self-efficacy beliefs and self-regulated learning ... · pdf fileself-efficacy beliefs and...

CHUANG WANGUniversity of North Carolina, Charlotte

STEPHEN J. PAPEThe Ohio State University

Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Self-Regulated Learning Strategiesin Learning English as a SecondLanguage: Four Case Studies

n These case studies provide a descrip-tion of 4 fifth-graders’ self-efficacybeliefs and use of self-regulated learn-ing strategies related to studyingEnglish as a second language.Structured interviews with the childrenand their parents were conducted toinvestigate the family context of learn-ing English and to elicit children’s self-reported self-efficacy beliefs and self-regulated learning (SRL) strategies. Inaddition, students’ responses to twoquestionnaires were used to examinethe participants’ self-efficacy beliefsand self-regulated learning behaviors.Thick descriptions through “emic”analysis of the interviews and cross-checking indicated a relationshipbetween self-efficacy, self-regulatedlearning strategies, and participants’English language proficiency.Implications for teachers are discussed.ESL teachers should incorporate explic-it SRL strategy instruction to facilitatethe development of strategies suitableto students’ characteristics and the lan-guage-learning context. Students’ self-efficacy beliefs can be enhancedthrough successful past experience andpositive feedback with scaffolding pro-vided by teachers and parents.

Introduction

There are 2.1 million speakers of English asa Second Language (ESL) in American

public schools. Approximately 76% of publicschools with ESL student enrollments provideESL programs, but only about 30% of publicschool teachers instructing ESL students havetraining to teach ESL students. Fewer than 3%of teachers with ESL students have earned adegree in ESL or bilingual education(Hoffman, 2002). These figures indicate astrong need for teachers and educators tounderstand ESL children in public schools ingeneral and to help them acquire English lan-guage proficiency in particular.

The first author lives at an internationalgraduate student family center, where he hasbecome acquainted with many internationalchildren. Some of them have been in theUnited States for a long time, and theirEnglish has become quite fluent. Other chil-dren, however, often struggle with learningESL. Individual differences in rates of learn-ing may be noticed. What environmental fac-tors and individual differences influence thistrajectory of learning? The purpose of thispaper is to investigate individual differencesin self-efficacy and self-regulation and theireffect on learning ESL.

We approached this investigation fromboth social cognitive and sociocultural per-spectives. Qualitative analytic techniqueswere used to provide an in-depth examina-tion of participating ESL students’ behaviorsand beliefs. After a discussion of self-regu-lated learning (SRL), the role of self-efficacybeliefs in SRL, and characteristics of suc-cessful second language learners, we presentfour case studies of fifth-grade children.Through these case studies, we provide evi-dence for the relationship between self-effi-cacy and SRL strategies within the context oflearning ESL.

Theoretical Background

Self-Regulated Learning. From a socialcognitive perspective, self-regulation involvesthe interaction of personal, behavioral, and

76 • The CATESOL Journal 17.1 • 2005

environmental triadic processes (Bandura,1986). Self-regulation is defined as “self-gen-erated thoughts, feelings, and actions that areplanned and cyclically adapted to the attain-ment of personal goals” (Zimmerman, 2000,p. 14). To be self-regulated, individuals needto use three important processes: self-obser-vation, self-judgment, and self-reaction(Bandura, 1986), which enable individuals tomonitor and adjust their behaviors accord-ingly. In addition, 14 categories of self-regu-lated learning strategies have been identifiedand associated with academic achievement(see Appendix A for list of strategies; Pape &Wang, 2003; Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons,1986, 1988, 1990).

From a sociocultural perspective, the reg-ulation of children’s behaviors is a shared actand an interpersonal phenomenon, and self-regulatory capacities develop within the con-text of adult-child interactions. Within theseinteractions “children begin to use languagenot only to communicate but to guide, plan,and monitor their activity” (Diaz, Neal, &Amaya-Williams, 1990, p. 135). Throughspeech, children’s cognitive operations gaingreater flexibility, freedom, and independencefrom environmental stimuli. Children’sbehaviors and actions begin to depend less onthe environmental stimuli as they becomeguided by plans. Speech provides childrenwith the tools to master their own behaviorand gain control of the environment(Vygotsky, 1978). By audibly controlling theirbehaviors through private speech, childrengradually take over the caregiver’s role ofexternal control. Self-regulatory capabilitiesare finally established with the internalizationof private speech.

Self-Efficacy, SRL Behavior, andLearning English as a Second Language.Bandura (1997) defined self-efficacy as indi-viduals’ judgments of their capabilities toorganize and execute courses of actionsrequired to produce given attainments.Students’ self-efficacy is influenced by theirlearning performance (Wang & RiCharde,1987), and their academic achievements areinfluenced by their self-efficacy beliefs

(Pajares & Miller, 1994; Zimmerman &Martinez-Pons, 1990). For example, students’judgments about their capabilities to solvemathematics problems have been shown tobe more predictive of their success in solvingthe problems than other variables (Pajares &Miller, 1994).

Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1990)reported that students’ perceptions of bothmathematical and verbal efficacy were posi-tively correlated with their use of SRL strate-gies and negatively correlated with their seek-ing adult assistance. This finding supportsEllis’s (1989) argument that good languagelearners prefer to take charge of their ownlearning rather than to rely exclusively on theteacher. These results have been replicated instudies of the American Language Program(Wenden, 1987), arithmetic proficiency(Schunk, 1981), and language learning(Oxford & Nyikos, 1989). Highly efficaciouschildren have been found to persist longerand achieve more success.A related finding inlanguage-learning studies indicates thathigher self-perceived proficiency in languageskills is associated with greater use of learn-ing strategies (Oxford & Nyikos, 1989).Perceived competence is also a major compo-nent of self-concept.“There is at least consid-erable overlap in the makeup of academicself-concept and academic self-efficacy andthat perception of academic capability is themajor common denominator between thetwo” (Bong & Shaalvik, 2003, p. 11). Duringthe early stage of development, self-conceptmay be indistinguishable from self-efficacyjudgments. As students obtain more enactiveattainment and vicarious experiences as wellas consistent feedback from significant oth-ers, such as teachers and parents, their com-petence perceptions toward particular tasksgradually become more stable. Perceived self-efficacy in a specific academic domain corre-lates significantly with academic self-conceptin that area (Bong & Shaalvik, 2003).

Characteristics of Good LanguageLearners. Good language learners are con-cerned primarily with learning how to com-municate and believe that the best way to

The CATESOL Journal 17.1 • 2005 • 77

learn a language is through the use of thatlanguage (Ellis, 1989). They are willing to takerisks and take charge of their own learningrather than relying exclusively on the teacher(Ellis, 1989; Rubin, 1975). Successful lan-guage learners are tolerant of the ambiguityand vagueness in language, persistent in pur-suing their goals, and aware of the learningprocess (Ellis, 1989). They tend to guess themeaning of unknown words from the contextand frequently use circumlocution and ges-tures in communication (Rubin, 1975).Cognitively, they attend to language forms byanalyzing, categorizing, and synthesizing(Rubin, 1975). A good language learneremploys strategies appropriate to his or herown personality, age, sex, purpose, and learn-ing context, while not-so-good languagelearners often use less effective learningstrategies (Bates, 1972). Good language learn-ers use conscious learning strategies not onlyin the classrooms but also in out-of-class-room daily activities (Chamot, 1987).Learning strategies in language contexts havebeen described as “specific actions taken bythe learner to make learning easier, faster,more enjoyable, more self-directed, moreeffective, and more transferable to new situa-tions” (Oxford, 1990, p. 8; see Appendix B).

In a study of high school ESL students, dif-ferences in individual strategy use were foundbetween beginning and intermediate levelESL students (Chamot, 1987). Metacognitivestrategies such as self-management, advancepreparation, and self-monitoring werefavored by intermediate-level students.Contextualization was used more oftenamong intermediate-level students whiletranslation and imagery tended to be favoredby beginning-level students. Moreover, manymore intermediate-level students used strate-gies for oral presentations than did begin-ning-level students.

In a case study of a successful and a less-successful second language learner, Abrahamand Vann (1987) illustrated individual differ-ences in choice of strategies. The successfullearner used more strategies overall, a greatervariety of both learning and communicative

strategies, and was more concerned with thecorrectness of forms, more willing to guessmeaning, showed higher persistence, usedmore production strategies such as para-phrasing to make himself understood, andemployed many more clarification/verifica-tion strategies. These characteristics of suc-cessful language learners are similar todescriptions of self-regulated learners whoare described as active participants in thelearning process. Self-regulated learners con-trol their cognitive processes, motivation, andemotions (Zimmerman, 1994, 2000).

The Present Study

The purpose of this study is to describefour ESL students’ self-efficacy beliefs and useof SRL strategies and to investigate the rela-tionship between the participants’ self-effica-cy beliefs, use of SRL strategies, and successin learning ESL. We also document the com-municative activities of high and low self-effi-cacy children.

Methods

Participants

Four fifth-grade children who were learn-ing ESL and 1 parent of each participated inthis study. Three participants were 10 yearsold, and 1 was 11 years old. There were 1 girland 3 boys. Three of them are from China, and1 is from Taiwan. At the time of the study, 2children had been in the United States for atleast 4 years and had achieved English profi-ciency close to that of native speakers ofEnglish. The remaining 2 children had beenin the United States for about half a year; thus,their English was still limited. All of the stu-dent participants attended the same elemen-tary public school in a Midwest urban area.Atleast 1 parent of each of the participants hadeither earned or was working toward a doc-toral degree.

Measures

Two measures were used in this study. TheESL Self-Efficacy Questionnaire was com-posed of 23 items that required the students


to indicate how well they performed specificlanguage tasks in the areas of listening,speaking, reading, and writing English—forexample: “How well can you understandmovies in English?”; “How well can you speakto your teacher in English?”; “How well canyou understand English stories when read-ing?”; and “How well can you write a note toyour friends in English?” Students reportedtheir beliefs of their capabilities on a scalefrom 1 for “not being able to do it” to 5 for“being able to do it very well.”

The ESL SRL Strategy Questionnaire wascomposed of 15 open-ended questions.Students reported the strategies they used toaccomplish particular language-learningtasks. Examples from this questionnaireincluded: “What do you do if you meet a wordthat you do not understand when you arewatching an English TV program?”; “What doyou do when you make a mistake on yourhomework?”; and “How do you help yourselfstudy English?”

Procedure

Three interviews with each child and oneinterview with each parent were conductedover 3 months during the summer of 2001.The parents and children were interviewed intheir homes. The student interviews weredesigned to elicit the student’s backgroundinformation, use of English at home, self-effi-cacy beliefs, and SRL strategies. These inter-views included the two measures, ESL Self-Efficacy Questionnaire and ESL SRL StrategyQuestionnaire. The parent interview wasdeveloped to elicit the parent’s backgroundinformation, language spoken in differentcontexts, and his or her child’s strategicbehavior in relation to learning English.Questions that emerged during data analysisprompted follow-up interviews (two for eachparticipant) to clarify beliefs and behaviors.Most interactions were conducted in English.Infrequently, the questions were paraphrasedin the students’ native language (i.e., Chinese)to facilitate understanding.

Observations of these children’s behaviorsin several contexts served as triangulation toestablish the trustworthiness of the data.Formal observations consisted of readingtasks during which the children were asked toread a passage and describe their strategies.Informal observations occurred while thechildren were playing with their peers in anatural setting. Field notes were written dur-ing observations. Transcribed data wereshown to participants for member checks.Peer debriefing was conducted to provide theperspectives of peers regarding our methods,assumptions, and data representations.

Data Coding

Participants’ levels of self-efficacy andSRL strategy use were determined from theirresponses to the questionnaires and inter-views. Students’ self-efficacy judgments weredeveloped from two sources: their mean self-efficacy ratings on the ESL Self-EfficacyQuestionnaire and their statements related totheir abilities and confidence to perform aca-demic tasks. Level of self-efficacy was basedon a comparison across the four case studies.Students’ use of SRL strategies was docu-mented through their responses to open-ended questions on the ESL SRL StrategyQuestionnaire and the number of differentstrategies elicited during the follow-up inter-views. The strategies reported during the stu-dent interviews were grouped according to 14categories of SRL strategies, which includeself-evaluation, organizing and transforming,goal-setting and planning, seeking informa-tion, keeping records and monitoring, envi-ronmental structuring, self-consequences,rehearsing and memorizing, seeking peerassistance, seeking teacher assistance, seek-ing adult assistance, reviewing tests, review-ing notes, and reviewing texts (see AppendixA; Pape & Wang, 2003; Zimmerman &Martinez-Pons, 1986). Two coders reviewedand coded the data according to the 14 cate-gories, and discrepancies were discusseduntil consensus was reached. The students’level of self-regulated learning-strategy use


was based on a comparison across the sampleof case studies.

Report of the Four Cases

Each of the individual learners is present-ed as a case study. From these cases, we exam-ine trends related to relationships betweenself-efficacy, strategic behavior, and languageachievement. To ensure confidentiality, par-ticipants’ names were changed.

Andrew Wong

Andrew was a 10-year-old boy at the timeof the study. He came to the United Stateswhen his father began to pursue a doctoraldegree 5 years earlier. He was born in Taiwan,and the dominant home language wasChinese, although sometimes the familyspoke Taiwanese and English. Andrew startedlearning English when he arrived in theUnited States and was more fluent in Englishthan in Chinese at the time of this study. Inaddition to English and Chinese, Andrew alsospoke some Taiwanese, but he used this lan-guage only when he talked to his grandpar-ents on the phone. Andrew’s parents werevery concerned with his English when theyarrived in the United States but more con-cerned with his Chinese when this study wasconducted because they were returning toTaiwan after the summer.

Andrew’s mean self-efficacy rating (4.26)was the highest in the group. His compara-tively high mean rating was supported by hisresponses during the interview. He reportedbeing able to write letters to his friends inEnglish, to talk to other children in English, tounderstand English books well, and to do hisEnglish homework without help. Andrew’smother believes he is a good reader. Duringher interview, she commented, “He likes toread. He can read very thick books like chap-ter books.”

Andrew reported many SRL behaviors.He noticed his English-language mistakesand used this information to improve hisEnglish; proofread his writing assignmentsto check his spelling, grammar, and syntax

before submitting them to his teacher; andasked for help when he was not certainabout English. In addition to using the dic-tionary for checking unknown words,Andrew indicated using a dictionary tocheck word usage. The following excerptfrom the interview demonstrates additionalstrategies, including rehearsing and memo-rizing, seeking social assistance, and seek-ing information:

Interviewer: How do you help yourselfremember a new word inEnglish?

Andrew: I just say the word, speak theword, look at the word, thencover the word. It’s like amethod of trying to remem-ber.

Interviewer: So what you mean is that youcover the word so…

Andrew: You cover it and say it. Yeah.Just cover it so you don’t lookat it. Then just say it and thenwrite it.

In the following excerpt his seeking socialassistance and seeking information behaviorsare exhibited further:

Interviewer: What do you do when youmeet a word that you do notunderstand while you aretalking to a friend, listening toa story, watching an EnglishTV program, or reading abook?

Andrew: I just try to act like I know thatwhat they were doing, whatthey were talking. I act asthough I know that word. Butif it’s not really that word, Iwill try to ask. If I am listeningto a story and I don’t know,well, it depends. If it is on likecassettes, I might go andcheck the dictionary. If it’ssomeone we are talking, I willraise my hand and ask what


the word is.Interviewer: What if you are watching an

English TV program?Andrew: Well, I just like feeling the

word is something that Iknow, feeling special with,maybe I don’t know. Oh! Icheck the picture.

Interviewer: What about reading a book?Andrew: Check the dictionary or guess

the word from the context.

This excerpt also shows his confidence withhis knowledge of the English language andhis feelings related to his competence.

In summary, Andrew is an efficaciouschild who is confident in his English-lan-guage skills and who thus does not feel shywhen speaking English. He considers himselfa good reader and enjoys reading. He alsodemonstrates a variety of SRL strategies.According to Oxford’s (1990) definition,many of these behaviors are metacognitive innature. He is able to manage his schoolworkby himself, study for tests, and monitor hisprogress while studying. These metacogni-tive strategies indicate that he is able to con-trol his own behaviors to achieve his goal.Moreover, when he does not understand anEnglish word the first time while reading, hetries several strategies to understand theword. These behaviors are consistent withresearchers’ claims that efficacious childrenare more likely to persist in the face of diffi-culties (Abraham & Vann, 1987; Ellis, 1989;Schunk, 1990).

Tom Liu

Tom was also 10 years old and was in thesame grade at the same school with Andrewat the time of this study. Unlike Andrew, hisEnglish was very limited as he had been inthe United States for only half a year, and hespoke exclusively Chinese at home. His fatherwas a university visiting scholar. Tom likedEnglish, which pleased his father because hewanted Tom to learn English well. Both heand his father believed that Tom was a slow-

er learner because he spent a long time doinghis homework. He had a private tutor to helphim study English. His parents were verystrict with him and seldom allowed him timefor play because he could not finish hishomework quickly.

Tom’s mean self-efficacy rating (2.83) wasthe lowest in the group. He strongly agreedthat it is difficult for him to concentrate onlearning tasks in English, his English home-work worries him, and he finds a lot of read-ing and writing homework in English hard todo. Moreover, he agrees that he avoids tryingto read new English books when they look toodifficult for him and admits having problemsin answering questions in English. The fol-lowing excerpt from the interview supportsour judgment that he is less efficacious thanother children in this study:

Interviewer: Do you feel shy when speakingEnglish? Why or why not?

Tom: Maybe. Because I don’t wantto make mistakes whenspeaking English.

This indicates that he lacks confidence inspeaking English, which is related to his lowerself-efficacy.

Tom reported far fewer strategies duringthe interview, and these strategies were verysimplistic. When he was asked how he helpedhimself to remember a new word in English,his response was simply, “Write, remember,many times.” Moreover, the only strategy hereported to support his understanding whilereading was to use the dictionary. Hedescribed the strategy of rehearsing andmemorizing quite a few times. To him, learn-ing English was just to write, to remember,and to use the dictionary. He showed no signof using any functional strategies, which havebeen shown to be beneficial to the learningoutcome (Nyikos & Oxford, 1993). A secondinterview with Tom revealed that he did nothave many friends, had little opportunity tospeak with English-speaking children, andpreferred playing with Chinese speakers andwatching Chinese TV programs.


In summary, Tom encountered great diffi-culty completing his homework in a timelymanner because he had to frequently checkhis dictionary for unknown words. This diffi-culty may contribute to his lower self-efficacy.During the interview, he repeated the samestrategies under different situations. Thisfinding is consistent with Pape and Wang’s(2003) findings that lower-achieving studentsrepeated ineffectual strategies, and that someunsuccessful problem-solvers’ only strategywas to read and reread mathematics wordproblems. For Tom, learning English is analo-gous to checking the dictionary and acquiringvocabulary rather than practicing functionaluse of the language through everyday experi-ences. This also supports Abraham and Vann’s(1987) finding for the less-successful individ-ual in their study.

Angela Zhao

Angela was born in China and had been inthe United States for 4 years at the time of thisstudy. Her father earned a doctoral degree inthe United States and was working at anAmerican company. According to her father,Angela spoke English as well as otherAmerican children her age. She was so used tospeaking English that even when her fatherspoke Chinese to her she responded inEnglish. The only place that she spoke Chinesewas in a Chinese school on Sundays. Herfather reported that Angela didn’t need hishelp on schoolwork, and she reported herbelief that her English was “way better” thanher Chinese although she was aware thatEnglish was her second language.

Angela’s mean self-efficacy rating (3.57)was the second-highest in the group. Shethought that she was pretty good at reading inEnglish and writing letters to her friends. Shereported that she learned English easily.Observations of her performing a readingtask offered evidence that she showed perse-verance in reading difficult English books.

The excerpt that follows is from our con-versation and illustrates Angela’s high per-ceived English competence, which is relatedto her self-efficacy for speaking English:

Interviewer: Do you mind being corrected?Are there certain circum-stances that you prefer not tohave your English corrected?

Angela: No, I don’t mind. It’s just likean accident. When it is a reallyeasy word and I just acciden-tally make a mistake. But if it’sa word that I just don’t knowhow to say, I don’t mind if theycorrect me.

Angela’s confidence in her English-speakingability supports her related belief that she isfully capable of accomplishing the task ofexpressing her ideas in English.

Angela demonstrated a variety of SRLstrategies related to studying ESL. She report-ed that while she was reading she oftenstopped after a few chapters and thoughtabout what had happened so far. This organ-izing and transforming strategy was also dis-played when she tried to remember a newword in English:

Interviewer: If you meet a new word thatyou do not know, what do youdo in order to remember thatnew word?

Angela: I try to think of a word thatsounds like it and try to com-pare the similarities so that Ican like learn it easily.

Although she mentioned during the inter-view that she used a dictionary when sheread, she said that she would first try to guessthe meaning of an unknown word by usingthe context of the sentences in which it wasembedded because she did not want to be dis-tracted. She also indicated that she studied inher own room and locked the door when hersister was watching TV in the next room,which is an example of environmental struc-turing. The following excerpt indicates herskill in goal-setting and planning:

Interviewer: What do you do to prepare fora test?


Angela: I study. When I don’t . . . whenI go home and know that thereis going to be a test the nextday. I don’t study it when I amdoing my homework. Usually Istudy at night cus [sic] that’show all the stuff comes to mybrain and then when I wakeup in the morning, I look atthe words again.

In summary, in relation to English lan-guage learning Angela is an efficacious childand her English proficiency is well developed.The strategies that she demonstrated whilestudying English indicate a high degree ofself-regulation. She no longer needs her par-ents’ help in doing her homework, learningnew words, and preparing for her exams.

David Xu

David was also 10 years old, but he hadbeen in the United States for only half a yearwhen this study started. Chinese was the onlylanguage spoken in his home. His father hadalready earned a doctorate in Germany, whereDavid completed his study in the second andthird grades. As a result, David was able tospeak some German as well. Unlike Tom’s par-ents, David’s parents were both working andseldom had time to help him with English.Instead, David went to a summer school in anESL program. His parents were less con-cerned with his English and did not hire atutor for him.

David’s mean self-efficacy rating (3.52)was the third among the group but quite sim-ilar to Angela’s average rating and far aboveTom’s efficacy rating. Thus, he was more sim-ilar to the high self-efficacy group. He thoughtthat he was pretty good at reading in English,his English writing homework was easy, andhe was able to talk to other kids in English. Onthe self-efficacy questionnaire he also indi-cated that, like other highly efficacious chil-dren, he was persistent in reading when thebook seemed hard for him to understand.Nevertheless, he was not confident with his

writing skills as indicated by his uncertaintyregarding whether he could write an Englishstory and he strongly disagreed that he wasable to write a letter to his friends in English.Like Tom, he preferred the translation of anew English word into Chinese to an explana-tion of that word in English. He reported thathe liked to watch both English and ChineseTV programs and to play with both Englishand Chinese speakers.

David indicated using several SRL strate-gies. He reported that he asked a speaker toslow down or speak again when he did notunderstand, planned his schedule to accom-modate studying for English, tried differentways of expressing the same idea in English,talked to English-speaking people to improvehis pronunciation, and chose a quiet place tostudy English. The following excerpt from ourinterview reveals more strategies that heused:

Interviewer: How do you help yourself toremember a new word inEnglish?

David: I think of another word thatsounds same. Like when I amlearning the word lamp, Ithink another word that Iknow like camp.

To learn the new word lamp, David madea connection with a known word, camp.Although these two words are not related inthe meaning, they share the same phonemes/æmp/ and letters a-m-p. In so doing, Davidtransformed and organized the new wordlamp in comparison to the known wordcamp. This is an example of the SRL strate-gies: organizing and transforming. Davidalso reported the SRL strategy of seekinginformation in the following excerpt:

Interviewer: How do you help yourselfunderstand and rememberwhat you have read?

David: Look at the picture of thebook. Reread a lot of times.


In addition, David reported that if he werelistening to a story on the radio that he didnot understand, he would get a book aboutthe story. His strategy of seeking informa-tion on his own initiative indicated his highlevel of self-regulation.

In summary, David is an efficacious childwho believes that English is easy to learn. Hedoes not want people to correct his mistakeson the use of words because he thinks that hecan communicate his ideas well. He is not effi-cacious, however, to complete English writingtasks. He demonstrates many more strategiesin learning ESL than Tom, who has been inthe United States for the same length of time,and his strategies are close to those of profi-cient English speakers. Unlike Tom, he finish-es his homework in about an hour and has alot more social activities than Tom does. Heviews English as a tool rather than somethingto remember. As a result, he pays more atten-tion to communicative purposes than to lan-guage forms.

Conclusions

The two proficient English speakers,Andrew and Angela, who each completed theESL program and 4 years of study in elemen-tary school in the United States, are also self-efficacious. This provides some support inthese students for the relationship betweenstudents’ performance and their self-efficacybeliefs (Wang & RiCharde, 1987;Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990). Thesehighly efficacious participants also demon-strated a number of different learning strate-gies during the interview. The strategies theyreported not only outnumbered thosereported by less-proficient participants inthis study, David and Tom, but they also rep-resented a wider variety of categories of SRLstrategies. Even between the two studentswhose proficiency in speaking English waslimited, David, the more proficient speaker,was more efficacious and demonstratedmore SRL strategies than Tom, who was lessproficient. Among these children, thereseems to be evidence for a relationship

between self-efficacy beliefs and SRL behav-iors. High self-efficacy participants, Andrew,Angela, and David, reported more activecommunicative styles than the lower self-efficacy participant, Tom. Our data indicatethat students who reported more SRL strate-gies were those who considered themselvesgood language learners. Thus, among ourparticipants there seems to be a positiverelationship between SRL strategies and stu-dents’ success in learning ESL.

Since these participants are young, theirparents may influence their self-efficacy andself-regulation. Interestingly, both Tom andDavid are required by their parents to studyEnglish on Sunday. Tom goes to a tutor’shouse, and David attends an English class,which may help explain these students’ self-efficacy and SRL behaviors. Tom is less effica-cious and more introverted. He prefers to usea dictionary instead of seeking social assis-tance. Each of these language-learning char-acteristics may result from his relatively infre-quent opportunity to practice English withhis peers. As a result, he has less opportunityfor feedback or self-evaluation of his Englishskills, which may contribute to his lack of self-efficacy since continuous feedback regardingthe adequacy of performance is influential tostudent self-efficacy beliefs (Keyser &Barling, 1981). David, on the other hand, ismore social and uses a dictionary only whenthere is nobody around, which may stem fromthe availability of social support in his envi-ronment. His comparatively high self-efficacymay be the result of his frequent opportuni-ties to speak English with his peers. He alsorealizes that “English is easy to learn.” Hisself-efficacy is thus enhanced by positivefeedback he receives for his English proficien-cy, which supports similar findings in theresearch literature (e.g., Schunk, 1994).

Although these findings are confined tofour individual case studies, there are impor-tant conclusions we might draw from thesecase studies. There is a relationship amongthese children’s self-efficacy, SRL strategies,and their success in learning English. Thechildren with high self-efficacy reported


more SRL strategies and experienced moresuccess in learning English than the childrenwith comparatively lower self-efficacy. Thus,further studies with a different population areneeded to examine and expand these results.

Limitations of the Study

This study represents an initial investiga-tion of the relationships between self-efficacyand SRL in the domain of ESL using case-study methodology. The findings are neces-sarily limited to the participants in the study.Moreover, all participants in this study arefrom the Chinese culture; therefore, culturaldifferences are not considered although eth-nic culture and even individual differences inpersonal characteristics cannot be ignoredwhen considering self-efficacy and SRL strat-egy choices (Oxford & Nyikos, 1989; Purdie &Hattie, 1996). Still another potential limita-tion is that the participants are all from fami-lies of international graduate students, whichlimits the interpretations of the findings tothis group of students.

Significance of the Study

Many studies have indicated that studentsmay benefit from support using SRL strate-gies (Butler, 1998; Oxford, Crookall, Cohen,Lavine, Nyikos, & Sutter, 1990; Oxford, Lavine,& Crookall, 1989; Wenden, 1987). Studiesabout students’ use of language-learningstrategies indicated that effective learnerswere more flexible with their repertoire ofstrategies and more effective at monitoringand adapting their strategies. Moreover, lesseffective learners have difficulty with detailswhereas more effective learners focused moreon the task as a whole. For instance, moreeffective learners seem more comfortableguessing or skipping some individual wordswhen they are decoding words. They usebackground knowledge and make inferences.Less effective students, however, use the dic-tionary only when decoding words (Chamot& El-Dinary, 1999).

The participants in this study who havehigher efficacy for learning ESL and who are

more proficient employ more strategies forlearning the language. Thus, ESL teachersshould incorporate explicit instruction relat-ed to SRL strategies and help students devel-op strategies suitable to their characteristicsand the learning context. Parents of an ESLchild may also teach SRL strategies, graduallywithdrawing their support and facilitatingtheir child’s developing self-regulation.

Another significance of this study lies inour investigation of self-efficacy beliefs. Therelationship between self-efficacy, self-regu-lation, and achievement is well documented(Pajares & Miller, 1994; Wang & RiCharde,1987; Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990;Zimmerman & Ringle, 1981), but it has notbeen studied within the realm of learningESL (Huang, Lloyd, & Mikulecky, 1999). Thisstudy indicates that children’s self-efficacybeliefs may influence the strategies theychoose to learn the language and their suc-cess in learning the language. In addition,studies of self-efficacy beliefs show that stu-dents’ self-efficacy can also be enhanced andpromoted through classroom teaching(Pajares, Miller, & Johnson, 1999; Pajares &Valiante, 1997; Wang & RiCharde, 1987;Wenden, 1987) and through modeling(Schunk & Hanson, 1985; Wang & RiCharde,1987; Zimmerman & Ringle, 1981).

Teaching students different cognitive andself-regulatory strategies may be moreimportant for improving their actual per-formance on classroom academic tasks, butimproving students’ self-efficacy beliefs maylead to more use of these cognitive strategies(Pintrich & DeGroot, 1990). The findingsfrom this study and from previous studiesindicate that students’ self-efficacy beliefs arenot fixed but rather task-specific (Klassen,2004). This is very encouraging to classroomteachers because unsuccessful students inone area can be taught to be successful inanother area, and students can also be taughtfrom not being successful to being successfulin a particular area. Their self-efficacy beliefsto perform language-learning tasks can thenbe enhanced through their successful pastexperience and lead to their future success in


similar language-learning contexts.This case study involves students from

Chinese or Taiwanese family backgroundonly. Future research should include studentsfrom a variety of family backgrounds and useboth qualitative and quantitative researchmethodologies to acquire in-depth descrip-tions of individual students as well as resultsthat are able to be generalized from samplesto populations.

This study is supported by the GraduateSchool of the Ohio State University via thePEGS grant.

Authors

Chuang Wang was a doctoral candidate in theIntegrated Teaching and Learning program inthe College of Education, The Ohio StateUniversity, when this article was written. He isnow an assistant professor in the Departmentof Educational Leadership in the College ofEducation, University of North Carolina,Charlotte, where he teaches courses in educa-tional research. His research interests includelearning theory and English as a second/for-eign language.

Stephen J. Pape is an associate professor ofmathematics education in the College ofEducation, The Ohio State University. Hisresearch interests include mathematical prob-lem-solving, strategic behaviors in academicsettings, and self-regulated learning withinmiddle-school student populations.

References

Abraham, R. G., & Vann, R. J. (1987).Strategies of two language learners: Acase study. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin(Eds.), Learner strategies in languagelearning (pp.133-144). Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice/Hall International.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations ofthought and action. Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exerciseof control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Bates, E. (1972). Language and context. NewYork: Academic.

Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academicself-concept and self-efficacy: How dif-ferent are they really? EducationalPsychology Review, 15, 1-40.

Butler, D. (1998). A strategic content learningapproach to promoting self-regulatedlearning by students with learning dis-abilities. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H.Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learningand academic achievements: Theory,research, and practice (pp. 143-167). NewYork: Springer.

Chamot, A. U. (1987). The learning strategiesof ESL students. In A.Wenden & J. Rubin(Eds.), Learner strategies in languagelearning (pp.71-84). Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice/Hall International.

Chamot, A. U., & El-Dinary, P. B. (1999).Children’s learning strategies in languageimmersion classrooms. The ModernLanguage Journal, 83, 319-338.

Diaz, R. M., Neal, C. J., & Amaya-Williams, M.(1990). The social origins of self-regula-tion. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky andeducation: Instructional implications andapplications of sociohistorical psychology(pp. 127-154). New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Ellis, R. (1989). Second language learning andsecond language learners: Growth anddiversity. TESL Canada Journal, 7, 74-94.

Hoffman, L. M. (2002). Overview of publicelementary and secondary schools anddistricts: School year 2000-01. NationalCenter for Education Statistics. RetrievedApril 12, 2002, from http://nces.ed.gov

Huang, S. C., Lloyd, P., & Mikulecky, L. (1999).ESL literacy self-efficacy: Developing anew scale. (ERIC Document Reproduc-tion Service No. ED427541)

Keyser,V., & Barling, J. (1981). Determinants ofchildren’s self-efficacy beliefs in an aca-demic environment. Cognitive Theoryand Research, 5, 29-40.


Klassen, R. M. (2004). Optimism and realism:A review of self-efficacy from a cross-cultural perspective. InternationalJournal of Psychology, 39, 205-230.

Nyikos, M., & Oxford, R. (1993). A factor ana-lytic study of language-learning strategyuse: Interpretations from information-processing theory and social psychology.The Modern Language Journal, 77, 11-22.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strate-gies: What every teacher should know.Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Oxford, R., Crookall, D., Cohen, A., Lavine, R.,Nyikos, M., & Sutter, W. (1990). Strategytraining for language learners: Six situa-tional case studies and a training model.Foreign Language Annals, 22, 197-216.

Oxford, R., Lavine, R. Z., & Crookall, D. (1989).Language learning strategies, the com-municative approach, and their class-room implications. Foreign LanguageAnnals, 22, 29-39.

Oxford, R., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variablesaffecting choice of language learningstrategies by university students. TheModern Language Journal, 73, 291-300.

Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs inmathematical problem solving: A pathanalysis. Journal of Educational Psycho-logy, 86, 193-203.

Pajares, F., Miller, M. D., & Johnson, M. J.(1999). Gender differences in writingself-beliefs of elementary school stu-dents. Journal of Educational Psychology,91, 50-61.

Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1997). Influence ofself-efficacy on elementary students’writing. The Journal of EducationalResearch, 90, 353-360.

Pape, S. J., & Wang, C. (2003). Middle schoolchildren’s strategic behavior: Classifica-tion and relation to academic achieve-ment and mathematical problem-solv-ing. Instructional Science, 31, 419-449.

Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990).Motivational and self-regulated learning

components of classroom academic per-formance. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 82, 33-40.

Purdie, N., & Hattie, J. (1996). Cultural differ-ences in the use of strategies for self-reg-ulated learning. American EducationalResearch Journal, 33, 845-871.

Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good languagelearner” can teach us. TESOL Quarterly,9, 41-51.

Schunk, D. H. (1981). Modeling and attribu-tional effects on children’s achievement:A self-efficacy analysis. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 73, 93-105.

Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning.Educational Psychologist, 25, 71-86.

Schunk, D. H. (1994). Self-regulation of self-efficacy and attributions in academicsettings. In D. H. Schunk & B. J.Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation oflearning and performance: Issues andeducational applications (pp. 75-99).Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.

Schunk, D. H., & Hanson, A. R. (1985). Peermodels: Influence on children’s self-effi-cacy and achievement. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 77, 313-322.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: Thedevelopment of higher psychologicalprocesses. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.

Wang, Y. A., & RiCharde, R. S. (1987).Development of memory monitoringand s el f - ef f ic ac y i n ch i ldren .Psychological Reports, 60, 647-658.

Wenden, A. (1987). How to be a successfullanguage learner: Insights and prescrip-tions from L2 learners. In A.Wenden & J.Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in lan-guage learning (pp.103-118). EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice/Hall International.

Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Dimensions of aca-demic self-regulation: A conceptualframework for education. In D. H.Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance:Issues and educational applications (pp.


3-21). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regu-lation: A social cognitive perspective. InM. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Seidner(Eds.), Self-regulation: Theory, research,and applications (pp. 13-39). Orlando,FL: Academic Press.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M.(1986). Development of a structuredinterview for assessing student use ofself-regulated learning strategies.American Educational Research Journal,23, 614-628.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M.

(1988). Construct validation of a strate-gy model of student self-regulatedlearning. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 80, 284-290.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M.(1990). Student differences in self-regu-lated learning: Relating grade, sex, andgiftedness to self-efficacy and strategyuse. Journal of Educational Psychology,82, 51-59.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Ringle, J. (1981). Effectsof model persistence and statements ofconfidence on children’s efficacy andproblem solving. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 73, 485-493.


Appendix ASelf-Regulated Learning Strategies

Category definitions Examples of ESL children

01. Self-evaluation: Self-initiated evaluations of Check the writing before turning the quality or progress of students’ work. it in to the teacher.

02. Organizing and transforming: Self-initiated Translate English into theirovert or covert rearrangement of instructional native language to helpmaterials to improve learning. memorize the word.

03. Goal-setting and planning: Setting Adjust what to write in a journaleducational goals or subgoals and planning entry by checking how muchfor sequencing, timing, and completing time is left.activities related to the self-set goals.

04. Seeking information: Self-initiated efforts Look for the meaning of a wordto secure further task information from in a dictionary.nonsocial sources.

05. Keeping records and monitoring: Self-initiated Take down an unknown word toefforts to record events or results. ask for help later.

06. Environmental structuring: Self-initiated Study in one’s own room.efforts to select or arrange the physical setting to make learning easier.

07. Self-consequences: Student arrangement or Jump up and down when oneimagination of rewards or punishment for gets good results of study.success or failure.

08. Rehearsing and memorizing: Self-initiated Write the word many times onefforts to memorize learning materials by paper in order to memorize it.overt or covert practice.

09. Seeking peer assistance: Self-initiated efforts Ask a friend.to solicit help from peers.

10. Seeking teacher assistance: Self-initiated Ask the teacher for help.efforts to solicit help from the teacher.


11. Seeking adult assistance: Self-initiated efforts Ask parents.to solicit help from adults.

12. Reviewing tests: Self-initiated efforts to Reread the past test.reread tests.

13. Reviewing notes: Self-initiated efforts to Reread the notes.reread notes.

14. Reviewing texts: Self-initiated efforts to Reread the textbook.reread texts.

Note: Adapted from “Development of a Structured Interview for Assessing Student Use of Self-RegulatedLearning Strategies,” by B. J. Zimmerman and M. Martinez-Pons, 1986, American EducationalResearch Journal, 23, p. 618. Copyright 1986 by the American Education Research Association. Adaptedwith permission.

Appendix BLearning Strategies Favored by Good Language Learners

Dichotomousclassification Strategies Substrategies Examples of strategies

Direct Memorization Creating mental linkages Grouping/Associating/strategies Elaborating

Applying images and Using imagery/sounds Semantic mapping

Reviewing Structured reviewing

Employing action Using physical responses/Using mechanical tricksof sensation

Cognitive Practicing Repeating/Formallypracticing

Receiving and sending Getting the idea quickly/messages Using resources for

receiving and sendingmessages

Analyzing and reasoning Reasoning deductively/Analyzing expressions

Creating structure for Taking notes/input and output Summarizing

Compensatory Guessing intelligently Using linguistic clues/Using other clues

Overcoming limitations Switching to the motherin expression tongue/Getting help


Indirect Metacognitive Centering the learning Linking with knownstrategies material/Paying attention

Arranging and planning Organizing/Setting goalsthe learning and objectives

Evaluating the learning Self-monitoring/Self-evaluating

Strategies Substrategies Examples of strategies

Affective Lowering anxiety Using music or meditation/Using laughter

Encouraging oneself Making positive statements/Rewarding oneself

Taking emotional Writing a language-learningtemperature diary/Discussing one’s

feelings with others

Social Asking questions Asking for clarification/Asking for correction

Cooperating with others Cooperating with peers/Cooperating with proficientusers of the language

Empathizing with others Developing culturalunderstanding/Becomingaware of others’ thoughtsand feelings

Note: Adapted from Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know, by R. L. Oxford, 1990,pp. 18-21. Copyright 1990 by Heinle & Heinle. Adapted with permission.

self-efficacy beliefs and self-regulated learning ... · pdf fileself-efficacy beliefs and...

Documents