Саморегулируемое обучение не для всех: в поисках объяснения гетерогенного эффекта интервенций

Успешность обучения студентов во многом зависит от того, насколько сформированы у них навыки саморегулируемого обучения, выражающиеся в совокупности когнитивных, поведенческих и мотивационных стратегий, с помощью которых студенты ставят учебные цели, вырабатывают последовательность действий для их достижения, контролируют своё поведение и окружающие обстоятельства, а также рефлексируют результаты обучения. Существующие исследования показывают, что многие студенты испытывают трудности при прохождении учебных курсов, требующих большой автономии учащегося (например, при прохождении онлайн-курсов). И эти трудности обусловлены низким уровнем сформированности у учащихся навыков саморегулируемого обучения. Для развития данных навыков применяются специальные интервенции (воздействия), реализуемые в виде лекций, заданий и комплексных учебных курсов. Однако исследования показывают, что подобные интервенции имеют гетерогенный эффект: они могут приводить к повышению навыков одних социально-демографических групп учащихся и быть неэффективными для других. На данный момент наблюдаемый гетерогенный эффект интервенций не был объяснён учёными, что препятствует разработке эффективной стратегии повышения навыков саморегулируемого обучения у всех учащихся. В рамках данной работы предпринимается попытка дать объяснение этому феномену с помощью качественного исследования. Проведены интервью со студентами, принявшими участие в комплексной интервенции «Саморегулируемое обучение: как развить навыки самоконтроля и метапознания». На основе этих данных была построена концептуальная модель, объясняющая различия в эффективности интервенций в зависимости от индивидуальных характеристик учащихся и характеристик самой интервенции. Полученные выводы легли в основу практических рекомендаций по разработке и внедрению интервенций по развитию навыков саморегулируемого обучения в университетах. Статья представляет интерес для исследователей в области педагогики и психологии образования, преподавателей и методистов в вузах, а также управленцев, чья деятельность связана с проектированием учебного процесса.

1. Gruzdev I., Kalinin R., Shmeleva E., Vilkova K. Suddenly online: how Russian students switched to distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic // Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education during COVID-19. Routledge, 2021. С. 134–149. DOI: 10.4324/9781003125921-13

2. Бекова С.К., Терентьев Е.А., Малошо- нок Н.Г. Образовательное неравенство в условиях пандемии COVID-19: связь социально-экономического положения семьи и опыта дистанционного обучения студентов // Вопросы образования . 2021. № 1. С. 74–92. DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2021-1-74-92

3. Zimmerman B.J. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview // Theory into practice. 2002. Vol. 41. No. 2. P. 64–70. DOI: 10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2

4. Zimmerman B.J. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview // Educational Psychologist. 1990. Vol 5. No. 1. P. 3–17. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4612-3618-4_1

5. Inan F.A., Kurucay M., Yukselturk E., Flo- res R. The impact of self-regulation strategies on student success and satisfaction in an online course // EdMedia+ Innovate Learning Online 2022. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 2017. Vol. 16. No. 1. P. 23–32. ISSN: 1537-2456.

6. Theobald M. Self-regulated learning training programs enhance university students’ academic performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation: A meta-analysis // Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2021. Vol. 66. Article no. 101976. DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101976

7. Stephen J.S., Rockinson-Szapkiw A.J. A highimpact practice for online students: The use of a first-semester seminar course to promote selfregulation, self-direction, online learning selfefficacy // Smart Learning Environments. 2021. Vol. 8. No. 1. Article no. 6. DOI: 10.1186/s40561021-00151-0

8. Kizilcec R.F., Pérez-Sanagustín M., Maldonado J.J. Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in Massive Open Online Courses // Computers & education. 2017. Vol. 104. P. 18–33. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.001

9. Xu Z., Zhao Yu., Zhang B., Liew J., Kogut A. A meta-analysis of the efficacy of self-regulated learning interventions on academic achievement in online and blended environments in K-12 and higher education // Behaviour & Information Technology. 2023. Vol. 42. No. 16. P. 2911–2931. DOI: 10.1080/0144929x.2022.2151935

10. Zheng L. The effectiveness of self-regulated learning scaffolds on academic performance in computer-based learning environments: A metaanalysis // Asia Pacific Education Review. 2016. Vol. 17. P. 187–202. DOI: 10.1007/s12564-016-9426-9

11. Ergen B., Kanadlí S. The effect of self-regulated learning strategies on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study // Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 2017. Vol. 17. No. 69. P. 55–74. DOI: 10.14689/ejer.2017.69.4

12. Jansen R.S., van Leeuwen A., Janssen J., Jak S., Kester S. Self-regulated learning partially mediates the effect of self-regulated learning interventions on achievement in higher education: A meta-analysis // Educational Research Review. 2019. Vol. 28. Article no. 100292. DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100292

13. Schippers M.C., Scheepers A.W.A., Peterson J.B. A scalable goal-setting intervention closes both the gender and ethnic minority achievement gap // Palgrave Communications. 2015. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 1–12. DOI: 10.1057/palcomms.2015.14

14. Miyake A., Kost-Smith L.E., Finkelstein N.D., Pollock S.J., Cohen G.L., Ito T.A. Reducing the gender achievement gap in college science: A classroom study of values affirmation // Science. 2010. Vol. 330. No. 6008. P. 1234–1237. DOI: 10.1126/science.1195996

15. Rovers S.F.E., Clarebout G., Savelberg H.H.C.M., de Bruin A.B.H., van Merriënboer J.J.G. Granularity matters: comparing different ways of measuring self-regulated learning // Metacognition and Learning. 2019. Vol. 14. P. 1–19. DOI: 10.1007/s11409-019-09188-6

16. Fan Y., van der Graaf J., Lim L., Raković M., Singh S. Towards investigating the validity of measurement of self-regulated learning based on trace data // Metacognition and Learning. 2022. Vol. 17. No. 3. P. 949–987. DOI: 10.1007/s11409022-09291-1

17. Jeong S., Feldon D.F. Changes in self-regulated learning profiles during an undergraduate peer-based intervention: A latent profile transition analysis // Learning and Instruction. 2023. Vol. 83. Article no. 101710. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101710

18. Dörrenbächer L., Perels F. Self-regulated learning profiles in college students: Their relationship to achievement, personality, and the effectiveness of an intervention to foster self-regulated learning // Learning and Individual Differences. 2016. Vol. 51. P. 229–241. DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.09.015

19. Broadbent J., Fuller-Tyszkiewicz M. Profiles in self-regulated learning and their correlates for online and blended learning students // Educational Technology Research and Development. 2018. Vol. 66. No. 6. P. 1435–1455. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-018-9595-9

20. Strauss A., Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, fourth ed. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, CA. 2014.URL: https://research-proposal.ir/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Basics_of_Qualitative_Research__Techniques_and_Procedures_for_Developing_Grounded_Theory.pdf (дата обращения: 01.11.2024).

21. Ganda D.R., Boruchovitch E. Promoting selfregulated learning of Brazilian Preservice student Teachers: results of an intervention Program // Frontiers in Education. Frontiers Media SA, 2018. Vol. 3. Article no. 5. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2018.00005

22. Panadero E. A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research // Frontiers in Psychology. 2017. Vol. 8. Article no. 422. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422

23. Wolters C.A., Brady A.C. College students’ time management: A self-regulated learning perspective // Educational Psychology Review. 2021. Vol. 33. No. 4. P. 1319–1351. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-020-09519-z

24. Chen J. The effectiveness of self-regulated learning (SRL) interventions on L2 learning achievement, strategy employment and self-efficacy: A meta-analytic study // Frontiers in Psychology. 2022. Vol. 13. Article no. 1021101. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1021101

25. Dignath C., Büttner G. Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students.A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school level // Metacognition and Learning. 2008. Vol. 3. P. 231–264. DOI: 10.1007/s11409-008-9029-x

26. Wolters C.A., Hoops L.D. Self-regulated learning interventions for motivationally disengaged college students. 2015. DOI: 10.1037/14641-004

27. Barnard-Brak L., Paton V.O., Lan W.Y. Profiles in self-regulated learning in the online learning environment // International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2010. Vol. 11. No. 1. P. 61–80. DOI: 10.19173/irrodl.v11i1.769

28. Chen J., Lin C.-H., Chen G., Fu H. Individual differences in self-regulated learning profiles of Chinese EFL readers: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study // Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2023. Vol. 45. No. 4. P. 955–978. DOI: 10.1017/s0272263122000584

29. González-Pienda J.A., Fernández E., Bernardo A., Núñez J.C., Rosário P. Assessment of a selfregulated learning intervention // The Spanish Journal of Psychology. 2014. No. 17. Article E12. DOI: 10.1017/sjp.2014.12

30. Fryer L.K., Vermunt J.D. Regulating approaches to learning: Testing learning strategy convergences across a year at university // British Journal of Educational Psychology. 2018. Vol. 88. No. 1. P. 21–41. DOI: 10.1111/bjep.12169

31. Wang G., Wang Y., Gai X. A meta-analysis of the effects of mental contrasting with implementation intentions on goal attainment // Frontiers in Psychology. 2021. Vol. 12. Article no. 565202. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.565202

32. Duckworth A.L., Grant H., Loew B., Oettingen G., Gollwitzer P.M. Self-regulation strategies improve self-discipline in adolescents: Benefits of mental contrasting and implementation intentions // Educational Psychology. 2011. Vol. 31. No. 1. P. 17–26. DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2010.506003

33. Duckworth A.L., Kirby T., Gollwitzer A., Oettingen G. From fantasy to action: Mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII) improves academic performance in children // Social Psychological and Personality Science. 2013. Vol. 4. No. 6. P. 745–753. DOI: 10.1177/1948550613476307

34. Saddawi-Konefka D., Baker K., Guarino A., Burns S.M., Oettingen G. et al. Changing resident physician studying behaviors: A randomized, comparative effectiveness trial of goal setting versus use of WOOP //Journal of graduate medical education. 2017. Vol. 9. No. 4. P. 451–457. DOI: 10.4300/jgme-d-16-00703.1

35. Wong J., Baars M., He M., de Koning, Paas F. et al. Facilitating goal setting and planning to enhance online self-regulation of learning // Computers in Human Behavior. 2021. Vol. 124. Article no. 106913. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106913

36. Vilkova K. The promises and pitfalls of self-regulated learning interventions in MOOCs // Technology, Knowledge and Learning. 2022. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 689–705. DOI: 10.1007/s10758-02109580-9

37. Kizilcec R.F., Cohen G.L. Eight-minute selfregulation intervention raises educational attainment at scale in individualist but not collectivist cultures // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017. Vol. 114. No. 17. P. 4348–4353. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1611898114

38. Dignath-van Ewijk C., Fabriz S., Bьttner G. Fostering self-regulated learning among students by means of an electronic learning diary: A training experiment // Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology. 2015. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 77–97. DOI: 10.1891/1945-8959.14.1.77

39. Schmitz B., Wiese B.S. New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: Time-series analyses of diary data // Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2006. Vol. 31. No. 1. P. 64–96. DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.02.002

40. Alvi E., Iqbal Z., Masood F., Batool T. A qualitative account of the nature and use of selfregulated learning (SRL) strategies employed by university students // Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online). 2016. Vol. 41. No. 8. P. 40–59. DOI: 10.14221/ajte.2016v41n8.3

41. Chitra E., Hidayah N., Chandratilake M., Nadarajah V.D. Self-regulated learning practice of undergraduate students in health professions programs // Frontiers in Medicine. 2022. Vol. 9. Article no. 803069. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.803069

42. Katsantonis I., McLellan R. Students’ Voices: A Qualitative Study on Contextual, Motivational, and Self-Regulatory Factors Underpinning Language Achievement // Education Sciences. 2023. Vol. 13. No. 8. Article no. 804. DOI: 10.3390/educsci13080804

43. Ateş Akdeniz A. Exploring the impact of selfregulated learning intervention on students’ strategy use and performance in a design studio course // International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2023. Vol. 33. No. 5.P. 1923–1957. DOI: 10.1007/s10798-022-09798-3

44. Lazar J., Feng J.H., Hochheiser H. Chapter 11-Analyzing qualitative data // Research Methods in Human Computer Interaction. 2017. P. 299–327. DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-805390-4.00011-x

45. Chun Tie Y., Birks M., Francis K. Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers // SAGE Open Medicine. 2019. Vol. 7. Article no. 2050312118822927. DOI: 10.1177/2050312118822927

46. Ryan R.M., Deci E.L. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions // Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2000. Vol. 25. No. 1. P. 54–67. DOI: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020

47. Conti R. College goals: Do self-determined and carefully considered goals predict intrinsic motivation, academic performance, and adjustment during the first semester? // Social Psychology of Education. 2000. Vol. 4. No. 2. P. 189–211. DOI: 10.1007/s11031-011-9272-3