguyen Thanh Duc, my reviewers, who has read my thesis very carefully and given me invaluable advice. Thanks to your advice, I could recognize and fill the gaps, as well as the mistakes existing in my thesis in my ability. In addition, you two have motivated me to make careful and detailed correction and appropriate changes. My greatly sincere thanks would be sent to Miss Rebecca and Miss Liz, the volunteer American teachers who have taught the first-year students of English Department (course 36) in Can Tho University. You two have helped me a lot by sharing me your invaluable time so that I could finish my data collection. Also, you have encouraged me to try my best with my thesis, which has motivated me a lot. I am greatly grateful for the first-year students of English Education, course 36. My thesis had been not completed and meaningful without your cooperation. You all have been very enthusiastic to give me valuable answers. My thanks also fly to my dear friends, who have given me sincere helps and continual encouragement. You are willing to be with me and help me eradicate the moments of tension and stress! Lastly, I would love to send my love to my family, my strong spiritual base. You all are always make me really motivated and give me energy to finish this thesis. Actually, it had been impossible for me to finish my thesis without all of these helps. Thank you all much more and more. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of contents ..................................................................................................v List of tables .........................................................................................................vi Abstract ................................................................................................................vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................1 1.1.1 The research problem ............................................................................... 1 1.1.2 Research hypotheses ............................................................................................ 4 1.1.3 Research objectives .............................................................................................. 4 1.1.4 Research questions ............................................................................................... 4 1.1.5 General organization and coverage of the study ................................................... 5 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...............................................................6 2.1 Self-regulated learning ........................................................................................ 6 2.1.1 Definition of self-regulated learning .................................................................... 6 2.1.2 The components of self-regulated learning ........................................................ 10 2.1.3 The importance of self-regulated learning ......................................................... 17 2.2 Time management in self-regulated learning ..................................................... 18 2.2.1 The definition of time management ................................................................... 18 2.2.2 Time management strategies ............................................................................. 19 2.2.3 The importance of time management in self-regulated learning ......................... 26 CHAPTER 3: METHOD ........................................................................................... 30 3.1 Research design ................................................................................................ 30 3.2 Participants ....................................................................................................... 30 3.3 Instrument ......................................................................................................... 30 3. 4 Research procedure ............................................................................................ 34 CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS ..........................................................................................35 4.1 The extent to which self-regulated learning (SRL) strategies are used by the first-year students of English Education (course 36) ..........................................35 4.2 The extent to which the first-year students of English Education apply time management strategies in their learning .....................................................37 4.3 The extent to which the first-year students balance their academic and social life .................................................................................................... 47 CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLICATION ......................................................................................48 REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................51 APPENDICES ..........................................................................................................58 v LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Tables Table 3.3 Cluster of the questionnaire ......................................................................... 32 Table 4.1.1 Descriptive Statistics of each item of the cluster of SRL strategies ........... 35 Table 4.1.2 The overall mean score of the students’ use of SRL strategies in their learning ................................................................................................ 36 Table 4.1.3 The frequency levels of students' use of specific SRL strategies in their learning ................................................................................................. 36 Table 4.2 The sub-cluster of time management strategies ............................................. 37 Table 4.2.1 The extent to which the students’ use time management strategies in general .......................................................................................................... 38 Table 4.2.2 The frequency level of students' use time management strategies in details ........................................................................................................... 38 Table 4.2.2.1 The frequency level of students' identification of their personal productive time ........................................................................... 39 Table 4.2.2.2a The sub-clusters of the planning strategies ............................................ 40 Table 4.2.2.2b The overall mean score of the cluster of planning strategies .................. 40 Table 4.2.2.2c Descriptive Statistics of specific planning activities .............................. 40 Table 4.2.2.2.1 The frequency levels of students' use of the strategies of getting organized .............................................................................................. 41 Table 4.2.2.2.2 The frequency levels of students' use of the strategies of general planning ............................................................................................... 42 Table 4.2.2.2.3 The frequency levels of students' use of the strategies of goal-setting ... 42 Table 4.2.2.2.4 The frequency levels of students' use of the strategies of prioritizing .... 43 Table 4.2.2.2.5 The frequency levels of students' use of the strategies of scheduling .... 43 Table 4.2.2.3 The frequency levels of students' use of the strategies of procrastination and deadline avoidance with time compensation ....................... 44 Table 4.2.2.4 The frequency level of students' use of the self-reward strategy .............. 45 Table 4.2.2.5 The frequency level of students' use of help-seeking strategy .................. 46 Table 4.2.2.6 The frequency level of students' use of evaluating their time management ....................................................................................... 46 Table 4.2.2.7 The frequency level of students' use of evaluating their time management ..................................................................................... 47 Table 4.3 The extent to which the students’ balance their academic and social life.................................................................................................... 47 Figures Figure 2.1.2 Framework of the components of self-regulated learning ......................... 10 vi ABSTRACT This study was conducted from January 11th to March13th, 2011 in Can Tho University. The participants were 84 first-year students of English Education (course 36). Accordingly, this study was purposeful to examine the extent to which the first-year students use self-regulated learning (SRL) strategies in general and time management techniques in particular, as well as the extent to which they keep balanced in both academic and social life. The questionnaire was given to 84 first-year students and the data was run by SPSS 11.5. Consequently, the students reported that they just rather sometimes use SRL strategies in their learning (M=4.41, SD=.74, with 1 – Never (0%), 2 – Rarely (1% – 19%), 3 – Seldom (19%-25%), 4 – Sometimes (25% - 75%), 5 – Often (75% - 90%), 6 – Usually (90%-99%)). Besides, they admitted that they sometimes apply time management strategies in managing their time (M=4.09, SD=.61). Being asked bout how well they keep the balance between academic and social life, the students reported that they can just sometimes stay balanced (M=4.44, SD=.94). Similarly, they just sometimes use their time effectively. From the results, the researcher proposes trainings on self-regulated learning and time management from English Department in orientation courses. Besides, in combination with extra-curriculum activities, the agencies of the Youth Union in School of Education should include the activities on training and sharing the experiences on self-regulated learning and time management among the students. vii TÓM LƯỢC Nghiên cứu này được thực hiện từ 11/01/2011 đến ngày 13/03/2011 tại Trường Đại học Cần Thơ với đối tượng nghiên cứu là 84 em sinh viên năm thứ nhất chuyên ngành sư phạm Anh văn, khóa 36, thuộc khoa sư phạm, trường Đại học Cần Thơ. Nghiên cứu nhằm tìm hiểu việc sử dụng một số phương pháp tự điều chỉnh trong học tập mà đặc biệt là kỹ năng quản lý thời gian, cũng như mức độ cân bằng trong việc học với đời sống cá nhân và việc tham gia các hoạt động ngoại khóa của sinh viên. Với mục tiêu trên, nghiên cứu đã được thực hiện thông qua 84 phiếu điều tra được xử lý bằng phần mền SPSS 11,5. Kết quả cho thấy sinh viên chỉ thỉnh thoảng sử dụng các biện pháp tự điều chỉnh trong học tập nói chung (M=4.41, SD=.74 với 1- Không Bao Giờ (0%), 2 – Hiếm Khi, 3 – Ít Khi (10%-25%), 4 – Thỉnh thoảng (25%-75%), 5 – Thường (75%-90%), 6 – Luôn Luôn (90%-99%)). Đồng thời, khi xét riêng về việc sử dụng các phương pháp quản lý thời gian được nêu ra, các em sinh viên cũng cho biết các em cũng chỉ sử dụng các biện pháp này ở mức độ thỉnh thoảng (M=4.09, SD=.61), có phần ít hơn so với các biện pháp tự điều chỉnh trong học tập đã được nêu. Ngoài ra, các em cũng cho biết các em cũng thỉnh thoảng cân bằng được việc học, sinh hoạt cá nhân và tham gia các hoạt động ngoại khóa (M=4.44, SD=.94). Qua đó, các em cũng đánh giá rằng các em cũng chỉ thỉnh thoảng sử dụng thời gian của mình một cách hiệu quả (M=4.33, SD=.85). Từ kết quả nghiên cứu, tác giả kiến nghị Bộ môn Anh văn nên quan tâm hơn nữa đến công tác hướng dẫn các em sinh viên năm nhất phương pháp tự điều chỉnh trong học tập cũng như kỹ năng quản lý thời gian để các em thích ứng nhanh với môi trường học mới. Các tổ chức Đoàn thanh niên trực thuộc Khoa Sư Phạm cần kết hợp việc chia sẻ kinh nghiệm học tập và quản lý thời gian cho các em sinh viên. Giáo viên bộ môn cũng nên cố gắng lồng ghép vào một số hướng dẫn giúp các em sinh viên cách học tốt môn học với việc hướng dẫn cách quản lý thời gian hiệu quả. vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This chapter is attempted to generalize the research problem, as well as state the research hypotheses, objectives and questions which are followed by the organization of the study. 1.1 The research problem Recently, the Psychology of Education has been more and more developed, and learners are perceived under the innovative view that learners actively engage in their learning process to acquire knowledge rather than passive involvement (Perkins, 1992; cited in Chen, 2002). Based on this development, it is revealed that the learning outcomes will be better when students actively participate in learning activities. Thanks to the active engagement, learners find it easier to obtain high achievements. One of the great breakthroughs of active learning approaches is the emergence of self-regulated learning which has been focused to investigate over the last three decades (Zimmerman, 1989). In self-regulated learning, students make their own decision for their learning goals, maintain self-motivated and make great effort to use appropriate strategies in their own learning. Moreover, self-regulated learners make adaptive changes to cope with different learning situations. It is also proved by research that self-regulated learning is highly correlated with achievement (Bandura, 1986; Corno, 1989; Mc Combs and Marzano, 1990; Schunk, 1990; Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons, 1986; and Zimmerman, 1989 & 1990). In fact, it is important for students to become self-regulated learners in their learning processes. Besides, students are not possible to wait for the teachers to stand by them all over the time when they need help. Therefore, they have to make adjustment in each situation. In addition, under the “bombing” of information, it is impossible for the lecturers to provide students with all information in the world. Rather, students themselves integrate in the information flow to find out which is most useful for them. In Viet Nam context, integrating with the development of worldwide education, the education system of Viet Nam has gradually been innovated. Coincident with the governmental policies of education, Can Tho University (CTU) has made a great 1 innovation in the educational structure and teaching methods. Based on Regulation 42 on Credit-based learning system, which was issued by the Ministry of Education and Training on August, 15th 2007, CTU Board made a declaration to shift into complete credit-based learning system in the school year of 2007-2008. Since the teaching methods shift from teacher-centered approaches from student-centered ones, students are expected to be more proactive and highly responsible for their learning. Taking deep care on how CTU students carry out their learning with the new learning system, CTU Steering Board operated a conference named “Assessment on CTU students' Use of Two Hours for Selfstudy” on January, 5th 2010. With this conference, CTU leaders desired to find out problems and solutions to help CTU students to become more independent and make self-adjustments in their learning processes and make adaptive changes to catch up with the new approach of credit-based learning. There were 28 reports on related surveys showed in the conference that the majority of students, who took part in the surveys, are weak in organizing their time for self-study although they are greatly aware of the importance of self-study. However, most of the reports are in general. With this credit-based system of learning, students are required to learn independently. They have right to choose the subjects they learn within the frame of requirements in their major. They also make arrangement of the subjects they learn, organize these subjects into a timetable to match with their available time for the purpose of balancing their schoolwork and personal life. They have to think that they themselves, not the teachers, are making their learning successful and obtain good achievements. Another important thing is that they have to adjust themselves in particular situations, both in learning and life. In other words, they must regulate themselves in all aspects, especially in their own learning process. Thus, they are expected to become self-regulated learners. That means they are able to determinate their own learning objectives or goals, choose their own ways of achieving these, and evaluate their progress, then make changes when necessary to adapt to new learning environments or situations. Therefore, right at the beginning of the first semester of their first year at university, students must have a clear overview of what they will do for the whole 2 academic syllabus for their major. They have to plan what they do, how to arrange time, how to decide the learning strategies to get the goals. Then, each semester, they have a clear schedule on their own, not only the university schedule but also the timetable for their all other activities. After they have their goals, plans, and learning strategies to focus, managing the time is an important factor to consider carrying out their plan to aim at their goals. However, it is not easy at all for first-year students to organize their academic and social life well because they have just encounter the transitional environment from high school into university. Everything is new to them. Actually, high school students in Viet Nam usually depend too much on their family for their decision-making and other things. Moreover, the remainder of traditional teaching methods resulting from re-packaging knowledge in many high schools is still serious. Thus, becoming independent right away is really challenging for them. In fact, I had hard experience when I was in the first year, 2007-2008, the year of innovation in learning approach in CTU. There were so many assignments, presentations, and personal demands etc. to deal with. It seemed that I had never had enough time to do all my work. As a result, I had few friends in the first year in the university and had hardly time talking with them. I usually work late at night for my due assignments. Then, I try to find out books or any means to be better. Accidentally, I caught up with the books on how to get more organized and how to manage the time, which really attracted me. By trying those tips, I felt better. I wish I had known these tips before. Thus, I understand how difficult it is for first-year students because of new environment along with learning and teaching methods. Due to the problems aforementioned, I suppose that first-year students now (course 36) of English Education in CTU may experience the same difficulties as I did in learning independently. Accordingly, I would like to further exploration for more details by conducting this study. The purpose is then giving out specific solutions to help them use their time well in effective self-study. Actually, I hope I can share with them the experience I have to help them better their use of time. In addition, I think self-regulated learning is necessary for students to be aware of and apply. In my concern and limitation, 3 I would like to discover to what extent they apply time management strategies, as part of strategies in self-regulated learning, in their learning and university life under the light of self-regulated learning perspective, if they manage to use their time well and how they think of their current use of time in self-regulated learning. Since the data were collected to analyze, I would suppose possible supportive suggestions to assist them in managing their time effectively. For the research purpose, my study is named as “Time management in self-regulated learning of first-year students majored in English Education in Can Tho University” 1.2 Research hypotheses Based on the research problem, I hypothesize that (1) first-year students majored in English Education in CTU use some selfregulatory strategies mentioned to regulate their own learning; (2) first-year students majored in English Education in CTU use time management strategies to manage their time; (3) first-year students majored in English Education in CTU balance their academic and social life. 1.3 Research objectives This study is aimed to investigate: (1) the extent to which first-year students majored in English Education in CTU use some self-regulatory strategies to regulate their own learning, (2) the extent to which they use time management strategies, (3) and the extent to which students balance their learning and personal life through the way they manage their time. 1.4 Research questions To serve the research objectives, I make attempt to answer these questions: 1. To what extent do first-year students majored in English Education in CTU use some self-regulatory strategies mentioned to regulate their own learning? 2. To what extent do they use time management strategies to manage their time? 3. To what extent do students balance their learning and personal life? 4 1.5 General organization and coverage of the study This study comprises of five chapters: (1) Introduction, (2) Literature review, (3) Research method, (4) Results, and (5) Summary, discussion, limitations, and recommendations for the future research. Chapter 1 is named the introduction in which the research problem, research hypotheses, objectives and questions, as well as the organization of the study are presented. In chapter 2, the literature related to selfregulated learning and time management is reviewed, which is the theoretical foundation for the purposes of the study. Chapter 3 relates to research method, which consists of the descriptions of research design, participants, instruments and procedure which was followed to carry out this study. The outcomes are presented in chapter 4 including the information of the degree to which first-year students majored in English Education in CTU apply self-regulatory strategies to self-regulate their learning, of the extent to which they make use of these strategies, and of how effective they use their time. Chapter 5 comes last to serve the study with the information of the summary, discussion, limitations of the study, and thanks to this, setting up the base for suggesting directions for the future research. 5 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Self-regulated learning (SRL) has been considered as a significant shift in the context of Educational Psychology (Paris and Winograd, 2003) since 1980's and has been currently attracted plenty of researchers (Pintrich, 2000; Zimmerman, 1989). Recently, there have been a wide range of studies on self-regulated learning based on different theoretical perspectives which are of operant, phenomenological, volitional, Vygotskian, and social-cognitive theory (Southerland and Crowther, 2008). Nevertheless, general features of SRL which can be found across all the above viewpoints have been synthesized as metacognition, motivation and behavior (Zimmerman, 1989, 1990; Schunk, 1990; Chung, 2000). This paper is considered under the theoretical basis related to the social cognitive perspective. In this study, I introduce the definition of self-regulated learning and its three main components: behavior, motivation and metacognition. Then, I shift into the introduction of time management as a sub- component of metacognition. 2.1 Self-regulated learning (SRL) 2.1.1 The definition of self-regulated learning (SRL) Based on the viewpoints of the social cognitive perspective, self-regulation on learning is dependent on specific learning situation. Social cognitive researchers claim that learners make adaptation of their learning strategies to particular tasks, and that selfregulation of learning is by no means automatic development. Instead, it is built up in individuals from social sources such as a teacher or tutor, and then they activate what they have acquired and apply it in their learning process (Zimmerman, 1989, 1990, 2008; Schunk, 1990; Bundura, 1997; Pintrich and De Groot, 1990). Research reported that the students who involve in self-regulated learning (SRL) are generally remarked to be active and responsible for their learning to aim at achieving good learning results. However, self-regulated learning has been experienced under different viewpoints by researchers with different definitions. In some research papers, SRL is somewhat coincident with the use of learning strategies. For instance, Corno (1989) defined SRL as a set of learning strategies which learners can use effectively and flexibly to meet the requirements of a particular task. 6 Corno (1989) contributed the specification to the concept of SRL by adding the use of language learning strategies as the key feature to the model of SRL. In his definition, Corno asserted SRL to be coincident with the application of a series of language learning strategies (eg, note taking, grouping, inferring, and summarizing) that the learners can apply to meet task requirements effectively. In contrast, as Tran (2006) reviewed, McKeachei et al. (1985) have explored that knowing strategies of learning does not necessarily lead learners to self-regulate. For instance, an individual may know many learning strategies but he does not put these strategies into practice. Thus, the evidence indicates that Corno’s(1989) concept of SRL appears insufficient. With an attempt to build up the contribution of SRL concept, Boekaerts’ (1997) presented that self-regulated learning composes of the features which are related to motivational and cognitive notions. That is, SRL is considered as a complicated, integrative process constituted with the behavior of self-regulating one's own cognition and motivation. Besides adding motivational component, the cognitive factor in SRL, in Boekaerts’ self-regulation view, refers to cognitive strategies which learners use to reach their learning achievement. Nevertheless, learning outcomes may not be improved if learners only make use of cognitive strategies accidentally. It is due to the fact that different learning situations require different appropriate strategies. In other words, learners have to use the learning strategies which are relevant to the tasks they meet. This aspect refers to the use of the metacognitive strategies in which learners probably determine the appropriate ones in using cognitive strategies in each situation. However, the metacognitive aspect is not mentioned in Boekaerts’s (1997). Therefore, strategies in the SRL model of Boekaerts’s (1997) are proved to be weak. Additionally, other findings on the constitution of metamemory and motivational or volitional aspects of learning have shown that learners who are able to perceive the appropriateness of learning strategies may not apply them in their learning process (Artelt, 2000). Thus, not only cognitive and metacognitive aspects but motivation and emotion should be considered. Schunk (1990) pointed out that self-efficacy, an aspect of motivation in which learners believe themselves to be capable enough to carry out a 7 learning task and accomplish the goals, can be resulted from effective strategy instruction. Through comprehensible instruction, learners believe that they have enough capabilities to use the strategies and increase positive outcomes of learning, and performance is, thus, improved. As mentioned above, Boekaerts (1997) introduces a model of SRL in which components of cognition and motivation in learning are put under equality to consider. Boekaerts ' (1997) model consists of two types of regulation on three levels: levels of goals, strategies and domain-specific knowledge (knowledge on particular tasks). Adapting from Boekaerts ' version (1997), Baumert (1999) made a SRL model by adding metacognitive strategies besides cognitive strategies and domainspecific knowledge. According to Zimmerman (1989) who follows the social cognitive perspective, self-regulated learning is defined as the learning process in which learners are “metacognitively, motivationally, and behaviorally active participants in their own learning process” (p. 4). By this definition, learners are expected to self-regulate in three aspects: cognition, motivation and behavior. The motivational, behavioral and metacognitive features are further clarified in Zimmerman and Martine-Pons (1990). In views of Zimmerman and Martine-Pons (1990), self-regulated learners are highly motivated with self-efficacy, beliefs to be capable enough to implement a learning task and attain the goals and intrinsic motivation. In the behavioral aspect, self-regulated learners are highly active in using SRL strategies for selecting, structuring, and creating social and material environments to increase the productiveness of their learning processes. In terms of metacognition, self-regulated learners are expected to use metacognitive activities such as planning, organizing, and evaluating. Sharing the same viewpoints, Schiefele and Pekrun’s (1996, p.258) gave out a definition on self-regulated learning that “self-regulated learning is a form of learning in which individuals, depending on the type of their motivation to learn, autonomously deploy one or more self-regulatory measures (of a cognitive, metacognitive volitional or behavioral nature) and monitor the progress of their own learning” (cited in Baumert et al., 2000). This consideration on self-regulated learning of Schiefele and Pekrun (1996) is 8 also included the aspects of metacognition, motivation and behavior; however, they mentioned these aspects in more details. Contributing to the explanation of self-regulated learning, Leutwyler and Merki (2009) defined self-regulated learning as “a proactive, intentional, reflexive from of learning that entails a sense of personal responsibilities for learinng” and as “a dynamic interaction of skill and will” (p.200). In this definition, Leutwyler and Merki (2009) highlighted the importance of using learning strategies and motivational factors in learning, while less focusing on the metacognitive factors. In an attempt to specify the concept of self-regulated learning, Chen (2002), who adapted from Zimmerman (1990), defines that “self-regulated learning is a self-initiated action that involves goal setting and regulating efforts to reach the goal, self-monitoring (metacognition), time management, and physical and social environment regulation” (p.11). By this definition, Chen (2002) specified the metacognitive, motivational and behavioral components of self-regulated learning under the views of Zimmerman (1989). In Chung's (2000) definition, self-regulated learning is considered as “the situation when learners, as a master or their own learning, monitor their academic goals and motivations for themselves, manage human and material resources, and become the subjects of decisions and performances in all learning process” (p. 56). Actually, Chung (2000) made a great attempt to cover the common factors of self-regulated leaning in that definition. Differentiated from others', Chung's (2000) directly included the management of human and material resources, for example, seeking helps from teachers and friends (human factors) or searching documents when encountering difficulties in their learning processes, which is of behavioral regulation. As aforementioned, there have been many attempts to give out various definitions of self-regulated learning based on different directions to discover. However, I personally consider that the definition from Zimmerman (1989) is most meaningful for my study to have an overview of the construct “self-regulated learning”. Based on Zimmerman's (1989), I define in my words that “self-regulated learning is the learning process which learners engage themselves in all learning activities by applying appropriate learning 9 strategies, make adaptation to suit each learning situation and are responsible for motivating themselves to aim at producing high achievements”. In the following part, three main components that build up the concept of selfregulated learning will be presented. 2.1.2 The components of self-regulated learning Figure 2.1.2 Framework of the components of self-regulated learning SELF-REGULATED LEARNING BEHAVIOR PLANNING MOTIVATION SELF-MONITORING METACOGNITION SELF-EVALUATING TIME MANAGEMENT Different components of students' self-regulation in academic learning now have been developed into sufficient size that provides a strong theoretical base for further learning investigation or application (Terry, 2002). In this part, three main components that self-regulated learners put under their self-regulation in their learning are: (1) behavior, (2) motivation and (3) metacognition which have been taken into account in numerous studies (e.g., Weinstein and Mayer, 1986; Pintrich, 1989; Zimmerman & Martinez-Ponds, 1990; O'Malley and Chamot, 1990; Baumert, 1999; Zimmerman, 1989, 1990, 2000; Corno, 1989, Pintrich and De Groot, 1990 ; Pintrich and Garcia, 1991; and Nist and Holschuh, 2005). 10 2.1.2.1 Behavior in self-regulated learning In behavioral aspects, SRL activites are expected to be interpreted through the use of SRL strategies (Garcia et al. 2004; cited in Tran, 2006). To engage in self-regulated learning (SRL), students carry out their learning through performing a set of activities in which they use different strategies to approach their learning tasks to acquire academic knowledge or achieve academic goals. In Weinstein and Mayer's view (1986 ), behavioral aspect of SRL mentions the actual cognitive strategies that students can use in learning to approach and understand the materials like strategies for rehearsing, elaborating and organizing information with the aim at promoting active involvement in learning and lead to higher achievement. Sharing the same viewpoints, Zimmerman (1989) asserts that students who are considered to be self-regulated learners are to apply specific SRL strategies to attain academic goals on the basis of self-efficacy perceptions. Specifically, students use the strategies that they believe are effective in SRL process. In his account, “SRL strategies are actions and processes directed at acquiring information or skill that involve agency, purpose, and instrumentality perceptions by learners” (p. 329). In other words, to satisfy as self-regulated learners, students have to know and use appropriate SRL strategies to aim their efforts to obtain their learning goals or completing their learning tasks. Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1986) pointed out 14 types of SRL strategies. Some examples among these are organizing and transformation, seeking information, and rehearsing or using memory aids, environmental structuring, and seeking helps. Nevertheless, Baumert (1999) claimed that self-regulated learners use a set of cognitive and metacognitive strategies as SRL strategies, while Zimmerman (1989 and 1990) separated to investigate metacognitive strategies in terms of metacognition. Although researchers are not completely in agreement in descriptions of SRL strategies, most approved that the application of SRL strategies is closely connected academic achievement (Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons, 1986; Pintrich, 1989; Pintrich and Garcia, 1991). According to Zimmerman (2008), learners with higher achievement use a wider range of SRL strategies than ones who have lower achieving outcomes. 11