Studies show that incorporating self-regulated learning (SRL) strategies into foreign language teaching encourages the development of autonomous learners. However, interviews with teachers (n = 51) indicate that they mostly do not consider SRL in classroom practices. The present study attempts to highlight the significance of SRL in language teaching by exploring its impact on language achievement. It investigates learner reported use of SRL, focusing on its three main components – orientation, performance, and evaluation – and their power in predicting foreign language achievement. A total of 222 undergraduate foreign language learners at a state university participated in the study. Data was collected from two sources: a five-point Likert-type self-regulated language learning questionnaire, adapted from models and research instruments used in previous studies to investigate SRL and language learning strategies, and the university’s English achievement exam. Quantitative analyses indicated that although participants reported moderate to low levels of SRL use, it is a significant predictor of foreign language achievement and had significant correlations with language achievement. The results are meant to draw attention to the importance of SRL research within the foreign language teaching field as well as foster SRL implementation in language instruction.
AndersonN.J. (2003). Metacognitive reading strategies increase L2 performance. The Language Teacher, 27, 20–22.
2.
AndradeM.S.BunkerE.L. (2009). A model for self-regulated distance language learning. Distance Education, 30, 47–61.
3.
AndradeM.S.EvansN.W. (2013). Principles and practices for response in second language writing: Developing self-regulated learners. New York: Taylor and Francis.
4.
BeishuizenJ.SteffensK. (2011). A conceptual framework for research on self-regulated learning. In: CarneiroR.LefrereP.SteffensK.UnderwoodJ. (Eds.), Self regulated learning in technology enhanced learning environments: A European perspective (pp. 3–19). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
5.
BoekaertsM. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7, 11–186.
6.
BoekaertsM. (1999). Self-regulated learning: Where we are today. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 445–457.
7.
BonneyC.R.CortinaK.S.Smith-DardenJ.P.FioriK.L. (2008). Understanding strategies in foreign language learning: Are integrative and intrinsic motives distinct predictors?Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 1–10.
8.
BrownA.ArmbrusterB.BakerL. (1986). The role of metacognition in reading and studying. In: OrasanuJ. (Ed.), Reading comprehension from research to practice (pp. 49–75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
Council of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
CronbachL.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.
11.
DörnyeiZ. (2002). The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In: RobinsonP. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 137–158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
12.
DörnyeiZ. (2009). The L2 motivational self-system. In: DörnyeiZ.UshiodaE. (Eds.), Motivation, language, identity, and the L2 self. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
13.
DörnyeiZ. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. New York: Routledge.
14.
DörnyeiZ.ChanL. (2013). Motivation and vision: An analysis of future L2 images, sensory styles, and imagery capacity across two target languages. Language Learning, 63, 437–462.
15.
EhrmanM. (1996). An exploration of adult language learner motivation, self-efficacy and anxiety. In: OxfordR.L. (Ed.), Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new century (pp. 81–103). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
16.
GohC. (2008). Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, practice and research implications. Regional Language Centre Journal, 39, 188–213.
GriffithsC.OxfordR.L. (2014). The twenty-first century landscape of language learning strategies: Introduction to this special issue. System, 43, 1–10.
19.
GunningP.OxfordR.L. (2014). Children’s learning strategy use and the effects of strategy instruction on success in learning ESL in Canada. System, 43, 82–100.
20.
HoferB.K.PintrichP.R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.
21.
KalayciS. (2010). SPSS uygulamali cok degiskenli istatistik teknikleri [SPSS Statistical Techniques for multiple variables]. Ankara: Asil Publishing.
22.
KuhlI. (1984). Volitional aspects of achievement motivation and learned helplessness: Toward a comprehensive theory of action-control. In MaherB.A. (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research (pp. 99–171). New York: Academic Press.
23.
MaR.OxfordR.L. (2014). A diary study focusing on listening and speaking: The evolving interaction of learning styles and learning strategies in a motivated, advanced ESL learner. System, 43, 101–113.
24.
MasuiC.De CorteE. (2005). Learning to reflect and to attribute constructively as basic components of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 351–372.
25.
NickersonR.S.PerkinsD.N.SmithE.E. (1985). The teaching of thinking. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26.
O’MalleyJ.M.ChamotA.U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
27.
OxfordR.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
28.
OxfordR.L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: An overview. Oxford: GALA.
29.
OxfordR.L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
30.
OxfordR.L.RubinJ.ChamotA.U.SchrammK.LavineR.GunningP.NelC. (2014). The learning strategy prism: Perspectives of learning strategy experts. System, 43, 30–49.
31.
ParisS.g.WinogradP. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In: JonesB.F.IdolL. (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking: Cognitive instruction (pp.15–51). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32.
ParisS.g.ByrnesJ.P.ParisA.H. (2001). Constructing theories, identifies, and actions of self-regulated learners. In: ZimmermanB.J.SchunkD.H. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 253–288). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
33.
PattonM.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
PintrichP.R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In: BoekaertsM.PintrichP.R.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp. 451−502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
36.
PintrichP.R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 385–407.
37.
PintrichP.R.De GrootE.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33−40.
38.
PintrichP.R.GarciaT. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the classroom. In: MaehrM.L.PintrichP.R. (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Goals and self-regulatory processes (pp. 371–402). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
39.
RasekhZ.E.RanjbaryR. (2003). Metacognitive strategy training for vocabulary learning. TESL-EJ, 7, 1–17.
40.
RientiesB.TempelaarD.Van den BosscheP.GijselaersW.SegersM. (2009). The role of academic motivation in computers-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behaviour, 25, 1195–1206.
41.
SchunkD.H.ZimmermanB.J. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
ShmaisW.A. (2003). Language learning strategy use in Palestine. TESL-EJ, 7, 31–45.
43.
SinclairB. (2000). Learner autonomy: The next phase? In: SinclairB.McGrathI.LambT. (Eds.), Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions (pp. 4–14). London: Longman.
44.
SternP.N. (1995). Grounded theory methodology: Its uses and processes. In: GlaserB.G. (Ed.), Grounded theory, (pp.29–39). Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
45.
VermuntJ.D. (2000). Over de kwaliteit van het leren [About quality of learning]. In: GijselaarsW.VermuntJ. D. (Eds.), Studeren voor nieuwe geleerden [Studying for new scholars](pp. 37–61). Maastricht: Universiteit Maastricht.
46.
WangJ.SpencerK.XingM. (2009). Metacognitive beliefs and strategies in learning Chinese as a foreign language. System, 37, 46–56.
47.
WinneP.H.HadwinA.F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In: HackerD.J.DunloskyJ.GraesserA.C. (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp.277–304). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
ZieglerK.HofmannF.AstleitnerH. (2003). Selbstreguliertes lernen und internet [Self-regulated learning and the internet]. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
50.
ZimmermanB.J. (1998). Academic studying and the development of personal skill: A self-regulatory perspective. Educational Psychologist, 33, 78–86.
51.
ZimmermanB.J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In: BoekaertsM.PintrichP.R.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.13–39). New York: Academic Press.
52.
ZimmermanB.J.RisembergR. (1997). Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social cognitive perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 73–101.
53.
ZimmermanB.J.SchunkD.H. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
54.
ZimmermanB.J.SchunkD.H. (2008). Motivation. In: SchunkD.H.ZimmermanB.J. (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research and application (pp.1–30). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
