Inquiry – What is my question?
How do educators teach SRL practices in the classroom and ensure similar practices are carried out at home? How do teachers bridge the gap between the class environment and home environment? What methods can I use, without overstepping personal and professional boundaries, to mediate and encourage parental involvement and positive modelling to ensure consistent SRL practices are developed at school and at home.
Personal Significance
My interest in studying the parental role in developing self-regulated learners surfaced through my interactions with my students at my practicum school. It became quite evident during my first few visits that the students in my classroom were not as fortunate as myself, in regards to parental support. During my time as an elementary and secondary school student, I was lucky to have heavy parental involvement throughout my entire education path. Much of the support came through sports, but having parents who were around and asking about my day made all the difference. My father is an architect and real estate agent, and my mother is an office manager at an elementary school. Their involvement in my academics and extracurricular absolutely impacted my development as a life-long learner and my ability to self-regulate. On the other spectrum, for students in my classroom it was abundantly clear that many of them lacked the parental/guardian support at home that would be conducive to self-regulatory habits. I believe my question is very important to other educators because it will examine the variables that are controllable as educators. As a young educator, I often feel helpless or caught in an uphill battle, because I have students arriving to school without proper supplies or food. However, as their teacher, my presence and support needs to be proactive and multi-faceted. Not only will I persistently brighten the moods of my students, but also I will try to find the proper resources for the students, and more importantly, engage parents to foster positive involvement and modelling. I’m bringing a perspective that was very fortunate to receive outstanding parental support in my educational journey. My family supported my social, emotional, and academic needs throughout my elementary and secondary school. I was fortunate enough to participate in a number of team sports and extracurricular clubs that were not only financially expensive but time consuming. My parents supported me wholeheartedly through my decade of competitive basketball, and their greatest sign of support has been their long time friendship with the parents of my elementary school classmates. It is has been a testament to their parental involvement; my parent’s closest friends are the parents of my classmates. Despite being the youngest of three children, my parents were so heavily involved with my education path that they maintain life-long friendships that were made through their interactions in my schooling.
What historical, empirical, or practical background underlies the issue addressed?
There are various empirical and practical issues that are highlighted when researching Self-regulatory habits and pedagogy at home. Perry, Nordby, and VandeKamp (2000) acknowledge a deficiency in SRL research, as it has been dependent on student and family self-reporting, often answering through generalizations. Self-reporting also allows students to present themselves in the best possible light, resulting in response bias (Perry, 2000). Irrespective of these nuances, current research and findings have concluded, “Parent-child relationships (particularly a child’s perceptions of these relationships) play an important role in shaping children’s adjustment and psychological development, including school related outcomes” (Mih, 2013, pg.36). The relationship between parent and child is critical to development, and has been broken down into two important dimensions, parental autonomy support and parental control (Mih, 2013). Parental control is understood to be forms of conformity or manipulation of emotions through punitive disciplinary practices. On the other end, parental autonomy support is conceptualized as a parent’s cultural and value influence on children’s independent problem solving and decision-making. Parental autonomy support is understood to be beneficial as it provides secure support for children without leaving students feeling manipulated (Mih, 2013). Within these two realms of parent-child relationships, there are also three parenting style prototypes: authoritative, authoritarian and permissive (Huang and Prochner, 2004). Furthermore, the findings from Huang and Prochner and their preceding researchers showed, “Parenting style may influence students’ self-efficacy, self-esteem, and self-concept, and these motivational components of self-regulated learning may in turn influence children’s self-regulated learning strategy use (Huang and Prochner, 2004, pg. 229). Parenting styles have an overwhelming affect on child development and fostering self-regulated learning, and more importantly, unintentional parental modeling also influences greatly on children’s habits. Martinez-Pons (2002) details the issue of indirect parental influence, suggesting parents need to become aware that the methods they apply in problem solving and decision making in the presence of their children will influence their study habits. The issue of parental modeling is imperative in developing SRL at home, as socio-economic status and cultural implications will inexplicably affect the pedagogical work culture and habits at home. Martinez-Pons (2002) uses the term “hidden curriculum” to explain the opportunities guardians need to utilize when aiding with homework or other learning experiences. An example, which is used by Martinez-Pons (2002), is the influence of parent’s role modeling; turning off the television when it is time for children to complete work would demonstrates proper prioritizing and acknowledgement of a distraction to a productive work space. “Turning off all televisions in a home for a nightly study period can also facilitate a youngster’s concentration, and it conveys the intrinsic value placed upon doing well in school” (Martinez-Pons, 2002, pg. 130).
In addition to the inexplicit parenting influence, parents that do find time to support their children may still encounter difficulties. Parental support can be limited and more procedural rather than instrumental support. (E.g. correcting a child’s reading miscues instead of allowing them to sound it out themselves). This could be the result of time constraints or resources. The lack of resources at home also relates to an overlooked variable in current SRL studies into parental support, which are socio-economic and cultural implications. An article by Vassallo (2012) advances these studies by observing the socio-economic implications on SRL habits at home and the potential variables in occupations and parental work habits, more specifically, within the working class and middle class settings. His article also involves a study on a working class family, Francisco and Laura who both cared deeply about their children’s school success, but experienced class-based conditions that interfered with providing proper support (Vassallo, 2012). Vassallo’s research was able to build off Lareau’s (2003) work thatcontends that working-class families manage their homes and families with the logic of natural growth. Meaning, as long as children had sufficient food, shelter, clothing, and comfort, their cognitive development was allowed to ‘unfold spontaneously’ (Lareau, 2003, pg. 238). Moreover, guardians would not prioritize academic development of children, resulting in excessive free time for children.
What did you learn? What are the implications?
Beyond my academic research, I have been able to inquire into my issue through various conversations with people that are school administrators, youth workers, other educators, coaches and parents. My open and on-going dialogue with these resources has been beneficial to my inquiry, as they have supported previous academic findings, enhanced current views on SRL, and directed my teaching practice.
My conversations with various administrative staff members have also re-iterated the importance of parental involvement in SRL development. However, each administrator empathized with their community, as some schools may have too intense and politically driven parental involvement or some schools lack enough parental involvement to carry out annual fundraising events. I was fortunate enough to speak with administration that worked at schools that were extremely different financially and demographically. Observing the two socio-economic classes allowed me to make various connections to Vassallos’ claims regarding differences in working class and middle class cultural practices and its impact on child development (2012). More importantly, Vassallo mentions “Working-class culture is often treated as incongruent with the culture of schooling, and therefore, a site for reformation” (Vassallo, 2012, pg. 508). This quote resonates with me, as it inspires me to implement various strategies during my experience. I have continually worried about the lack of resources and support my students will have once they leave the school; however, I must see it as an opportunity to scaffold innovative strategies that could provide instant success and gratification for the students, and would not have been presented if I wasn’t there. A major point which the dialogue with various administrators highlighted was the importance of understanding socio-economic status and where families are coming from, before implementing or providing resources and strategies.
Understanding family background will be an essential step in my planning process for implementing SRL strategies for students outside of school. I had the opportunity to speak with a youth worker during my volunteering experiences, which allowed me to make a connection to Lareau (2003), and her findings regarding guardians from working class backgrounds. Lareau (2003) argues that working class family guardians are less likely to have teachers as part of their social networks, and, as a result, have frequent participation in schooling, and less knowledge of schooling discourse and available resources. Dialogue with the youth worker re-enforces these academic findings, as it’s often the teacher who must initiate communication out of worry for the student’s well being. Guardians might be unaware of resources or potentially embarrassed to ask for help, which leads to stagnation, negative re-enforcement of work habits at home, resentment towards the school, and most importantly, it puts students at a major disadvantage.
Through discussions with coaches, I was able to learn about the importance of establishing boundaries and terms of communication with parents. Parental involvement would vary by each player, but being firm with your team expectations will result in a positive support network for the players. Entering the season, my coaching staff was clear with the parents, that we expected full commitment and trust from them in our coaching philosophy, abilities and standards. As a result, our coaching staff implemented player contracts, which outlined that players were expected to give us their fullest effort on the court and to reflect their school community in a positive light off the court.
What will you (did you) do to advance your learning? (Research, practice, etc.)
Taking into consideration the present academic research on developing SRL at home, and my dialogue with adults that are living in various socio-economic spectrums, I have been able to plan out a preliminary and continually adapting teaching philosophy. I hope to establish a classroom environment that is academically challenging, mentally engaging, and emotionally cognisant; most importantly, I envision a classroom that upholds values that are student driven and intrinsically motivated for the success of other classmates. I intend to scaffold appropriate amounts of autonomy and opportunities for self-regulation to students in hopes to show students that I trust them with their learning environment and that their success is in their control. A helpful strategy would be to assess my classroom learning styles to understand which learning practices are most ideal and effective: Viorel Mih (2013) mentions using the MSLQ Diagnostic Tool to assess students learning and motivational strategies.
As Linsin outlines in his article, “The whole idea of having a strong community is that we want our students to act without prompting. We want teamwork and camaraderie to be who they are and how they choose behave, not something foisted upon them by the teacher” (Linsin, 2009). To ensure this type of culture is prevalent I would need to focus on social-emotional learning. Norris mentions that for students to buy into the classroom culture, “Students must listen to and respect each other, and no put- downs or thoughtless comments can be made (Norris, 2003).” To scaffold social-emotional learning into my classroom, I will need to ensure the classroom environment is conducive to positive personal growth, judgment free, and risk-taking. This could be achieved through community building exercises, such as, weekly dialogue or classroom conduct contracts.
Additionally, I believe a major factor in student success and willingness to work independently, is having confidence in yourself and your support network. Ryan Shams introduced a great article that focused on motivational self-talk for students in physical education, which I believe is applicable to the classroom setting, especially for students that are lacking self-confidence in their academic ability or emotional strength. Kolovelonis describes motivational self-talk as, “statements designed to facilitate performance by building confidence, increasing effort and energy expenditure and creating a positive mood” (Kolovelonis, 2010, pg. 154). By empowering my students and helping them recognize their applicable prior knowledge, my classroom could become more conducive for self-regulating learning to occur.
What’s next? For you or others?
To further research in parental involvement in developing self-regulating learning pedagogy in children, various amendments must be made to research practices. Vassallo (2012) outlines numerous downfalls in the research practices being implemented currently. Current research neglects the “class-based implications of constructing, valuing, rewarding, and developing certain kinds of SRL”, which can lead to oversights in recognizing class-based differences in student self-regulatory habits and structures (Vassallo, 2012, pg. 525). Furthermore, by acknowledging the diverse forms of SRL within the different social classes, it could lead to more research into the socio-economic structures and impacts on student learning. Vassallo’s study presented a clear motive and hope for future research, which I agree with, “a more critical approach to SRL… to create a space where diverse manifestations of SRL can be recognized, enacted, valued, and rewarded (Vassallo, 2012, pg. 525). Lastly, educators must develop methods that encourage parents to practice particular pedagogical structures at home to encourage SRL development without overstepping professional boundaries. It is a difficult border to tread, as past research has proven, self-reporting surveys are not reliable and miscommunication or misinterpretation is very common from the classroom to the home. As educators, we cannot lecture or hold parents accountable for their parenting practice; however, we can show our support and establish our presence as a educational resource and not merely another checkpoint in their child’s educational journey.
Referenced Works
Juan, H., & Prochner, L. (2004). Chinese Parenting Styles and Children’s Self-Regulated Learning. Journal Of Research In Childhood Education,18(3), 227-238. doi:10.1080/02568540409595037
Kolovelonis, A., Goudas, M., & Dermitzaki, I. (2010). The effects of instructional and motivational self-talk on students’ motor task performance in physical education. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(2), 153-158. (Ryan)
Lareau, Annette. 2003. Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley, CA: University ofCalifornia Press.
Linsin, M. (2009). How to Build a Classroom Community: It’s Not What You Think.
Martinez-Pons, M. (2002). A Social Cognitive View of Parental Influences on Student Academic Self-Regulation. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 126-31.
Mih, Viorel. (2013). Role of Parental Support for Learning, Autonomous / Control Motivation, Forms of Self-Regulation on Academic Attainment in High School Students: A Path Analysis. Cognition, Brain, Behaviour. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 17(1). 35-59.
Nancy E Perry, Karen J.O VandeKamp, Creating classroom contexts that support young children’s development of self-regulated learning, International Journal of Educational Research, Volume 33, Issues 7–8, 2000, Pages 821-843, ISSN 0883-0355, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(00)00052-5. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035500000525)
Norris, J. A. (2003). Looking at classroom management through a social and emotional learning lens. Theory into Practice, 42, 313-318.
Vassallo, S. (2012). Observations of a Working Class Family: Implications for Self-Regulated Learning Development. Educational Studies, 48(6), 501-529. doi:10.1080/00131946.2011.647150
Zimmerman, Barry J. 1989. “A Social Cognitive View of Self-Regulated Academic Learning.” Journal of Educational Psychology 81:329–339.
—————. 1998. “Developing Self-Fulfilling Cycles of Academic Regulation: An Analysis of Exemplary Instructional Models.” Pp. 1–19 in Self-Regulated Learning: From Teaching to Self- Reflective Practice. Edited by Dale Schunk and Barry Zimmerman. New York: Guilford.
—————. 2000. “Attaining Self-Regulation: A Social Cognitive Perspective.” Pp. 13–41 in Hand- book of Self-Regulation. Edited by Monique Boekaerts, Paul Pintrich, and Moshe Zeidner. San Diego: Academic Press.
—————, Sebastian Bonner, and Robert Kovach. 1996. Developing Self-Regulated Learners: Be- yond Achievement to Self-Efficacy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.