The Present Dissertation

1.2.1 Research Goals

The general aim of this dissertation was to evaluate students’ current ways of regulating themselves and their learning processes in school. We intended to gain information on the strategies students currently use, which of these strategies facilitate an efficient

students’ regulation of the self, Study III focuses on students’ use of metacognitive strategies when learning for a test.

By investigating students’ learning behavior, the assessment of students’

dispositional ways of regulating themselves provides important information about the structure and relation of different strategies. These fundamental observations are especially important when a very new area of self-regulation is being explored (Study I), but to gain a comprehensive insight into students’ regulation behavior, it is also important to take situational aspects into account (Study II and Study III) and therefore also address the situational characteristic of self-regulation. The use of the experience sampling method (Csikszentmihalyi & Larson, 1987; Hektner et al., 2007) provides the possibility of assessing students’ actual behavior in specific situations very accurately (Study II). In addition it describes the development over time as the students prepare for one specific event (Study III).

Previous educational theories and research suggest that students’ self-regulated learning is a goal-oriented process (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005). Self-regulated learning therefore should be assessed by defining a specific goal, thought to be domain specific in nature, and by considering students’ emotional experiences towards the learning situation (Goetz et al., 2006). Following on from this, it is also important in the present dissertation to analyze students’ regulation behavior with respect to domain specificity. As such, the trait and state measures employed in all three studies were domain-specific, consistently pertaining specifically to mathematics classes. This academic domain was selected based on previous research showing students experience a moderate degree of boredom in regards to mathematics classes (Goetz et al., 2006), thus allowing for greater generalization across subject areas as compared to a more extreme boredom-eliciting subject area and ensuring a sufficient degree of variability in boredom experiences and coping strategy use (Study I and Study II).

Study I evaluated one specific component of self-regulation, namely coping with boredom in the classroom, by developing trait-based scales measuring four different categories of strategies for coping with boredom in school. The questionnaire was designed in line with a theoretical framework adapted from the coping with stress literature (Holahan, Moos, & Schaefer, 1996) which differentiates between four different categories comprised of two dimensions: approach versus avoidance and cognitive versus behavioral coping. To this end, we evaluated (1) the structure of these scales, which was validated, (2) students’ different patterns in their use of strategies for coping with their boredom; these groups were identified

and are referred to as “boredom-coping groups” from this point forward. These groups reflect the relative likelihood of each strategy being used to combat boredom and thus lent themselves to further analyses regarding (3) whether the use of certain patterns of coping strategies are more effective in reducing boredom than others. Specifically, we tested differences between frequencies of boredom experiences, as well as differences in academic achievement, and in their emotions, motivation, and cognitions towards mathematics within the boredom-coping groups.

Study II similarly examined how students protect themselves and their learning process from the boredom in the classroom. This study replicated and extended the trait-based results of Study I by evaluating both trait and state measures of boredom-related coping strategies in order to determine techniques students use to manage and overcome boredom in academic settings. The structural relations between coping strategies as well as relations between these strategies and other variables assessed using both trait and state-based methods were central to the study’s hypotheses. Briefly, the aims of Study II were to (1) analyze relations between trait-based coping group membership and other personality traits (e.g., extroversion) to validate their dispositional nature as well as to examine the interrelations between specific trait boredom-related coping strategies, (2) investigate frequencies of state-assessed boredom and coping behaviors, as well as relations between coping behaviors and other state-assessed constructs (emotions, value) to explore how effective different coping behaviors are, and (3) explore the relations between trait and state assessments of boredom-related coping.

Study III focused on students’ use of metacognitive strategies as part of the self-regulated learning process by exploring students’ use of metacognitive strategies in studying for an upcoming test, as well as the relationship between metacognitive strategy use and test performance. We intended to take the process nature of learning for a test into account in addition to investigating correlational relationships. We investigated (1) how often students occupy themselves with thoughts about the test and whether cognitive engagement changes as the test gets closer in time, (2) the possible relationship between students’ test performance and cognitive engagement with the test, (3) the metacognitive strategies employed when students are thinking about the test and (4) the influence of these metacognitive strategies on test performance.

1.2.2 Dissertation Outline

The present dissertation contains three empirical studies that investigate students’

self-regulation in school, more specifically students’ coping with boredom behavior (Study I and Study II) and students’ use of metacognitive strategies when studying for a test (Study III). These studies are presented in the following chapters (Chapter 2, Chapter 3, and Chapter 4). All three studies are presented in these respective chapters, and can be read and understood independent of one another.

In Study I (Chapter 2) four different strategies for coping with boredom were explored. Considering an adapted theoretical framework of coping with stress (Holahan et al., 1996), a questionnaire was developed focusing on two dimensions of coping, namely approach- versus avoidance-oriented coping and cognitive- versus behavioral-oriented coping.

The structure of the coping with boredom scales was first verified. Students’ use of these strategies as well as the relation between the use of these strategies to the frequency of experiencing boredom, the academic achievement, and further emotional, motivational, and cognitive aspects of academic achievement situations were then analyzed. Results showed lower boredom levels corresponded with the cognitive-approach orientation.

In Study II (Chapter 3), the results of Study I were extended and students’ use of boredom-related coping strategies, as assessed using both trait- and state-based methods, were explored. Consistent with Study I, results showed that using either trait- or state-based methods, the cognitive-approach orientation corresponded to lower boredom levels. However, trait and state measures are not consistently connected to each other, therefore emphasizing the importance of assessing trait-based measures in addition to state-based measures.

In Study III (Chapter 4), students’ occupation with thoughts about a test was explored with particular emphasis on students’ use of metacognitive strategies as assessed using the experience sampling method. Results showed that students apply metacognitive strategies more frequently as the test date draws closer and they think more often about the test in learning related situations than during their leisure time. Both the frequency with which students think about the test as well as the growth of this frequency as the time of testing approaches is positively connected to test performance. Monitoring was the only specific metacognitive strategy related directly to test performance. Implications for further research promoting the experience sampling method for assessing students’ learning behavior are discussed.

The final chapter (Chapter 5) summarizes the results of the empirical studies and discusses the general conclusions that can be drawn from this dissertation as well as implications for future research and practice.