PhD in Language Pedagogy
Budapest, ELTE
January 19, 2018
An exploratory study of self-regulation differences in
three English language learning contexts:
Focusing on public school education, private tutoring
and homeschooling
- DISSERTATION PROPOSAL -
Mikusová Melinda
Supervisor: Wein Csizér Kata
2
Table of content List of Acronyms: .......................................................................................................................................... 3
List of Tables: ................................................................................................................................................ 3
List of Figures: .............................................................................................................................................. 3
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4
2. Literature background ........................................................................................................................... 6
2.1 The notion of self-regulation ......................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Self-regulation models ................................................................................................................ 10
2.3 Self-regulation and language learners ......................................................................................... 13
2.4 Self-regulation and learning context ........................................................................................... 14
2.4.1 Public school environment .................................................................................................. 15
2.4.2 Private tutoring .................................................................................................................... 17
2.4.3 Homeschooling environment ............................................................................................... 18
3. Research questions .............................................................................................................................. 20
4. Research methods ................................................................................................................................ 21
4.1 Research design ........................................................................................................................... 21
4.2 Setting and participants ............................................................................................................... 22
4.2.1 Hungarian English language teachers.................................................................................. 22
4.2.2 Lower and upper secondary level school students .............................................................. 23
4.2.3 Homeschooling parents ....................................................................................................... 23
4.2.4 Homeschooled students ....................................................................................................... 24
4.3 Description of data sources and data analysis ............................................................................. 25
4.4 Ethical issues ............................................................................................................................... 33
4.5 Overview of data sources and data analysis ................................................................................ 34
4.6 Quality criteria for the study........................................................................................................ 35
5. Limitations and expected outcomes .................................................................................................... 35
6. Time frame and work schedule ........................................................................................................... 37
References ................................................................................................................................................... 38
3
List of Acronyms:
NCC National Core Curriculum
SLA Second Language Acquisition
FLA Foreign Language Acquisition
List of Tables:
Table 1: Self-regulation Definition Example……………………………………………..........7
Table 2: Overview of the Participants’ Biographical Data…………………………………...24
List of Figures:
Figure 1: Zimmermanʼs (2000) Self-Regulation Model……………………………….………10 Figure 2: Zimmerman & Moylanʼs current (2009) Self-Regulation Model………………......11
4
1. Introduction
In today’s teacher-oriented and teacher directed traditional school setting students tend to
depend on their teachers. Students expect their teachers to motivate them and to tell them what
and how to learn and to what extent, which leads to the fact that students do not know how to
organize and regulate their own learning. However, teachers can ensure that the learning process
is a liberating one rather than an oppressive process (Freire, 1993). One of the ways to achieve
this is by fostering the development of their students’ self-regulatory skills, so teaching their
students how to take responsibility for their own learning, thus to have a greater control over
what, how and where they learn in order to fully engage in the learning process (Zimmerman &
Schunk, 2001). So rather than the teacher deeming what is necessary to do, self-regulated learners
take control of their own development.
According to Zimmerman (2008), self-regulation can be learned and taught and the
primary setting in which this should happen is the school setting. In spite of its many advantages,
Thornburn (2017) stresses that teachers neglect to develop their learners’ self-regulatory skills.
However, it is hard to think of acheiving academic success without the students being self-
regulated (Zimmerman, 2000). Therefore, the teachers’ role in promoting their students’ self-
regulated learning strategies is generally accepted as it helps students to develop learning skills
which provide them assistance with any academic subject (Carneiro & Veiga Simão, 2012).
The question of what makes a successful language learner is a long-standing research
topic that has been in the foreground in not just second (SLA) but also in foreign language
acquisition (FLA) research since the 1960s. There is a body of research focusing on the ways –
methods and techniques - English language is taught and the issue has been widely investigated
from learners’ perspective as well. Rubin and Thompson (1982, p.3) even highlighted the role of
the language learner in the success of their learning: “You, the language learner are the most
important factor in the language learning process.” My own belief that the language learners’
active participation plays a key role in their learning process is what motivates me to conduct this
research.
Self-regulation has been a significant area of research “in the fields of education and
psychology over the last few decades” (Collett, 2014, p.430) however, it is a relative newcomer
to the field of foreign language learning research. Especially in Hungary where only a limited
amount of research has been conducted on learning strategies recently (Habók, 2016) and even
5
less on language learning strategies (Csizér & Kormos, 2012). However, in my opinion, learning
strategies make up only a small proportion of self-regulated learning, thus I view self-regulation
as having a much broader meaning.
Even though the Hungarian National Core Curriculum (2012) highlights that the school
setting is where students are taught - in addition to subject matter (content) knowledge - to
increase their awareness and understanding of self-regulation and to contribute to their ability to
regulate effectively, Hungary offers some opportunities for those who are dissatisfied and
disenchanted with the education provided by the public school system. Choosing to be a private
student, attending a private school or educating children at home are just a few options for
parents who seek alternatives to public education. Since the enactment of the 1993 LXXIX Act on
Public Education, homeschooling is no longer a peripheral, illegal movement, but has become a
viable alternative for Hungarian families to follow; as the law allows parents to teach their
children - categorised as private students - at home.
The home learning environment places increased demands not just on parents, but on the
learners as well, including problem-solving (Pelt, 2015), increased determination (Riley, 2015)
and autonomy (Gaither, 2016), since homeschooling families, even when following the school
curriculum, may freely decide what, when, where, and how to learn. Initially, at the start of my
inquiry, I declared my interest in investigating the main differences and similarities between
homeschooled students’ and school students’ self-regulation processes. What I was in fact the
most interested in was the internalised process of learning itself and how these two types of
learners become capable of regulating their learning, with the main focus put on English language
learning.
In order to provide a much more comprehensive understanding of self-regulation the
focus of the study was broadened and will not only look at self-regulation from the language
learning perspective but will try to collect data from the teachers’ perspective as well, mainly
focusing on the question of whether English teachers find it important to deal with the issue and
whether they are equipped enough to create the conditions that might help the development of
effective self-regulatory skills. Furthermore, as Thornburn (2017) summarized, teachers do not
emphasize self-regulation in the classroom for manifold different reasons, but whether they pay
more attention to teach self-regulation outside of the classroom environment, for example when
giving private lessons, has not been investigated before. Therefore the teachers’ classroom
6
practice and their private tutoring will be compared with respect to self-regulation and whether
the language teaching environment influences how much attention is paid to the development of
self-regulation skills. The present dissertation aims to focus on this relatively neglected aspect of
language learning, on investigating how the language learning and teaching context influences
the self-regulation of English language learners and on examining whether there are any
perceived differences between the self-regulatory strategy use in the chosen learning contexts: the
traditional school setting, the private tutoring context and the homeschooling environment. First
to fully comprehend the given topic and to understand how teachers and students interpret their
complementary roles a clear definition of the notion of self-regulation is needed.
2. Literature background
After reviewing of the huge amount of data and definitions, I realized that there are some issues
which make self-regulation research complicated, namely that (i) there is a need for greater
definitional clarity; (ii) there is a large number of self-regulated models present in literature; (iii)
there are different views as of how to measure self-regulation. The imprecise addressing of these
problems would affect the research results, so these will be addressed one-by-one in the literature
background.
2.1 The notion of self-regulation
Self-regulation has been defined in different ways over the years. Montalvo and Torres (2004,
p.2) claim that self-regulated learning research first emerged in the mid-1980s when Zimmerman
and Schunk (1989) published their volume series on self-regulated learning. A great deal of
research on self-regulation has been undertaken and it became “one of the essential axes of
educational practice.” A year later, Boekaerts and Corno (2005, p.200) summarized that over the
past twenty years “researchers have struggled with the conceptualization and operationalization
of self-regulatory capacity, coming to the conclusion that there is no simple and straightforward
definition of the construct of self-regulation.”
Even though there is considerable agreement that successful and effective learners do self-
regulate, self-regulation theories differ in their descriptions of its various psychological
dimensions (see Table 1). Researchers cannot find a common ground on whether self-regulation
7
is a process or an action (Demetriou, 2000; Pintrich, 2000), an approach (Cohen, 1990), a
capacity or ability (Lemos, 1999; Collett, 2014) or a system, which is comprised by a complex set
of factors contributing and influencing self-regulation in learning (Zimmerman, 1989). Dörnyei
(2005, p.191) goes further and highlights that self-regulation is “the degree to which individuals
are active participants in their own learning.”
Table 1
Self-regulation Definition Example
Author Definition
Zimmerman, (1989, p. 2) “Self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions that are planned
and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals.”
Cohen (1990, p. 10) “An approach wherein ”learners make decisions, alone or with the
help of others, about what they need or want to know, how they
will set objectives for learning, what resources and strategies they
will use, and how they will assess their progress.”
Lemos (1999, p. 3) “An individual's capacity to modulate behavior according to
internal and external changing circumstances.”
Demetriou (2000, p. 2) “Actions directed at modifying a system’s present state or activity
and which are necessary either because that state (or activity) is
diverting from a previously set goal or because the goal itself
needs to be changed.”
Pintrich (2000, p. 453) “An active, constructive process whereby learners set goals for
their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control
their cognition, motivation, and behaviour, guided and constrained
by their goals and the contextual features in the environment.”
Collett (2014, p. 5) “Refers to the capability of people to recognise and respond to
context-situated behavioural, cognitive, or metacognitive cues,
ideally modifying aspects of their functioning in the particular
context to meet the needs signalled by these cues.”
Boekaerts & Niemivirta (2000) perceive this bias as something useful, as it is possible to
break down self-regulation into manageable units or subsystems so the investigation of the issue
is more comprehensive. It is worth noting that, apart from these differences, the main component
parts are essentially the same, thus (meta)cognitive, motivational and behavioural points of view
are taken into account in line with the learning environments’ influence. Therefore, it is possible
to classify the previously conducted self-regulation studies around one or more of these –
overlapping – categories: a) (meta)cognition-centred studies, b) motivation-centred studies, c)
behaviour-centred studies.
8
Cognition-centred self-regulation studies investigate the learners’ use of cognitive and
metacognitive strategies such as setting goals, planning how to achieve them, monitoring the
learning task, using learning strategies (Cohen, 2011) to solve particular problems, repeating and
storing the information (Chamot, 2008) and evaluating one’s own performance (Shunk, 1996).
Therefore, self-regulation is characterized as being a broader construct than language learning
strategies (Dörnyei, 2005), which only encompass a small segment of self-regulation. There is
evidence that the conscious use of these cognitive strategies is linked to higher academic
achievement and performance (Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1986). According to Bandura’s
(1986) social cognitive theory, the capacity to self-regulate is a basic function of human
behaviour; therefore, it is present to differing extents in everyone (Boekaerts & Niemivirta, 2000;
Zimmerman, 2000).
Motivation-centred studies attempt to explain self-regulated learning based on the
student’s motivations. The use of a particular self-regulated strategy alone is not sufficient;
students must be motivated to control their cognition (Pintrich & DeGroot, 1990). Motivation
explains the reasons why people choose a certain action (choice), how hard (effort) and for how
long (persistence) they sustain that activity (Dörnyei & Skehan, 2003). In other words,
motivation regards three basic dimensions of human behaviour “direction, a choice of a particular
action and magnitude, the effort made to the action and the persistence of this effort” (Dörnyei &
Ushioda, 2011, p.4). Research on motivation has traditionally investigated the positive influences
that generate interest in a particular action (Dörnyei, 2005). Currently there is a shift in the
motivation research trend from what causes motivation to how motivation changes. Motivation is
no longer perceived as something stable, but as a complex, multi-dimensional and dynamic
factor, that goes through a process of evolution and constant change because of the various
internal and external influences a person is exposed to. This is called the process-oriented
approach to motivation (Dörnyei, 2000). Therefore, motivation-centred self-regulatory studies
aim to investigate those motivational dimensions: the students’ goal orientation (Zimmermann,
1989), self-efficacy belief (Bandura, 1986), task value (Pintrich, 1999) or anxiety (Zimmermann,
1989) which are in constant interaction with – and form an absolutely indispensable part of –
self-regulated behaviour.
As Yang (2005) summarized, other researchers focus on the importance of the
behavioural aspects of self-regulation as cognition and motivation does not mean actual action or
9
behaviour. Self-regulated learners take responsibility for and control of their learning over a long
period of time. These studies explore the students’ ability to resist temptations such as watching
television, playing online, going out with friends and other sources of distraction to control their
learning. In addition, self-regulated learners seek help and assistance more often when it is
needed and consciously regulate their learning environment, thus try to find quiet places.
According to Zimmermann and Martinez-Pons (1986), self-regulated learners – in terms of
behaviour – select, organize and construct social and physical environments that optimize their
learning.
The present study is to be guided by Zimmerman’s (2000, p.14) definition of self-
regulation, referring to it as “self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions that are planned and
cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals” together with Pintrichʼs (2000, p.453)
definition as it is much more detailed and multifaceted and emphasizes many of the self-
regulations’ construct and building blocks:
Self-regulated learning is that it is an active, constructive process whereby learners set
goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition,
motivation, and behaviour, guided and constrained by their goals and their contextual
features in the environment. These self-regulatory activities can mediate the relationships
between individuals and the context, and their overall achievement. (Pintrich, 2000,
p.453)
The general working definition of self-regulation in this study is drawn from the literature
and views self-regulation as an internal, dynamic process, which is possible to develop with
teachers, since they are the ones expected to cultivate these skills in students, and which in
addition is viewed as an important lifelong learning skill. Therefore the present study
characterizes self-regulated learners as being competent to set objectives for their learning, take
charge of their learning, self-monitor their behaviour and consciously manipulate those learning
strategies which promote their learning. Therefore, self-regulation is seen as comprised of
building blocks such as motivation, cognition, metacognition and behaviour depending on
external factors, such as environmental (e.g., school, home, library) and social variables (e.g.,
parents, peers, teachers, friends).
10
2.2 Self-regulation models
Several models of self-regulated learning have emerged in research literature over the last 30
years. Each of these models reflects a slightly different theoretical stance and outlines a variety of
processes and stages learners go through while being engaged in a learning task (Collett, 2014).
Recently, Panadero (2017) reviewed six of the self-regulation models, including the ones which
investigate the cognitive, motivational, and emotional interrelations of self-regulated learning and
thus fit the study’s proposed definition. He analysed the models which are still widely used and
whose authors are active self-regulation researchers. The revised models of Zimmerman (2000),
Boekaerts (2011), Winne and Handwin (1998) and Pintrich (2000) were compared with each
other and with two much recent models of Efklides (2011) and of Hadwin, Järvelä, and Miller
(2011). This proposal does not describe each of these models due to space constraints; however,
the final version of the dissertation will devote a whole chapter to the description and analysis of
these self-regulation models.
After reviewing all of these models I began to explore the idea of using Zimmerman and
Moylan’s (2009) model as a tool for guiding my inquiry. The first version of their model, the
Triadic Model of Self-Regulated Learning, which described the interactions of personal,
environmental, and behavioural determinants of self-regulated learning was developed in 1989
Figure 1
Zimmermanʼs (2000) Self-Regulation Model
Note. Own construction. Based on Zimmerman (2000).
Environment
11
and has undergone some revisions over the years. In the 2000s version (See Figure 1) only the
three basic interacting phases of the model were outlined: (1) forethought phase, (2) performance
or volitional control phase and (3) self-reflection phase. The sub-processes belonging under each
phase went through some changes, and the model acheived its current form only in 2009.
The current form of the model (see Figure 2) still comprises the three basic phases and their
underlying sub-processes, such as self-regulated strategies and tools. The forethought phase is
characterized by goal setting and strategic planning and involves all the self-motivation beliefs,
as self-efficacy, outcome expectations, task interest/value and goal orientation which precede
efforts to act and set the stage for learning.
The performance phase, occurring during learning efforts, incorporates everything related to
self-control as the chosen learning strategy, time management, handling stress, environmental
Figure 2
Zimmerman & Moylanʼs current (2009) Self-Regulation Model
Note. Own construction. Based on Zimmerman & Moylan (2009).
Zimmerman´s Model
Forethought Phase
Task AnalysisGoal setting
Strategic planning
Self-Motivation Beliefs
Self-efficacy
Outcome expectations
Task interest/value
Goal orientation
Performance Phase
Self-Control
Task strategies Interest incentives
Self-instruction Help-seeking
Environmental structuring Imagery
Time management Self-consequences
Self-Observation Metacognitive monitoring
Self-recording
Self-reflection Phase
Self-JudgementSelf-evaluation
Causal attribution
Self-ReactionSelf-satisfaction/affect
Adaptive/defensive
12
structuring and all the self-observation strategies which affect attention and performance. Last but
not least the self-reflection phase includes all the strategies of self-judgement (as self-evaluation
and casual attribution) and self-reaction (as self-satisfaction) which happen after the performance
efforts and determine the learner’s reaction to the whole experience which in turn influences the
subsequent learning efforts (forethought phase), thus completing the self-regulatory cycle.
One of the reasons for opting for this model is that Zimmerman and Moylan (2009) considers
self-regulation as a range of competencies that allow students to consciously and intentionally
control the variables which have impact on their learning process. Because the model is so widely
and carefully developed it was viewed as being an effective tool for developing research
instruments. Going through these sub-processes it is clear that they cover all the psychological
components of self-regulated learning: metacognition, cognition, motivation and behaviour, and
it is possible to address the questions of who (self-efficacy, self-evaluation), why (motives, goals),
how (method, strategies), when (time constrains), where (physical environment), with whom
(social environment) and what (task performance).
The model is based on Zimmerman and Ponsʼ (1986, p.618) ten self-regulated learning
strategies each falling into one of the following three categories: personal, behavioural and
environmental. Personal strategies involve those strategies which help students to organize and
interpret information, such as:
1. Organizing and transforming information (summarizing, rearrangement of materials)
2. Goal setting and planning (sequencing, timing, completing activities)
3. Keeping records and monitoring (record events and results, note-taking, record of marks)
4. Rehearsing and memorizing (memorize material, using repetition)
5. Reviewing records (re-reading tests, notes, textbooks to prepare for class)
Behavioural strategies are the actions student take such as:
6. Self-evaluating (checking the quality or progress of their work)
7. Self-consequences (self-motivation, arrangement or imagination of rewards and
punishment for success and failure)
Environmental strategies involve seeking assistance and the structuring of the physical study
environment:
8. Seeking information (non-social sources as library)
9. Environmental structuring (select or arrange the physical setting, isolating, minimizing
distractions)
10. Seeking social assistance (solicit help from peers, from teachers or adults)
13
The main reasons for choosing this model, in addition to the fact that it has been applied
extensively in developmental research, is that it builds on Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive
theory, thus emphasizes the dynamic triadic interaction of personal factors, behaviour, and
environment. As the study aims to investigate self-regulation in different learning contexts
(school and private tutoring setting and homeschooling) and from two different perspectives
(English language learning and teaching), Zimmerman and Moylan’s (2009) model seems to be
the best choice as it includes feedback-loops on personal, behavioural and environmental level.
2.3 Self-regulation and language learners
Dörnyei (2005) noted that the field of language teaching and learning seems to be heading away
from a focus on the teacher to the learner and their language learning processes. Collett (2011)
stresses that self-regulation has been a topic of increasing interest for foreign and second
language educators in recent years as there is a body of research on how self-regulated learning
can help language learners to develop in different learning environments. Ping (2009) stated that
a language learners’ success in mastering a particular second or foreign language depends highly
on the usage of self-regulated learning strategies. As Zimmerman (1998, p.1) very clearly
highlights, what makes self-regulated learners different is the fact that they view learning “as
something they do for themselves rather than as something that is done to or for them.” Self-
regulated - second and foreign - language learning strategies are important throughout the world
and even the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (Council of Europe,
2001) promotes the development of “Learning how to learn” approaches.
Self-regulation is not an in-born characteristic feature, but can be developed; the English
language teachers play an essential role in the incorporation of self-regulated learning strategies
into the teaching of English, which help their students’ construct their own strategies (Pintrich,
1999). Ushioda (2003, p.96) highlighted that the question of motivation is no longer focusing on
how we motivate our learners, but how we help learners to motivate themselves and “to lead
them to reflect on and evaluate their own achievements and learning experience in a constructive
manner.” Ushioda (2003, p.8) observed that the pivotal role of the teacher is not “finding
strategies and incentives to get the learners to do what they want, but of providing the right kinds
of interpersonal support and stimulation so that learners will discover things they want to do for
themselves.”
14
However, in practice teachers tend to provide their students with unguided practice. Teachers
should provide their students an explanation about the classroom strategies used as the type of
strategy, and why, how, when and where to use it and how to evaluate its effect (Garner, 1987).
According to Zimmerman and Shunk (2001), feedback given by the teacher is the single most
important feature in developing the students’ self-regulation strategies. Offering tasks which
stimulate engagement, guiding the use of self-regulated learning strategies, keeping a record of
students’ progress and monitoring their learning process are considered to be important roles of a
teacher in promoting self-regulation in the language classroom.
Nakata (2010, p.6) claims that in an English classroom teachers should be aware of their
learners’ background: they should know their students’ language-learning history, their language
proficiency level, preferred learning style and strategies. Furthermore, they should be aware of
their students’ “attitudes toward language-learning, the factors impeding their progress and
motivation, and the gap between their background and the teacher’s own background as a
language-learner and a language teacher (e.g., teachers’ beliefs, teaching styles).” Focusing on
these issues, teachers may help the development of their learners’ self-regulatory skills. As one of
the aims of this study is to explore how teachers introduce and develop particular self-regulating
language learning strategies and tools in different learning contexts, the next chapter characterises
the chosen environments one-by-one.
2.4 Self-regulation and the learning context
Learning may take place in very different learning environments. The United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) report (2012, p.12) defines the
learning environment as “the complete physical, social and pedagogical context in which learning
is intended to occur” and the underlying conditions as “factors embedded in the shared physical
and social learning environment of the school or classroom that influence learning processes.”
These definitions highlight that students learn in many different ways in very different contexts.
Learning might happen inside or outside of school locations and even in the outdoor
environment, with or without instruction, intentionally and incidentally, formally and informally.
Therefore it is possible to make a distinction between physical, natural, and close or distant social
environment. Furthermore, learning may happen individually and in smaller or larger groups of
learners. Because of the technology-driven world, the definition of learning environment has
15
become much wider in the 21st century, as it no longer means a physical place, but might mean an
online, virtual learning environment as well (Steel & Andrews, 2012).
Fraser (1994) emphasized that each learning environment can be characterized by two
components: physical and psychosocial. The physical component includes all the physical aspects
of an environment such as space, furniture, light, sound, temperature and access to learning
resources, while the psychosocial component is basically the social environment, incorporating
all the interactions occurring between the individuals within the given learning environment such
as students with students, students with teachers, students with parents. These components
supplement each other in creating a learning context which affects and optimises the ability of
students to learn. The following three sub-chapters will characterize each of the studies’
investigated learning contexts, namely the traditional public school environment, private tutoring
and the homeschooling environment.
2.4.1 Public school environment
School is the place where students spend most of their time and learn various skills. According to
Dörnyei (2001, p.4), it is the “microcosms” where students make friends, fall in love, get to know
themselves and others, “in short where they grow up.” A classroom is built on its students’ and
their teachers’ co-operation and communication. Conversation with classmates, helping each
other, conflicts and solving problems form an essential part of the classroom culture. There is a
range of different rules that determine what students can and cannot do, so students learn that
their actions not only affect themselves, but their classmates as well. Therefore, the classroom
plays an important role in teaching the next generation how to be successful members of society
and so careful attention should be paid to creating a learning environment which would help
students to thrive. Dörnyei (2001) emphasizes that it takes only a few minutes to sense a pleasant
and supportive-classroom-atmosphere. In Holley and Steiner’s (2005) research, students were
asked to list specific characteristics they perceive as contributing to a safe learning environment.
The vast majority of respondents put the responsibility of creating a safe environment on their
instructors and listed 387 characteristic features of a safe classroom. Students reported that the
feeling of being in a safe classroom influenced both what and how much they learned.
If approached correctly, a classroom can have an impact on the student’s focus and
achievement in the class. There are numerous ways teachers can modify the learning environment
16
to help their students be successful within the classroom. They can manipulate for example with
the physical elements such as the classroom itself, colours, arrangement of desks, resources,
decorations. Allwright and Bailey (1991) correctly point out that each classroom is unique,
because both the teachers and the students bring their own individual experience and values into
it. It is commonly accepted that no two students are the same, even though each student tends to
sit in the same spot, next to the same students week after week. Bronson (2000, p.234) adds that
in a “regimed classroom climate” students “required to do the same thing at the same time in the
same way.” This uniformity discourages self-regulation as students cannot learn to select the
strategies most suitable for them and the ones which provide them stimulation.
Learning in a classroom is not always an anxiety-free experience. Some argue that there are a
number of distractions in a classroom such as peers, own thoughts, feelings and physical
conditions that make it hard to stay focused in a classroom (Dörnyei, 2001). According to Astin
(1993, p.398), peers are “the single most potent source of influence, affecting virtually every
aspect of development—cognitive, affective, psychological, and behavioural.” This influence can
be both positive and negative. On one hand, peer interactions are particularly important because
these are “major contributors to experiences with diversity” (Kuh et al., 2006, p.43) and because
students can perceive their peers as role models, providing a source for motivation (Leka, 2015).
On the other hand, peers might pressure each other in a negative way as well. One of the ways to
do so is bullying. However, a study conducted by Craig et al. (2000) showed higher rates of
bullying behaviour outside of the classroom, e.g., in the playground, than in the classroom.
Despite its numerous advantages, many people think that the educational system is too old-
fashioned, it follows and operates on similar principles to schools which existed hundreds of
years ago. These institutions, which are far from the needs of the 21st century, do not prepare
students well enough for everyday challenges (Collom, 2005; Pell, 2014) therefore numerous
parents are looking for alternatives to school education. Private tutoring and homeschooling
education will be included in the scope of this study as both of these alternatives means of
education appear to be increasing. On one hand, their growth should not be ignored, as they are
likely to influence the Hungarian educational system. On the other hand, both of these
alternatives operate on an individual, one-to-one basis, and therefore are distinctive from
classroom environment.
17
2.4.2 Private tutoring
Nowadays, even when public education is available, many families choose private tutors to help
their children for various reasons, such as helping them with schoolwork, examination
preparation and university preparation. It is often called the “shadow education” system,
supplementing the teaching children receive in a traditional school setting. The term was first
used by Bray (1999) who explained that the reasons for choosing this term are manifold. First,
the metaphor “shadow” refers to the fact that this type of supplementary education developed
parallel to mainstream education and exists because of it. Second, as mainstream education
changes, so does private tutoring. In addition, he highlights that there is a bigger focus on
mainstream education than on its’ shadows, and finally because it shares some similar features
with mainstream education, but has its own distinctive features, too. According to Bray (2003),
“shadow education” is expanding at an alarming rate and is likely to influence the education
system in the future. Bray and Kwok (2003, p.2) defines private tutoring as help provided by
tutors in academic subjects “for financial gain and which is additional to the provision by
mainstream schooling.” It generally refers to individual tutoring, provided in the homes of either
the tutors or the tutees.
Private tutoring offers some advantages to both the learners and tutors, and even the parents.
As it generally happens on a one-to-one basis, tutors have time to get to know their students: their
weaknesses and strengths, and to take better care of their individual needs. In addition, it enables
students to learn skills and subjects not offered by schools. The tutors get some extra benefits to
supplement their income and it is still cheaper for parents than private schools’ tuition fees (Bray,
1999; Bray & Kwok, 2003). Tutoring might be undertaken by various people; by recent or former
trained teachers, by school graduates or by other volunteers, which may have an effect on the
quality of the education. What makes the situation even worse is that there is little or no
regulation of private tutors (Ireson, 2004).
There are a number of disadvantages to private tutoring as students have to do some extra
work along with that already given by the school, so students hardly have time for entertainment
and rest (Bray & Kwok, 2003). Students often feel ashamed of receiving private classes. They are
afraid that it will affect their relationship with their school teachers, because they might consider
it as a criticism of their teaching (Ireson, 2004). Students having private classes often tend to hide
18
that they need extra help because it is often perceived as a sign of a low ability or learning
difficulty (see Vogel et al., 2007 for a review of the main avoidance factors).
Students generally commute between home and school. There are parents who choose private
tutors because they do not have time and they need someone to stay with their children (Bray &
Lykins, 2012). Other parents think that they already have an involvement in their child’s
education, as they help them with homework and practice together, and therefore they feel that
they do not need to employ tutors. Parents holding a teacher degree are especially likely to do this
in conjunction with other family members or friends (Ireson, 2004). In addition there are families
who think that this parent-led home-based education is the best option for their children and
therefore they decide to pull their kids out of traditional or private schools and provide them
education at home.
2.4.3 Homeschooling environment
Act No. LXXIX of 1993 makes it clear that homeschoolers are classified as private students. In
Hungary these students are supervised by an authorized school and they have to pass annual
exams which are specified by the school directors. Since home education was legalized the
number of home educated students seems to be growing rapidly. The actual number of
homeschoolers in unknown as they are a sub-category of private students, but some guiding
numbers exist. According to the 2004census there were about 5,000 private students in Hungary,
this number increased in 2008 to 6,800 and to 8,600 by 2012.
Petrie (1998) defines the concept as “the full time education of children in and around the
home by their parents or guardians, or by tutors appointed by the parents or guardians” (p.285).
She highlights that, in addition to parents, there are many people responsible for homeschooling,
furthermore she incorporates the phrase “in and around the home” into her definition, which
signifies that it is not precise to argue that homeschooling is conducted exclusively at home.
Lines (1993) has a similar definition, she only emphasizes and adds the detail that it is the
education of school-aged children at home instead of in a conventional educational institution. In
contrast, Holt and Farenga (2003) point out that homeschooling is a “process by which children
grow and learn in the world without going, or going very much, to schools” (p.20). Their
definitions point out that there are homeschooled children who might actually attend school
classes.
19
In line with these ideas, for the purposes of this study I defined homeschooling as an
alternative to traditional formal school formats, in which parents choose to educate their children,
not exclusively, but at home, instead of sending them to traditional public or private schools. In
Hungary two terms are used frequently, “otthonoktatás” which matches with the term
homeschooling and “otthontanulás” which might be literally translated as home-based studying
or home education. There is a slight difference in the meaning and rationale behind these two
terms, as Gaither (2008) notes many reject the term homeschooling “as what they are doing is
qualitatively different to conventional school” (p.230). As the difference between these two terms
is not put into focus in the present study, I will use the terms homeschooling and home education
interchangeably.
Numerous studies have demonstrated that the reasons for choosing home education are
diverse and as “numerous and unique as each homeschooling family” (Pell, 2014, p.2). Compared
to this, Hungary lacks information regarding the reasons and motives of parents who withdraw
their children from the public school system. The results of previously conducted studies which
aimed to gather insightful information about the primary reasons for choosing homeschooling
education (Isenberg, 2007; Pell, 2014; Ray, 1989) indicate that there are some reasons which
frequently appear. Most commonly families choose homeschooling for academic, social, familial
and religious reasons. According to Isenberg (2007), parents make school choice decisions based
on “preferences, the quality of local schools, and constraints of income and available leisure
time” (p.398). In Pell’s (2014) study the options of better educational need, religious reasons,
poor school learning environment and the desire to build stronger family bonds were selected as
being the most important factors influencing decision making.
Parents desire to provide the best educational experience for their children, and many of them
take the responsibility of teaching them at home. The concept itself has many advantages and
disadvantages. Close parental bonds, a loving, familiar and safe atmosphere (Pell, 2014), own
educational principles, choice of curriculum, methods, and instructions to meet the needs of the
children (Martin, 1997) all allow freedom for children to develop naturally, to become critical
thinkers, and experiment creatively. Homeschooling parents can use their flexibility to develop
their children in the most suitable way, they do not have to follow any rules or schedules, and
they can teach whenever and wherever they wish to (Martin, 1997). According to Bell (1997),
homeschooling gives children enough time to not just memorize, but master the material; it
20
leaves time for its’ complete exploration. This seems to corroborate with the research results,
which indicate that homeschoolers often outperform their public or private school counterparts
(Ray, 2011; Van Pelt, 2015).
Another advantage of homeschooling lies in the fact that families have many options on
how to teach their children at home. They can rely on a preplanned, prepackaged curriculum
designed for homeschoolers or they may choose to prepare their own material (Lyman, 1998;
Ray, 1994). Homeschooling parents try to apply various methods to fulfil the needs of their
children. The conditions are given, thus the lessons are not limited to their home only. According
to Pell (2014), homeschoolers have their own computers, electronic devices and other resources
which contribute to more diverse ways of teaching and learning, as opposed to the ones most
public schools can provide. Working outdoors, taking field trips and visiting various institutions
are among the commonly used homeschooling approaches (Basham, 2001).
In Hungary people recently started to establish support groups and organize meetings for
homeschooling families to meet each other in order to exchange ideas. Even though the issue is
beginning to receive increased attention from different types of media, there is a paucity of
research on the subject, not to mention the low number of Hungarian books dealing with the
topic.
3. Research questions
The study aims to investigate how the chosen language learning context, i.e., public school
setting, private tutoring and homeschooling environment, influences self-regulation of English
language learners. Two types of research questions were set: a) research questions concerning
English language teaching and b) research questions concerning English language learning. The
questions are thus divided into two main questions and five sub-questions.
Questions concerning English language teaching are as follows:
1. What practices and views can be identified concerning the promotion of self-
regulatory strategy use in various educational contexts of English language
teaching in Hungary?
1.1. What do Hungarian educational documents say about self-regulated learning?
21
1.2. How do English language course books incorporate the promotion of self-regulated
learning into their content?
1.3. How do Hungarian English teachers integrate the development of self-regulated
learning strategies into their language teaching in the school setting?
1.4. How do Hungarian English teachers integrate the development of self-regulated
learning strategies into their language teaching in the private tutoring context?
1.5. How do homeschooling parents integrate the development of self-regulated learning
strategies into language teaching?
Question concerning English language learning is as follows:
2 What characterizes Hungarian homeschoolers’ and school students’ self-
regulatory strategy use in English language learning?
4. Research methods
This section outlines the research design and methodology, including the study population,
criteria used for selection, sampling, data collection and analysis procedures. It covers the ethical
considerations pertaining to the research and some possible limitations are also discussed.
4.1 Research design
As the above outlined framework indicates, this exploratory study focuses primarily on the
influence of three different language learning environments (traditional classroom, private
tutoring and homeschooling environment) on the development of self-regulation skills and
intends to gather data from English language teaching and learning perspectives. Therefore the
current research is designed as a mixed method exploratory study using both qualitative data
from interview studies, classroom observation and document analysis, and quantitative data from
a questionnaire in order to ensure triangulation, and to allow the different facets of the studied
phenomenon to emerge (Creswell, 2003). Boekaerts and Corno (2005, pp.209-211) in their
comprehensive discussion outlined eight different instruments that assess self-regulation: “self-
report questionnaires, observations of overt behaviour, interview evidence, think aloud protocols,
traces of mental events and processes, situational manipulations, recording on-task motivation
strategies and keeping diaries.” Boekaerts and Corno (2005) are aware of the fact, that each of
22
these instruments has its own strength and weaknesses. The most important thing is careful
design and the mixture of techniques suiting the particular study’s purpose.
This proposed dissertation research consists of seven independent but inter-related studies
dealing with self-regulation through various lenses and perspectives. The study combines
different research methods such as analysis of educational documents, questionnaire study,
course book analysis, classroom observations and interviews with students and teachers.
4.2 Setting and participants
4.2.1 Hungarian English language teachers
The English language teacher participants for the questionnaire study will be recruited with the
help of colleagues and my own professional acquaintances. In order to contact as many
Hungarian English language teachers as possible the study will rely on the use of the snowball
sampling method, so the participants will be asked to share the questionnaire with further English
language teachers. The questionnaire study will aim to collect data from approximately 150
teachers.
Recruiting teachers for the interview studies who, apart from teaching in a public primary
or secondary school, also offer private English classes will be much more challenging. I will try
two sampling techniques. I will use the above-mentioned snowball sampling methods, so my
colleagues will be asked to provide me with contacts to teachers who offer private classes outside
of school. In addition, the last page of the questionnaire study will ask teachers who offer private
English lessons to volunteer for a follow-up interview about their classroom and private teaching
practices and, if they agree, to provide their contact information. I will try to recruit primary and
secondary school teachers to see whether there are any perceived differences or not. Those who
provide their contact information and agree to participate in this study will be contacted via e-
mail and they will be asked to allow a classroom observation before the interviews. I have to
carefully think about the information I provide them at this point as I do not want these teachers
to modify their behaviour (cf. the Hawthorne effect) and therefore influence the research results.
The criteria for teacher selection will include: (1) being an English teacher in Hungary, (2)
teaching English in a public primary or secondary school and (3) offering private English lessons
outside of the school setting. I am aiming to conduct interviews with at least 10 English language
teachers who fit the designed criteria.
23
4.2.2 Lower and upper secondary level school students
The interviewed teachers will be asked to help recruit their students for the interview study about
their English language learning habits and practices. The criteria for students will be: (1) being
enrolled in lower or upper secondary school level, (2) learning English as a foreign language, (3)
willingness to work with the researcher. The rationale for choosing lower and upper secondary
school level, which covers the end of the primary school and secondary school education i.e. the
10-17-year-old age group, is that in Hungary students start learning their first foreign language in
grade 4 of primary school (NCC, 2012) when they are 9 years old. After a year of English
language learning it is presumed that students will be able to reflect on their learning with the
help of prepared questions. I am planning to conduct interviews with at least 10 students.
4.2.3 Homeschooling parents
Before the actual dissertation study, a preliminary pilot study was conducted to recruit
homeschooling family participants. The participants of the interview study were selected by
purposive sampling (Dörnyei, 2007). The pilot sample consisted of Hungarian families enrolling
their children in homeschooling education. The first two participants were recruited from and
through online social media, later these initially contacted families where asked to provide
contacts to additional homeschooling families who also fit the study’s criteria, hence as the next
step the snowball sampling technique was applied. A series of four interviews (see Table 2) was
conducted for this pilot study during the spring term of the academic year 2016-2017 by the
researcher. The only inclusion criterion for participants was to have at least 6 months of
homeschooling experience. The reason for restricting homeschooling experience to a minimum
of six months is twofold. Firstly, as Griffith (2010) suggests, it takes several months to deschool,
or leave the school system behind. It is a mental process a child and even parents go through after
being removed from a formal schooling environment (Griffith, 2010). Secondly this minimal
time was considered to be a reasonable amount of time for these families to ensure that they have
had time to develop their own personal homeschooling style so that they can reflect on it.
Interviews with a broad focus were conducted, dealing with the rationale for choosing
homeschooling education, perceived advantages, disadvantages and challenges. Furthermore
some questions regarding Hungarian homeschooling policies and regulations were addressed.
24
Because of the lack of Hungarian research and the highly restricted nature of homeschooling
informants, this small-scale pilot study aimed to test whether these families are approachable and
willing to co-operate or not. The pilot study helped me to compile a list of 20 Hungarian
homeschooling families. It is also important to stress that all the participants volunteered for a
longer, follow-up co-operation.
4.2.4 Homeschooled students
For the purposes of this study I find it important to characterize homeschooled students. I define
homeschooling as an alternative to traditional, formal school formats, in which parents choose to
educate their children not exclusively, but mostly at home instead of sending them to traditional
public or private schools. Therefore homeschooled children, most of the time, learn at home led
by their parents. Having some school lessons, taking classes from other tutors and getting help
from others are not considered to be excluding factors here, however parent led education should
outweigh the time of education provided by others, e.g., private tutors. Homeschooling parents
taking part in the interview study will be asked to provide permission for their child or children to
participate in this study. I will try to conduct at least 10 interviews with homeschooled children in
the selected 10-17 age range.
Table 2
Overview of the Participants’ Biographical Data
Name Gender Age Marital
status
Highest level of
education
Number of
children
Number of years
homeschooling
1. Eszter Female
49 Married University 1 (11 years old) 3
2. Kitti Female
37 Divorced University 1 (13 years old) 7
3. Anita Female
53 Divorced University
5 (16, 13, 12, 10, 8
years old) 8
4. Orsolya Female 41 Married University 3 (10,5,3 years old) 3
Note. The names are pseudonyms.
25
4.3 Description of data sources and data analysis
The following section provides a brief description of the data sources and data analysis processes
linked to the research questions, focussing on the ways the sources are used to answer the
research questions. The justification for each of the data collection methods proposed in the main
study is outlined in the following sections as well.
1. What practices and views can be identified concerning the promotion of self-
regulatory strategy use in various educational contexts of English language teaching
in Hungary?
To answer the first main research question, 5 sub-questions are addressed. First, two types of
document analysis will be carried out to answer the first two sub-questions. Merriam (1988, as
cited by Bowen, 2009, p.29) claims that “documents of all types can help the researcher uncover
meaning, develop understanding, and discover insights relevant to the research problem.”
Yanow’s view (2007) supports the previous idea by emphasizing that a document analysis might
serve as a part of an observational or interview study. She argues that the chosen documents can
provide background information which “may corroborate observational and interview data, or
they may refute them, in which case the researcher is ‘armed’ with evidence that can be used to
clarify, or perhaps, to challenge what is being told, a role that the observational data may also
play” (p.411).
Sub-question 1.1.: What do Hungarian educational documents say about self-regulated
learning?
This first study aims to investigate the place of self-regulation in Hungarian governmental
educational sources using content analysis and will try to offer a better understanding of the
approaches to self-regulation in the Hungarian context. Hungary has a three-level curriculum
system comprising of the National Core Curriculum (acronym: NCC), frame curricula and local
curricula. The National Core Curriculum is a central level document issued by the Hungarian
Government, which regulates the content of Hungarian education. The frame curricula are
accredited by the Ministry of Human Resources and are developed on the basis of the NCC. Both
of these documents provide a framework for schools to develop their local curricula, meaning
that these latter types of curricula are developed by schools at an institutional level (NCC, 2012).
26
The document analysis results are expected to help the development of interview questions and
observation sheets. Therefore, this aims to serve as a backbone to the dissertation study and to
obtain information about what is prescribed in these documents, thus expanding my
understanding of the given topic from a theoretical point of view before proceeding with the
observations and interviews.
Obtaining source documents: The Hungarian National Core Curriculum selected for the
study was collected in electronic form from the official websites of the Ministry of National
Resources. Both the Hungarian and the English versions will be used and checked so as to
prevent any translation errors, and to find the best possible Hungarian translation of the world
self-regulation, in order to see what types of synonyms and terms are used in connection with
self-regulation. The Hungarian frame curricula are also available on the official website of the
Hungarian Institute for Educational Research and Development. Most of the schools have their
local curricula available online on their websites, so getting access to these documents is not
going to cause any problems. With the help of an online browser, I will search for those schools
which made their local curricula available and I will purposefully select 30-35 of them. Then I
will group together all the primary schools and secondary school and randomly select
approximately 8 of each for document analysis. Therefore, the National Core Curriculum, the
frame curricula for primary and secondary schools and 16 local curricula will be analysed in this
study. I am planning to conduct this document analysis in the spring semester of 2018, as part of
my elective course.
Data analysis: The documents will be analysed using the constant comparative method (Maykut
& Morehouse, 1994) to identify the key themes related to the conceptualization and integration of
self-regulated learning as part of these documents. Documents will be coded inductively (Fereday
& Muir-Cochrane, 2016) with higher levels of abstraction (bottom-up coding) achieved through
multiple readings. The study will focus on English language learning but will analyse the whole
document to see the exact number of direct references to self-regulation and to see in which
subject matter it is emphasized the most. The process of data analysis will follow Bereczki’s
(2015) study who investigated the place of creativity in the Hungarian National Core Curriculum.
Initially sets of codes will be developed to guide the analysis throughout the process. The coding
framework will include references to self-regulation (such as autonomy, independent learning,
self-directed learning) and by reading the text further relevant key words and notions will be
27
identified and added to the preliminary list of search terms (codes). Based on these search terms,
bigger categories will be created and operational definitions will be provided. Each document
analysis will cover the following elements: (1) place of the particular curriculum in the
Hungarian educational system, (2) the structure of the document and (3) the ways self-regulation
is integrated into the document.
Sub-question 1.2. How do English language course books incorporate the promotion of self-
regulated learning into their content?
In an English language classroom, students are told what to do directly by their teacher and
indirectly by their course book (Dam, 2012). In the Hungarian context, course books are still
considered to be the primary sources of language teaching, which justifies the course book
analysis in this study. Initially, the second study was planned to be a course book analysis.
However, this was changed, because of a lack of knowledge about the current English language
course book usage in the Hungarian context. As I aim to conduct a document analysis on those
course books which are used most frequently in Hungarian English classes at the lower and upper
secondary school level there is a need to conduct a survey on the issue, as no recent and adaptable
data could be identified. Almost twenty years ago teachers claimed to use the Headway series,
followed by the Hotline series (Nikolov, 1999) but it is questionable whether these results are still
relevant. Therefore, a preliminary questionnaire study was implemented into the research design
before the actual course book analysis. A short, online questionnaire will be distributed among
Hungarian English teachers, aiming to reach at least 150 respondents. The questionnaire will
involve variables such as the teachers’ age, gender, nationality, teaching experience, the location
of the school and grade level of his/her students. The content questions will focus mainly on the
course books used by the participating teachers, their opinion about the given course books and
will include a question about the teachers’ preferred course books from their past or present
teaching experience. It will ask teachers to select the course book they currently use from a
provided list and indicate their satisfaction with the course book on a Likert-scale based on
different categories such as overall opinion, design, and types of activities. In addition a few
questions about the usage of course book supplementary materials, such as teachers’ books, CDs,
vocabularies will be addressed and furthermore the participants will be asked to describe what
makes a good course book and why, in order to see whether they incorporate some self-regulation
28
related content into their answer. The results of this survey will provide the fundamental basis for
the third study.
After identifying the most widely used course books in Hungary this third study will
encompass their analysis. This study will aim to investigate the manifestation of self-regulation in
selected English as a foreign language course books with the scope of the study determined later.
As the dissertation study aims to investigate the issue from not just from an English language
learning but from a teaching perspective, the teacher’s guides will be included in the analysis as
well. Even though learners do not have access to them, it is each teacher’s choice whether or not
to use certain materials in the teacher’s guide and incorporate it into their own teaching. The
results from the course book analysis can then be compared with the ones gathered from the
teacher’s guides.
Obtaining source documents: Those course books which turn out to be used most frequently in
Hungary will be analysed. They will be borrowed from the university library if available or from
teacher colleagues.
Data analysis: The questionnaire study data will be analysed using the SPSS statistical software
packages while the course book analysis will employ content analysis. The steps will be the same
as in the case of the educational documents analysis, therefore some key words and concepts such
as learner autonomy, self-reflection, self-evaluation, planning, learning strategies etc. will be set.
It is possible that these will not be present in the course books and the supplementary teachers’
book directly, therefore I will look for tasks which can be said to promote the development of
self-regulatory skills. I will try to identify those cases in which the course books offer some
advice or information about self-regulatory learning and when they provides opportunities to put
them into practice.
Sub-question 1.3. How do Hungarian English teachers integrate the development of self-
regulated learning strategies into their language teaching in the school setting?
Sub-question 1.4. How do Hungarian English teachers integrate the development of self-
regulated learning strategies into their language teaching in the private tutoring context?
Sub-questions 1.3 and 1.4 are described together as both of these questions will be answered with
the help of results emerging from the same semi-structured interviews conducted with Hungarian
English teachers. English language teachers – who teach both at a public school and also give
29
private lessons – will be interviewed about their teaching practice (see the next section).
However, in order to contextualise their views and perceptions, the teachers participating in the
interviews will be asked to allow me to observe some of their lessons before the interview
studies. The focus of the observation will be on how self-regulation appears in the classes (if at
all), but the class visits will also allow me to understand the teaching and learning processes in
those lessons. The reasons for doing this observation are manifold. First, as Friedman (2012,
p.186) noted when dealing with classroom related issues, it is not enough to conduct interviews
as these might be “open to challenges regarding the accuracy of the picture presented (i.e., do the
teachers really do what they say they do?).” Friedman (2012) highlights supplementing
interviews with other methods, such as classroom observations, and additional interviews with
students, in order to bring together the “etic (i.e., researcher) perspective with multiple emic
perspectives, thus creating a more complete and multi-layered description.” (p.186). Second, it
enables the researcher to compare and contrast the findings of the document analysis with the
actual implementation and promotion of self-regulatory skills in the language classroom. Third, a
classroom observation seems to be an effective method to study the roles teachers play in the
development and application of self-regulated learning strategies and in addition it may provide
an insight in the students’ self-regulatory behaviour in the classroom as well. It seems important
to conduct classroom observations before the interview studies so as not to affect the teachers’
classroom behaviour. In addition, the observation data can be compared to the participants’
interview answers so it can provide additional information on the topic. Classroom observation
has many advantages. As Whitebread et al. (2009) highlighted the main efficiency of classroom
observation lies in the fact that observation data comes from the actual classroom and captures
the relevant conditions, rather than the participants recalling all the events. According to
Boekaerts and Corno (2005), it is one of the most reliable methods to measure self-regulation as
it helps the researcher to become familiar with the social context of the classroom and record all
the social processes (such as teachers’ and peers’ facilitation) involved in the development of
self-regulatory behaviour.
Instrument: A classroom observation sheet will be developed to help the observation. Reeve et
al.’s (2004) study will provide the foundation for instrument development as it is built on
Zimmerman’s three-phase model, which serves as a basis for this study. According to Reeve et
al. (2004, p.49), teachers can foster the development of self-regulation in the language classroom
30
the following way: “(1) listening carefully, (2) creating opportunities for students to work in their
own way, (3) creating opportunities for students to talk, (4) arranging learning materials and
seating patterns so that students manipulate objects rather than passively watch and listen, (5)
offering encouragement when students show effort and persistence, (6) giving hints and praising
mastery and progress, (7) replying to student-generated questions in a contingent, satisfying way,
and (8) acknowledging students’ perspectives.” It is hoped that these initial observation
categories will help to sensitise me toward the research topic and issues I may need to pay
attention to in later classroom observations.
Data analysis: Because of the low number of classroom observations, I will use thematic
analysis of the obtained data, so the text data will be transcribed for qualitative analysis. The list
quoted above will be used to create the first version of the observation sheet and will be used
during the pilot classroom observations. Anything which the observer might perceive important
for the development of self-regulatory learning will be noted down and the sheet will be
constantly revised. I will note down all the self-regulation related issues and I will pay special
attention to teacher questions and instructions. The final version of the observation sheet will
contain a checklist, so a behavioural description of each category and some classroom examples
with the main focus on the teachers’ role in their implementation will be highlighted.
The classroom observations will be followed by semi-structured interviews. In order to
answer sub-questions 1.3 and 1.4, individual interviews will be conducted with a sample (n=10)
of Hungarian English language teachers. The main reason for choosing this approach is closely
related to the personal nature of the topic researched. Dörnyei and Csizér (1998) conducted a
questionnaire study with 200 English teachers in Hungary and based on the results they created
the Ten commandments for motivating language learners. One of these commandments is the
promotion of autonomy in the classroom, a term used interchangeably with self-regulation.
Therefore it seems evident that, from a motivational point of view, teachers consider it important
to foster. This study will use interviews with teachers of English in Hungary, teaching in
elementary and secondary schools, to compare the answers and to see at which educational level
teachers emphasize it more and which components of self-regulated learning emerge at these
specific levels. As the main study aims to compare the differences between private tutoring and
traditional classroom teaching special attention will be paid to selecting teachers who teach at a
school and also offer private classes. The interviews will focus on the ways these teachers
31
perceive the concept of self-regulated learning both in their classroom teaching and private
tutoring.
Instrument: The first part of the interview will focus on the teachers’ perceived differences and
similarities between teaching in a classroom and a private tutoring context to see whether any
issues related to self-regulated learning emerge. Before focusing on the topic of self-regulation I
will ask teachers to list the things they find challenging in both of these types of lessons,
elaborate on which one they prefer and which they perceive as a better way to improve English
language skills. The next part of the interview will focus on issues such as how do teachers define
self-regulated learning, how they promote it in a classroom, whether they use some strategies
intentionally to develop their students’ self-regulated behaviour and whether they think it is their
role to develop these skills or not. I am also planning to incorporate questions concerning the
teachers’ own use of self-regulation and the ways they developed these skills as this might have
an effect on how they promote self-regulation to their students.
Sub-question 1.5. How do homeschooling parents integrate the development of self-
regulated learning strategies into language teaching?
This interview study with Hungarian homeschooling parents aims to provide a different
perspective on the topic. It was apparent from the pilot study results that there are two types of
homeschooling families in Hungary. The ones who follow the National Core Curriculum and the
ones who are enrolled in Clonlara, which is an American School offering an off-campus program
for homeschooling families all over the world, where parents with the help of Clonlara advisors
design their own curriculum. As these families, even when following the National Core
Curriculum, are free to choose when, where, how and why the children learn certain things, it is a
crucial point of the study whether any self-regulation related differences between homeschoolers
and students in the traditional school environment will be identified. The same interview schedule
will be used with homeschooling parents as with English language teachers, except the questions
relating to the private tutoring context. They will be asked to describe their English language
lessons, the number of lessons per week, the variety of sources and supplementary material used,
and whether they seek help if needed. The study also hopes to provide an additional perspective
on homeschooling students’ learning, as parents will be asked to describe their own children’s
language learning thus it aims to compare the parents’ perceptions and the oral reports received
from the homeschooled students themselves.
32
2. What characterizes Hungarian homeschoolers’ and school students’ self-regulatory
strategy use in English language learning?
The second main question aims to explore whether homeschoolers and public school students
show any perceived differences regarding their self-regulatory strategy use. English language
learning homeschoolers and school students will be interviewed to gather data on the ways they
characterize their English language learning. As homeschoolers most of their time study at home
on a one-to-one basis, while school students have classes with peers and a variety of teachers,
some differences may be perceived between the ways they reflect on their learning. This study
aims to identify key self-regulated learning strategies present in 10-to-17-year-old-homeschoolers
and their school student counterparts. Interviews with approximately ten school students and ten
homeschooling students will be conducted, the final number will be decided when the data gained
from the interviews reaches the saturation point. As there is no evidence of what the earliest age
students can reflect on their own learning is, a few pilot studies will be conducted in order to see
whether the chosen 10-17 age category is aware of their own learning and can verbalize their
thoughts about their English language learning habits. The same semi-structured interview guide
will be applied to collect data from both types of participants to allow them time and scope to
elaborate on the issues they find relevant and to understand the participants’ point of view.
Instrument: Both homeschoolers and school students will be asked to share their English
language learning habits, their disposition toward English language, their thoughts on what the
best way is to learn English and their learning experience, success stories, challenges and
difficulties. They will be asked to talk about the things they like and dislike about English
language learning and the way they are taught. Along with semi-structured interviews,
Zimmerman and Martinez-Ponz’s (1986, 1988, 1990) Self-Regulated Learning Interview
Schedule (acronym: SRLIS) will be used to elicit information about their preferred self-
regulatory strategy use. The participants will be asked to respond to a series of six different
learning contexts and problems, such as “Some students find it easier to study or complete
assignments if they can arrange a place where they can study. Do you have a particular method
for arranging the place where you study?” (Zimmerman & Martinez-Ponz, 1990, p.53).
Data analysis: The data analysis procedure applies to all of the above described interview
studies. The interview questions will be written in Hungarian, the common mother tongue of the
33
participants and the researcher. The interviews will be audio recorded with the consent of the
participants and transcribed verbatim. The analysis of the transcribed interview data will build on
the traditions of the constant comparative method proposed by Maykut and Morehouse (1994)
with the help of the Atlas.ti 7.5.7 qualitative data analysis software. After the basic coding of the
text, the codes will be grouped into code families, thus the analysis will try to identify themes or
patterns in the first cycle codes. As the next step, similarities and differences will be aggregated
into emerging themes. Summing up, this process relies on the continuous comparison of newly
identified codes with already established ones.
4.4 Ethical issues
Important aspects to take into consideration are the ethical issues relevant to this research. As a
first step, I will apply for university research ethics approval. Before the interviews, observations
and the questionnaire study, all the participants will be informed about the purpose of the study
and assured that the data gathered will be used only for this investigation to achieve the goals set
prior the study. Before the classroom observation consent forms will be obtained from teachers
and students. In order to make sure that the questionnaire data are anonymous, even if the
respondent decides to share their contact details, a hyperlink will be inserted into the
questionnaire, which will take the respondent to an e-mail message that they can send to me just
by clicking on it. This way their contact information and data will be separated. As all the
participants, except the teachers, will be younger than 18 years old, the parents will have to give
their consent to their children participating in this study. The teachers and the students will be
given a consent form indicating that their participation in the study is voluntary and free and that
they can withdraw from the study at any time. All the participants will be assured anonymity by
using pseudonyms to maintain the confidentiality of the data and to protect the participants’
identity.
34
4.5 Overview of data sources and data analysis
Main questions: Sub-questions: Data sources Data analysis
1.What practices and
views can be identified
concerning the
promotion of self-
regulatory strategy
use in various
educational contexts
of English language
teaching in Hungary?
1.1. What do Hungarian
educational documents
say about self-regulated
learning?
Documents (National Core
Curriculum, Frame
Curriculum, Local Curriculum)
Document analysis
1.2. How do English
language course books
incorporate the
promotion of self-
regulated learning into
their content?
Questionnaire study on
course books used
English language course
books
Statistical analysis of
data (descriptive
statistics)
Qualitative analysis
(Constant
Comparative
Method)
1.3. How do Hungarian
English teachers integrate
the development of self-
regulated learning
strategies into their
language teaching in the
school setting?
Classroom observation +
Semi-structured interview with teachers
Qualitative analysis
(Constant
Comparative
Method)
1.4. How do Hungarian
English teachers integrate
the development of self-
regulated learning
strategies into their
language teaching in the
private tutoring context?
Semi-structured interviews
with teachers
Qualitative analysis
(Constant
Comparative
Method)
1.5. How do
homeschooling parents
integrate the development
of self-regulated learning
strategies into language
teaching?
Semi-structured interviews with homeschooling parents
Qualitative analysis
(Constant
Comparative
Method)
2.What characterizes
Hungarian
homeschoolers’ and
school students’ self-
regulatory strategy
use in English
language learning?
Semi-structured interviews with homeschooled children
and school students
Semi-structured interviews with homeschooling parents
Qualitative analysis
(Constant
Comparative
Method)
35
4.6 Quality criteria for the study
According to Seale (1999), transferability can be achieved by providing “a detailed, rich
description of the settings studied to provide the reader with sufficient information to be able to
judge the applicability of the findings to other settings that they know” (p. 45). This dissertation
proposal aimed to describe all the procedures and processes, which will be used to construct and
shape the study, in detail. To increase the validity and reliability of the questionnaire study, and
the credibility and dependability of the document analysis studies, the identified codes will be
discussed and refined with a co-coder (Dörnyei, 2007; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The research
instruments will be refined by fellow researchers and pilot studies will be conducted to test and
finalize them. Observational data will be analysed immediately after the observation so as to note
everything down and to make connections which might otherwise be forgotten. All claims will be
supported by specific observational examples. The principle of member checking will be used to
strengthen both the dependability and credibility of the study, so the transcribed interviews will
be shared with the participants so that they can alter and comment on their answers. Furthermore,
the interpretation of the data and findings will be supported by selected quotations from the
interviews. Bearing in mind focusing on “the meaning that the participants hold about the
problem or issue, not the meaning that the researchers bring to the research or that writers express
in the literature” (Creswell, 2014, p.186). It is also important to store both the electronic and
printed data in a well-organised manner, so decreasing the chances of losing any important
information and documents.
5. Limitations and expected outcomes
This study has its limitations. The main limitation is the complex nature of self-regulated
learning. Without knowing exactly what self-regulation entails, it would seem somewhat
premature to attempt to study it because, as cited by Collett (2014, p.432), the diversity of
conceptual understanding can cause “confusion when trying to understand research results
(Lajoie, 2008,) as well as contribute to inconsistencies in the results (Schunk, 2008).” Martin and
McLellan (2008) support this idea by emphasizing that before examining an issue, in this case
self-regulation, the clarification of the concept serves as an important and indispensable step. The
study, therefore, aims to examine the issue from various perspectives, through different lenses
36
and with the help of smaller studies. Nevertheless, these studies have their weaknesses. During
classroom observation students and teachers may change their behaviour when they know they
are being observed. Private lessons offered by English teachers might vary and depend on their
aims, such as whether it is an exam preparation course or a remedial class, and this may have an
effect on the data gathered. In addition, recruiting enough participants for questionnaire studies
and interviews is always challenging, not to mention the data analysis. The interview data
analysis is time-consuming and there is always a chance of the researcher’s own personal beliefs
and opinion influencing the research results (Dörnyei, 2007), but knowing about this, and using a
co-coder whenever possible, can help keep the necessary distance.
Recently, self-regulated learning strategies have become important aspects of language
learning. Cazan (2013) stresses that, because self-regulation is not a personality trait, by learning
how to control it it is possible to improve academic learning and performance. By exploring the
interrelationship of self-regulation and the three language learning context the dissertation hopes
to contribute to the expansion of previous theory. Furthermore, this study sets out to fill in the
gap (1) on Hungarian homeschooling literature, (2) on current Hungarian course book use, and
(3) on the main differences and similarities between school teaching and private tutoring context
perceived by Hungarian English language teachers. In addition, the study may provide and
suggest further lines of enquiry and discussion about the promotion and development of self-
regulated learning.
37
6. Time frame and work schedule
Time Procedure Remark
Stage 1 Spring term
2017/2018
Curricula document analysis
Part of How To Write And
Publish A Research Paper?
elective course
Stage 2 Spring term
2017/2018
Questionnaire study + course book
analysis
Part of Research Seminar 4
elective course
Stage 3 Spring term
2017/2018 to
August 2018
Development of research
instruments +
Pilot interviews/observation
Stage 4 Autumn term
2018/2019
Main interview study (data
collection)
Stage 5 Spring term
2018/2019
Main interview study (data
analysis)
Stage 6 2019-2020 Synthesizing and writing up
dissertation
Stage 7 2020 Expected date of submission
38
References
Act No. LXXIX of 1993 on Public Education. (1993). Ministerial Decree on Educational
Institutions, Budapest. Retrieved October 17, 2017 from
https://mkogy.jogtar.hu/?page=show&docid=99300079.TV
Allwright, D., & Bailey, K. M. (1991). Focus on the language learner. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory .
Englewood. Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Basham, P. (2001). Home-schooling: From the extreme to the mainstream. Public Policy
Sources, 51, 3-18.
Bell, D. (1997). Ultimate guide to homeschooling. Nashville, London: Thomas Nelson Inc.
Bereczki, E. O. (2016). Mapping creativity in the Hungarian National Core Curriculum: A
content analysis of the overall statements of intent, curricular areas and education levels.
The Curriculum Journal, 27, 330-367.
Boekaerts M. (2011). Emotions, emotion regulation, and self-regulation of learning. In B.J.
Zimmerman, & D.H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and
Performance (pp. 408-425). New York, NY: Routledge.
Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: a perspective on
assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 199-
231.
Boekaerts, M., & Niemivirta, M. (2000). Self-regulated learning: finding a balance between
learning goals and ego-protective goals. In M. Boekaerts, P.R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner
(Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp.417-450). San Diego, CA: Academic Press,
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative
Research Journal, 9, 27-40.
Bray, M. (1999). The shadow education system: private tutoring and its implications for
planners. Paris, France: International Institute for Educational Planning.
Bray, M. (2003). Adverse effects of private supplementary tutoring: dimensions,
implications and government responses. Paris, France: International Institute for
Educational Planning.
Bray, M., & Kwok, P. (2003). Demand for private supplementary tutoring: conceptual
considerations and socio-economic patterns in Hong Kong. Economics of Education
Review, 22(6), 611-620.
Bray, M., & Lykins, Ch. (2012). Shadow Education: private supplementary
tutoring and its implications for policy makers in Asia. Hong Kong: Comparative
Education Research Centre.
Bronson, M.B. (2000). Self-regulation in early childhood. New York: The Guilford Press.
Carneiro, R., & Veiga Simão, A. M. (2011). Technology enhanced environments for self-
39
Regulated learning in teaching practices. In R. Carneiro, P. Lefrere, K. Steffens, & J.
Underwood (Eds.), Self-regulated Learning in Technology Enhanced Learning
Environments: A European Perspective (pp. 75-101). Rotterdam, Netherland: Sense
Publishers.
Cazan, A.M. (2013). Teaching self regulated learning strategies for psychology students.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 78, 743-747.
Chamot, A.U. (2008). Strategy instruction and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.),
Lessons from good language learners (pp. 266-281). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Cohen, A. D. (1990). Language learning: Insights for learners, teachers, and researchers.
New York: Newbury House.
Cohen, A. D. (2011). Strategies in learning and using a second language (2nd ed.). Harlow,
UK: Pearson Education.
Collett, P. (2014). Researching self-regulated learning and foreign language learning. Studies
in Self-Access Learning Journal, 5(4), 430-442.
Collom, E. (2005). The ins and outs of homeschooling: The determinants of parental
motivations and student achievement. Education and Urban Society, 37(3), 307-335.
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved
January 7, 2018 from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/framework_en.pdf
Craig, W.M., Pepler, D.J., & Atlas, R. (2000). Observations of bullying in the playground and
in the classroom. School Psychology International, 21(1), 22-36.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method
approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Csizér, K., & Kormos, J. (2012). A nyelvtanulási autonómia, az önszabályozó stratégiák és a
motiváció kapcsolatának vizsgálata [Research on the relationship of language learning
autonomy, self-regulating strategies and motivation]. Magyar Pedagógia, 112(1), 3-17.
Dam, L. (2012, November). Empowering–Educating students to become lifelong learners.
Paper presented at the 39th PRTESOL Convention and the 11th CA & CB Regional
Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Demetriou, A. (2000). Organization and development of self-understanding and self-regulation:
Toward a general theory. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-
regulation (pp. 209-251). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2000). Motivation in action: towards a process-oriented conceptualisation of
Student motivation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 519-538.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). New themes and approaches in L2 motivation research. Annual Review of
Applied Linguistics, 21, 43-59.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second
language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
40
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. New York, USA: Oxford
University Press.
Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language learners:
Results of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2(3), 203- 229.
Dörnyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In C. J.
Doughty, & M.H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 589-
630). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011) Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow, UK:
Pearson.
Efklides, A. (2011). Interactions of metacognition with motivation and affect in self-regulated
learning: the MASRL model. Educational Psychologist, 46, 6-25.
Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A
hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5, 80-92.
Fraser, B.J. (1994). Research on classroom and school climate. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook
of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 493-541). New York, USA: Macmillan.
Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the City. New York, USA: Continuum Books.
Friedman, D. (2012). How to collect and analyze qualitative data. In A. Mackey, & S.
Gass (Eds.), Research methodologies in second language acquisition (pp.180-200).
Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Gaither, M. (2008). Why Homeschooling Happened, 1945–1990. Educational
Horizons, 86(4), 226-237.
Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Griffith, M. (2010). The homeschooling handbook. New York, USA: Three Rivers
Press.
Habók, A. (2016). Tanulási és nyelvtanulási stratégiák használata az általános iskola végén
és a középiskola elején [Learning and language learning strategy use are the end of
primary and beginning of secondary education]. Iskolakultúra, 26(10), 23-38.
Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä S., & Miller, M. (2011). Self-regulated, co-regulated, and socially
shared regulation of learning. In B.J. Zimmerman, & D.H Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of
Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance (pp. 65-84). New York, NY: Routledge.
Holley, L. C., & Steiner, S. (2005). Safe space: Student perspectives on classroom
environment. Journal of Social Work Education, 41(1), 49-64.
Holt, J., & Farenga, P. (2003). Teach your own: The John Holt book of homeschooling.
Boston, MA: Da Capo Press.
Hungarian Central Statistical Office. (2004). Population Census 2004. Budapest: Hungarian
Central Statistical Office.
Hungarian Central Statistical Office. (2008). Population Census 2008. Budapest: Hungarian
Central Statistical Office.
Hungarian Central Statistical Office. (2012). Population Census 2012. Budapest: Hungarian
Central Statistical Office.
41
Ireson, J. (2004). Private tutoring: how prevalent and effective is it? London Review of
Education, 2(2), 109-122.
Isenberg, E.J. (2007). What have we learned about homeschooling? Peabody Journal
of Education, 82(3), 387-409.
Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J.A., Bridges, B.K., & Hayek, J.C. (2006). What matters to
student success: A review of the literature. Commissioned report for the National
Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a Dialog on Student
Success. Washington, DC : National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. Retrived
January 5, 2018 from https://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/kuh_team_report.pdf
Kunzman, R. (2016). Homeschooler socialization: Skills, values, and citizenship. In M.
Gaither (Ed.), Wiley handbook of home education (pp. 135-157). New York, USA:
Wiley.
Leka, I. (2015). The impact of peer relations in the academic process among adolescents.
Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(1), 127-132.
Lemos, M. S.(1999). Students’ goals and self-regulation in the classroom. International
Journal of Educational Research, 31, 471-485.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Lines, P. M. (1993). Homeschooling: Private choices and public obligations. U.S.
Department of Education, 10(3), 3-25.
Lyman, I. (1998, January). Homeschooling. Back to the future? Policy Analysis No. 294.
Retrieved October 17, 2017 from https://object.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-
294.pdf?pagewanted=all
Martin, J., & McLellan, A. (2008). The educational psychology of self-regulation: A
conceptual and critical analysis. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27, 433-448.
Martin, M. (1997). Homeschooling: Parents’ reactions. Perspectives in Education and
Deafness, 17(2), 1-21.
Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and
practical guide. London: The Falmer Press.
Montalvo, F., & Torres, M. (2004). Self-regulated learning: Current and future directions.
Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 2(1), 1-34.
Nakata, Y. (2010). Toward a framework for self-regulated language-learning. TESL Canada
Journal, 27(2), 1–10.
National Core Curriculum. (2012). Budapest: Ministry of Human Resources. Retrieved 28
December, 2017 from http://www.ofi.hu/sites/default/files/WEBRA/2014/04/
NAT_2012_EN_final_2014marc14.pdf
Nikolov, M. (1999). Classroom observation project. In M. Nikolov, H. Fekete, & É. Major
(Eds.), English language education in Hungary. A baseline study (pp.221-245). Budapest,
Hungary: The British Council.
Panadero, E. (2017). A Review of Self-regulated Learning: Six Models and Four Directions
for Research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1-28.
42
Pell, B. (2014). Homeschooling: How Parents are Influencing Education for the 21st Century.
Himgiri Education Review, 1(2), 1-9.
Petrie, A. (1998). Home Education and the Law. Education and the Law, 10(2), 123-134.
Ping, L. (2009). Case Study of Factors Affecting Chinese Students’ English Communication
Performance. Canadian Social Science, 5(5), 70-88.
Pintrich, P.R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated
learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 459-470.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts,
P.R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San
Diego: Academic.
Pintrich, R. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning
components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology,
82, 33-40.
Ray, B. D. (1989). Home schools: A synthesis of research on characteristics and learner
outcomes. Education and Urban Society, 21(1), 16-31.
Ray, B.D. (1994). A Nationwide Study of Home Education in Canada. Salem, OR: National
Home Education Research Institute.
Ray, B. D. (2011). 2.04 million homeschool students in the United States in 2010. Salem, OR:
National Home Education Research Institute. Retrieved June 20, 2017 from
http://www.nheri.org/research/nheri-news/homeschool-population-report-2010.html.
Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Self-Determination Theory A Dialectic
Framework for Understanding Sociocultural Influences on Student Motivation. In D.
McInerney, & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Big Theory Revisited (pp. 31-60). Greenwich, CT:
Information Age Press.
Riley, G. (2015). Differences in competence, autonomy, and relatedness between home
educated and traditionally educated young adults. International Social Science Review,
90(2), 1-27.
Rubin, J., & Thompson, I. (1982). How to Be a More Successful Language Learner.
Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle Publishers, Inc.
Schunk, D.H. (1996, April). Self-Efficacy for Learning and Performance. Paper presented
at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, New
York, NY.
Seale, C. (1999). Quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 5, 465-478.
Seker, M. (2016). The use of self-regulation strategies by foreign language learners and its
role in language achievement. Language Teaching Research, 20(5), 600-618.
Steel, C., & Andrews, T. (2012). Re-imagining teaching for technology-enriched
Learning spaces: An academic development model. In M. Keppell, K. Souter, & M.
Riddle (Eds.), Physical and virtual learning spaces in higher education: concepts for
the modern learning environment (pp. 242-265). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Thorburn, M. (2017). Transformative Learning and Teaching in Physical Education. Oxon,
USA: Routledge.
43
UNESCO. (2012). A Ppace to learn: Lessons from research on learning environments.
Technical paper No. 9. Montreal: UNESCO Institute for Statistics. Retrived January 3,
2018 from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002154/215468e.pdf
Ushioda, E. (1996). Learner autonomy 5: The role of motivation. Dublin, Ireland: Authentik.
Ushioda, E. (2003). Motivation as a socially mediated process. In D. Little, J. Ridley, &
E. Ushioda (Eds.), Learner autonomy in the foreign language classroom: Teacher,
learner, curriculum and assessment (pp. 90-102). Dublin, Ireland: Authentik.
Van Pelt, D. (2015). Home education in Canada. Ontario, Canada: Canadian Centre for
Home Education.
Vogel, D.L., Wester, S.R., & Larson, L.M. (2007). Avoidance of counseling:
Psychological factors that inhibit seeking help. Journal of Counseling & Development,
85(4), 410-422.
Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Pino Pasternak, D., Sangster, C., Grau, V., Bingham, S.,
Almeqdad, Q., & Demetriou, D. (2009). The development of two observational tools for
assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacognition and
Learning, 4(1), 63-85.
Winne, P.H., & Hadwin, A.F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated engagement in learning. In
D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in Educational Theory and
Practice (pp.277-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Yang, M. (2005). Investigating the structure and the pattern in self-regulated learning by high
school students. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6(2), 162-169.
Yanow, D. (2007). Qualitative-interpretive methods in policy research. In F. Fischer, G.
Miller, & M. S. Sidney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: theory, politics, and
methods (pp. 405-416). Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329-339.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An
analysis of exemplary instructional models. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.),
Self- regulated learning from teaching to self- reflective practice (pp. 1-19). London:
Guilford Press.
Zimmerman, B.J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M.
Boekaerts, P.R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B.J. (2008). Investigating self - regulation and motivation: Historical
background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational
Research Journal, 45, 166-183.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for
assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational
Research Journal, 23, 614-628.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of
student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284-290.
44
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated
learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51-59.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and
motivation intersect. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of
Metacognition in Education (pp. 299-315). New York, NY: Routledge.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (1989). Self-regulated learning and academic
achievement: Theory, research, and practice. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Zimmerman, B.J., & Schunk, D.H. (Eds). (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic
Achievement: theoretical perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
![An Exploratory Study on Consumers’ Attention towards ...€¦ · social networks [21] and on social media [33], the effect that gender differences may have on consumers’ responses](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5f8a6f852a7b901de15ea17e/an-exploratory-study-on-consumersa-attention-towards-social-networks-21.jpg)
