Impacting the academic performance of high school students in core academic content areas is important because of the high-stakes nature of secondary school course grades relative to their vocational and post-secondary pursuits. Getting students to become more active, strategic participants in their learning by teaching them empirically supported learning strategies as well as specific forethought and reflective thinking skills is an important pathway to academic success. The importance of self-regulation processes also has been established in recent survey research with teachers and school psychologists showing that students who are referred for academic problems often have self-regulatory skill and motivation deficits. Intervention programs like the Self-Regulation Empowerment Program (SREP) can be conceptualized and implemented within the context of school-based service delivery frameworks. Tier I interventions typically occur at a classroom level and thus are designed to provide all students with the potential benefits of an intervention. With regards to classroom-wide self-regulation interventions, there are many empirically supported techniques that teachers can readily infuse into the daily routine of a school day, such as requiring all students to set performance goals, engage in progress monitoring, and utilize self-reflective processes. Students who do not respond (i.e., continue to exhibit poor test performance) to this general level of intervention support would be eligible to receive more intensive, Tier II pull-out programs, such as SREP.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
2.
BanduraA. (2006). Guide for creating self-efficacy scales. In PajaresF.UrdanT. (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307–338). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
3.
BlackwellL. S.TrzesniewskiK. H.DweckC. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246–263.
4.
BolL.HackerD. J.O'SheaP.AllenD. (2005). The influence of overt practice, achievement level, and explanatory style on calibration accuracy and performance. Journal of Experimental Education, 73, 269–290.
5.
ButlerD. (1998). The strategic content learning approach to promoting self-regulated learning: A report of three studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 682–697.
6.
ButlerD. L.BeckinghamB.LauscherH. J. N. (2005). Promoting strategic learning by eighth-grade students struggling in mathematics: A report of three case studies. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20, 156–174.
7.
ClearyT. J. (2006). The development and validation of the Self-Regulation Strategy Inventory-Self-Report. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 307–322.
8.
ClearyT. J. (in press). School-based motivation and self-regulation assessments: An initial examination of school psychologist beliefs and practices. Journal of Applied School Psychology.
9.
ClearyT. J.ChenP. (2008). Self-regulation strategy use and motivation in middle school: Grade level and achievement group differences. Manuscript submitted for publication.
10.
ClearyT. J.ZimmermanB. J. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment program: A school-based program to enhance self-regulated and self-motivated cycles of student learning. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 537–550.
11.
ClearyT. J.ZimmermanB. J.KeatingT. (2006). Training physical education students to self-regulate during basketball free-throw practice. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 77, 251–262.
12.
Department of Public Instruction. (2007). Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examination (WKCE). Retrieved February 15, 2008, from http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/wkce.html
13.
EcclesJ. S.WigfieldA. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.
14.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2006). A framework for building capacity for responsiveness to intervention. School Psychology Review, 35, 621–626.
15.
FuchsL. S.MockD.MorganP. L.YoungC. L. (2003). Responsiveness to intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities and Practice, 18, 187–200.
16.
GaskillP.HoyA. (2002). Self-efficacy and self-regulated learning: The dynamic duo in school performance. In AronsonJ. (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychosocial factors on education (pp. 185–208). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
17.
GerardJ. M.BuehlerC. (2004). Cumulative environmental risk and youth maladjustment: The role of youth attributes. Child Development, 75, 1832–1849.
18.
GleasonM. M.ArcherA. L.ColvinG. (2002). Interventions for improving study skills. In ShinnM. R.WalkerH. M.StonerG. (Eds.), Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches (pp. 651–680). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
19.
GrahamS.HarrisH. R. (2005). Improving the writing performance of young struggling writers: Theoretical and programmatic research from the Center on Accelerating Student Learning. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 19–33.
20.
GreshamF. M.LopezM. F. (1996). Social validation: A unifying concept for school-based consultation research and practice. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 204–227.
21.
HackerD. J.BolL.HorganD. D.RakowE. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 160–170.
22.
JacobsonN. S.FolletteW. C.RevenstorfD. (1984). Psychotherapy outcome research: Methods for reporting variability and evaluating clinical significance. Behavior Therapy, 15, 336–352.
23.
JooY.BongM.ChoiH. (2000). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning, academic self-efficacy, and Internet self-efficacy in Web-based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 5–17.
24.
KamphausR. W.FrickP. J. (2005). Clinical assessment of child and adolescent personality and behavior (2nd ed.). New York: Springer Science and Business Media.
25.
KazdinA. E. (1998). Research design in clinical psychology (3rd ed.). Needham Height, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
26.
KitsantasA.ZimmermanB. J. (2002). Comparing self-regulatory processes among novice, non-expert, and expert volleyball players: A microanalytic study. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 91–105.
27.
LockeE. A.LathamG. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
28.
MasonL. H.SnyderK. H.SukhramD. P.KedemY. (2006). TWA + PLANS strategies for expository reading and writing: Effects for nine fourth-grade students. Exceptional Children, 73, 69–89.
29.
NesbitJ. C.AdesopeO. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76, 413–448.
30.
PajaresF.UrdanT. (Eds.). (2006) Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
31.
PerryN. E. (1998). Young children's self-regulated learning and the contexts that promote it. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 715–729.
32.
ReeveJ. M.JangH. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students' autonomy during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 209–128.
33.
SchmitzB.WieseB. S. (2006). New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: Time series analyses of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 64–96.
34.
SchunkD. H.SwartzC. W. (1993). Goals and progressive feedback: Effects on self-efficacy and writing achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 337–354.
35.
SchunkD. H.PintrichP. R.MeeceJ. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
36.
UrdanT.MidgleyC. (2003). Changes in the perceived classroom goal structure and pattern of adaptive learning during early adolescence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 524–551.
37.
WeinerB. (1986). An attribution theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.
38.
WeinsteinC. E.HusmanJ.DierkingD. R. (2000). Self-regulation interventions with a focus on learning strategies. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 727–747). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
39.
WinneP. H.Jamieson-NoelD. L. (2002). Exploring student calibration of self-reports about study tactics and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 259–276.
40.
WolfM. M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214.
41.
WoodE.WoloshynV. E.WilloughbyT. (1995). Cognitive strategy instruction: For middle school and high school students. Brookline, MA: Brookline Books.
42.
ZimmermanB. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social-cognitive perspective. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
43.
ZimmermanB. J. (2002). Achieving self-regulation: The trial and triumph of adolescence. In PajaresF.UrdanT. (Eds.), Academic motivation of adolescents (Vol. 2, pp. 1–27). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
44.
ZimmermanB. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 166–183.
45.
ZimmermanB. J.KitsantasA. (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 660–668.
46.
ZimmermanB. J.Martinez-PonsM. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284–290.
