Procedia

Social and
Behavioral
Sciences

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2013) 000000

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

WCES 2013

The role of teachers self-regulatory capacities in the

implementation of self-regulated learning practices
Jeltsen Peeters a,b *, Free De Backer a, Veronique Romero Reina a , Ankelien Kindekens a,
Tine Buffel a,c, Koen Lombaerts a
a

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium

Research Foundation Flanders, Egmontstraat 5, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
c
The University of Manchester, School of Social Sciences, Oxford Road Manchester M13 9PL
b

Abstract
Teachers play a crucial role in promoting self-regulated learning (SRL). Although primary school teachers are favorably disposed
towards the introduction of SRL in their own classroom, different influences prevent teachers from fully promoting SRL. Based
on an extensive literature review, the present paper indicates teachers own self-regulatory competences as a critical determinant
of SRL implementation in primary school. Self-regulated teachers attune their instructional approach to their own SRL skills,
better understand SRL processes and become more effective in SRL promotion. The paper concludes by discussing the relation
between teacher SR and the promotion of students SRL.
2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Keywords: self-regulated learning, primary school, teacher self-regulation, educational innovation;

1. Introduction
Self-regulation (SR) appears to be critical for success in learning in academic life and beyond (Boekaerts, 1999).
More specific, self-regulated learning (SRL) in school settings increases success in problem solving, academic
achievement, intrinsic motivation and task interest (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004; Perry & Vandekamp, 2000;
Pintrich, 1999; Zimmerman, 2002). The impact of SR also outreaches educational life (Bandura, 2006; Boekaerts,
1999; Martin et al., 2003; Martinez-pons, 2002), since self-regulatory skills equip students with more positive views
towards their futures, empower them to manage their social behavior, and support the development of lifelong
learning skills (Bandura, 2006; Martin et al., 2003). Such skills associated with human agency are required to cope
with the challenges of contemporary society (Bandura, 2006). Hence, the ability to sufficiently equip students with
self-regulatory skills is of substantial educational and social importance. Fortunately, research repeatedly indicated
the teachability of SRL. Many researchers to date showed how adjustments made to the learning environment and
teaching practices resulted in positive effects on pupils development of SRL (Dembo & Eaton, 2000; Paris & Paris,
2001; Perels, Otto, Schmitz, & Bruder, 2007; Perels, Dignath, & Schmitz, 2009; Perry, Phillips, & Dowler, 2004;
Perry & Vandekamp, 2000; Zimmerman, 2002; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001). Teachers play a crucial role in

* Corresponding Author name. Tel.: +32-2-629-26-19

E-mail address: jeltsen.peeters@vub.ac.be

Jeltsen Peeters et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2013) 000000

promoting self-regulatory processes (Zimmerman, 2002). Despite primary school teachers positive beliefs towards
the introduction of SRL in their own classroom, different elements still prevent them from fully promoting it
(Dignath-van Ewijk & Van der Werf, 2012; Lombaerts, Engels, & Van Braak, 2009; Tillema & Kremer-Hayon,
2002). There is a clear need to advance research around the critical determinants of SRL promotion (Lombaerts et
al., 2009).
Against this background, the present paper focuses on one potential teacher determinant in particular, namely
teachers own self-regulation. Although many renowned researchers refer to the role of teachers SR in different
ways, so far, only a limited amount of publications has depicted teacher SR as its main topic of study (e.g. Dembo,
2001; Manning & Payne, 1993; Paris & Winograd, 2003; Randi, 2004). The current paper aims to explore the
potential role of teacher SR within the promotion of students SRL in primary education.
2. Teacher self-regulation
2.1. Self-regulation theory
The concept of SRL is used to describe how learners consciously regulate their cognitive strategies,
metacognition, motivation and environment. Self-regulation does not happen to learners, rather, it happens by them
as they proactively monitor, regulate and control their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors with the objective to
accomplish their goals (Pintrich, 2002; Zimmerman, 2002). Although it is argued that most learners self-regulate
their learning to some degree, the extent to which they consciously do so differentiates achievers from
underachievers (Butler & Cartier, 2005; Randi, 2004; Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997).
2.2. Teachers as learners
Teachers need to be able to learn in and from practice since the knowledge to teach can hardly be fully obtained
before or apart from practice (Randi, 2004). They work in a rapidly changing environment and need to continuously
update their teaching skills (Randi, Corno, & Johnson, 2011). About seventy per cent of teacher learning occurs
through every day learning (Fullan, 2007). Therefore, the recognition of learning opportunities at work is
tremendously important and can be facilitated through SRL skills. Comparing teachers to students, the school
environment seems to bear comparable demands. Both students and teachers are required to learn and work, engage
in social environments, deal with distractions, learn by engaging in cognitive tasks, look for feedback and support,
and update their (instructional) knowledge (Randi, 2004). SR supports individuals in learning and coping with
demands and competing priorities. It might help teachers to increase their self-knowledge and maintain their
motivation as well (Cardelle-Elawar & Sanz de Acedo Lizarraga, 2007; Delfino, Dettori, & Persico, 2010).
If teachers want to become effective in teaching, they need to become effective learners first. Likewise, they
might benefit from SR as well (Dembo, 2001). Luckily, the nature of the teaching profession itself provides
opportunities to develop SRL. Developing SRL skills thrive well in environments where learners can engage in
complex meaningful tasks and get opportunities to control their own processes and outcomes (Perry, Hutchinson, &
Thauberger, 2008). Moreover, traditional teacher tasks such as lesson plans and assessments can also facilitate
teachers own learning and SR (Randi et al., 2011; Randi, 2004).
2.3. Self-regulated teachers
Different authors previously outlined a profile of the self-regulated teacher. A main observation from the
literature review on teacher SR is the distinction between the self-regulation of teaching and the self-regulation of
learning from teaching (Butler, 2003; Delfino et al., 2010; Kramarski & Michalsky, 2009; Kramarski & Revach,
2009; Randi et al., 2011; Randi, 2004; Van Eekelen, Boshuizen, & Vermunt, 2005). Randi (2004) for instance
differentiated between work-oriented and learning-oriented volitional strategies. Whereas teachers do not always
self-regulate their learning, they often do self-regulate their teaching (Van Eekelen et al., 2005).
2

Jeltsen Peeters et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2013) 000000

Apart from this twofold division, self-regulated teachers are mostly described as (pro)active agents who trigger
certain educational beliefs, construct appropriate instructional practices accordingly and proactively control the
teaching environment and conditions (Butler, 2003; Manning & Payne, 1993; Randi, 2004). Furthermore, teacher
SR builds on metacognitive processes (Manning & Payne, 1993) that follow a spiral process: teachers set goals for
teaching and learning, plan appropriate actions, enact instructional strategies based on the pre-set goals, monitor and
evaluate outcomes, and adapt and revise their approach when necessary (Bartimote-Aufflick et al., 2010; Butler,
Lauscher, Jarvis-Selinger, & Beckingham, 2004; Van Eekelen et al., 2005). Self-regulated teachers are decision
makers that deliberately and preliminary reflect on their judgments (Manning & Payne, 1993; Randi, 2004).
Therefore, teacher introspection and self-assessment are critical (Butler, 2003; Butler et al., 2004; Manning &
Payne, 1993; Randi, 2004) and might lead teachers to modify and possibly supplement their knowledge about
teaching and learning (Butler, 2003; Butler et al., 2004). As independent learners, self-regulated teachers have the
necessary skills to learn from teaching and are expected to apply similar SRL strategies as students, e.g. seek help
from mentors, look for feedback and search professional literature for new ideas (Butler, 2003; Butler et al., 2004;
Manning & Payne, 1993; Randi, 2004).
Although the above profile presents a clear image, it remains too extensive to be applied as a workable definition.
Based on a review about workplace learning and student SRL, Van Eekelen and colleagues (2005, p. 467) define the
core of teacher SR as independently directing the process of improving teaching and/or attaining learning goals.
This definition enables us to connect teacher SR to the introduction of SRL classroom practices, which is the current
papers aim.
3. Teacher self-regulation and the prom otion of student SRL
3.1. Practice what you preach
If teachers expect students to self-regulate their learning, we might assume the same from teachers (Tillema &
Kremer-hayon, 2002; Van Eekelen et al., 2005). Due to their own SRL development, self-regulated teachers are, for
example, better able to understand the development of student learning strategies and to recognize and cope with the
needs, obstacles and difficulties that students may face in becoming more self-regulated (Delfino et al., 2010; Paris
& Winograd, 2003; Tillema & Kremer-hayon, 2002). Moreover, self-regulated teachers may have a better sense of
the specific learning and teaching strategies that are associated with SRL development and may be better aware of
the possible congruence of teacher and student learning (Paris & Winograd, 2003; Tillema & Kremer-hayon, 2002).
Hence, it is argued that teachers are more inclined to promote strategies of which they previously experienced the
effectiveness (Dembo, 2001; Gordon, Dembo, & Hocevar, 2007). Gordon and colleagues (2007) showed that selfregulated teachers who exhibit mastery goals become teachers who believe in the strength of SRL, apply a mastery
goal orientation in their classrooms, support a more humanistic classroom control ideology, and likewise create an
environment conducive to SRL development.
3.2. Self-regulated teachers as models
Presumably, the most obvious argument for the role of teacher SR in the promotion of student SRL is the
opportunity to model SRL strategies. Because of the importance of teacher modeling within SRL promotion (Paris
& Winograd, 2003; Randi, 2004; Zimmerman, 1989), one route towards fostering self-regulated students is to
develop self-regulated teachers as well (Manning & Payne, 1993). It could be argued that teachers, as skilled models
of SR, will be especially important within primary education in particular. Students SRL is developed through
different developmental stages: observation, emulation, self-control and self-regulation (Zimmerman, 2000).
Children already develop the capacity to self-regulate their learning during primary school years (Perry, 1998). It
3

Jeltsen Peeters et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2013) 000000

seems logical then that if pupils take their first steps in SRL development observation as a first developmental
stage - and consequently modeling as an instructional strategy - will be most critical.
The effectiveness of behavioral modeling is increased when accompanied by verbal elaboration in which the
strategies that are being demonstrated are explained (Pintrich, 2002; Zimmerman, 1989, 2000). It facilitates student
access to teachers, mostly implicit, knowledge about SRL strategies (Pintrich, 2002). As students observe teachers
strategies throughout the entire day, exploring teachers own SR strategies might as well be interesting to identify
and modify less effective strategies that are being modeled unintentionally (Butler & Cartier, 2005; Paris &
Winograd, 2003).
3.3. SRL knowledge and insights
If SRL strategies modeled by teachers are important in the promotion of students SRL, teachers need to acquire
the necessary SRL knowledge. Mostly, teachers SRL knowledge is mostly tacit and remains unconscious until
teachers are, for example, challenged to explain SRL strategies to their students (Delfino, Dettori, & Persico, 2010;
Perry et al., 2008; Pintrich, 2002; Randi, 2004). Teachers can acquire insight into SRL strategies by developing SRL
skills themselves. Insights in their own SRL increases knowledge about teaching and learning, and enables teachers
to better model SRL strategies (Paris & Winograd, 2003). Moreover, by receiving explicit instructions about their
own SRL, teachers advance their SRL knowledge and are enabled to recognize more opportunities to foster SR in a
diversity of settings (Randi, 2004). The more teachers know about SRL, the better they can make it visible for their
students (Paris & Winograd, 2003). Apart from direct instruction, SRL knowledge acquisition can be enhanced
when their SRL development is supported by collaborative reflection. Dialogue with peers facilitates coconstruction of knowledge, revision of conceptual frameworks, the articulation of tacit knowledge, and learning and
teaching strategies (Bartimote-Aufflick et al., 2010; Gordon et al., 2007; Kremer-Hayon & Tillema, 1999; Paris &
Winograd, 2003; Pintrich, 2002). It is therefore recommended to collaboratively discuss SRL, which provide
teachers opportunities to personally make sense of SRL promotion and to develop a shared language and discourse.
A common discourse makes SRL promotion more explicit in everyday practice and keeps it from turning into a
mysterious event simply happening to teachers (Fullan, 2007; Pintrich, 2002).
Considering the importance of SRL knowledge, the lack of knowledge, skills and self-efficacy to effectively
activate and guide young childrens SRL is an important barrier to actual SRL classroom realizations (KremerHayon & Tillema, 1999; Perry, Hutchinson, & Thauberger, 2008; Perry & Vandekamp, 2000; Wehmeyer, Agran, &
Hughes, 2000). Professional development activities therefore have an important role to play in equipping current
teachers with the necessary SRL knowledge. Luckily, contemporary professional development models already
adjusted their approach to the need to develop proactive professionals and identified teacher SR as an essential
teacher competence (Bartimote-Aufflick, Brew, & Ainley, 2010; Butler, Lauscher, Jarvis-Selinger, & Beckingham,
2004; Perry, Phillips, & Dowler, 2004; Randi, 2004).
3.4. Professional development
Rather than waiting until ineffective strategies have been adopted, it is recommended to start SRL promotion early
on in teachers professional development. Likewise, teachers are offered plenty of opportunities to develop SR
capacities and student-centered beliefs about teaching before entering practice (Kramarski & Michalsky, 2009;
Perry, 1998; Randi, 2004). Teachers learning processes affect the way they teach (Gordon et al., 2007). One way to
influence teachers instructional strategies is therefore to influence their behavior as student teachers. If teachers
experience the effectiveness of SR skills themselves, they might be more inclined to foster it within their students
(Dembo, 2001; Gordon et al., 2007; Kramarski & Michalsky, 2009). Teacher professional development programs
that include the promotion of (student) teachers SRL (e.g. Delfino, Dettori, & Persico, 2010; Dembo, 2001;
Kramarski & Michalsky, 2009, 2010; Manning & Payne, 1993; Paris & Winograd, 2003; Perry, Hutchinson, &
Thauberger, 2008; Randi, Corno, & Johnson, 2011; Randi & Corno, 2000) showed to have a positive impact on
4

Jeltsen Peeters et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2013) 000000

student teachers comprehension and design of lesson plans, classroom performance, creative problem-solving
capacities, internal locus of control, professional growth, student-centered beliefs of teaching and learning, and the
promotion of students deep understanding and SRL (Kramarski & Michalsky, 2009; Kramarski & Revach, 2008;
Manning & Payne, 1993). SRL supports learners in reaching their learning goals and increases their motivation
(Zimmerman, 2002). Presumably, teacher SR will also support the acquisition of skills and knowledge either
aimed at promoting SRL or not offered through professional development activities.
As the definition of teacher SR prescribes, SR skills do not only contribute to the attainment of teacher learning
goals, they also affect the process of improving teaching (Van Eekelen et al., 2005). Hence, teacher SR is assumed
to influence success in educational innovation, such as for example the implementation of SRL classroom practices.
3.5. Educational innovation
Innovation projects could benefit from appealing on teachers SR capacities for multiple reasons. First, teachers
should not be reduced to pure technicians carrying out enforced instructional changes (Butler et al., 2004). Rather,
they need to be approached as skilled professionals, inventors, decision makers and problem solvers (Perry et al.,
2004). Self-regulated learners, and self-regulated teachers by extension, do not simply stick to a plan such as, for
example, an implementation plan. Rather, they adjust the plan to their individual reality and know how to cope with
unexpected challenges (Paris & Winograd, 2003). Teacher empowerment is a key element in educational change
(Murphy, 1993; Scheerens, 2004). Hence, teachers should be offered sufficient opportunities for choice and control
enabling them to choose which innovations to adopt and which to adapt, when to imitate and when to invent
(Randi, 2004, p. 1830). Second, a strong top-down innovation approach or overdependence on expert support
appeals on other-regulation rather than on self-regulation and fails to create a feeling of ownership which is essential
for successful change processes (Butler et al., 2004; Fullan, 2007). Third, in order to achieve sustainable and deeprooted educational change, innovation projects need to be accompanied by new models of professional development
reckoning with teachers SR. Traditional models of professional development will only result in superficial
implementation (Butler et al., 2004; Gersten, Vaughn, Deshler & Schiller, 1997). Fourth, mapping teachers selfregulatory style paves the way for a more differentiated approach of innovation processes. Some teachers might, for
example, require more motivational encouragement, whereas others might need more support with their coping
strategies instead (Klusmann et al., 2008). Indeed, various instructional practices can be aligned with SRL principles
(Butler et al., 2004). Fifth, SRL as a complex, dynamic and situated learning process is very well suited to learn in
and from complex situations. SR enables teachers to adapt to changing environments and supports them to deal with
stress, competing demands, dilemmas, failing strategies, frustration and failure (Butler & Cartier, 2005; Delfino et
al., 2010; Manning & Payne, 1993; Paris & Winograd, 2003), which seems to be what teachers need to be capable
of when confronted with changes due to educational innovation projects.
However, self-regulatory capacity on itself will not automatically guarantee successful implementation of
educational innovation. Several conditions need to be fulfilled. Self-regulated teachers can decide not to apply their
SR skills because of motivational or contextual factors or due to the nature of the specific challenge or task
(Bartimote-Aufflick et al., 2010; Butler & Cartier, 2005; Zimmerman, 2000). Because of its important influence on
goal setting, strategy selection and self-assessment criteria, task interpretation is considered as a critical initial step
in SRL (Butler & Cartier, 2005). Furthermore, whether or not teachers apply their SR skills depends on teachers
goal setting. If not properly linked to the right problem, teacher SR can lead to effective learning without actually
giving rise to meaningful changes and outcomes. Therefore, a thorough exploration of the problem and a more
deliberate articulation of the teaching, learning or career goals will encourage teachers to efficiently apply their SR
skills (Bartimote-Aufflick et al., 2010; Randi et al., 2011).
If the implementation of SRL classroom practices is regarded as an exemplification of educational innovation, it
first needs to be articulated as a clear objective. A potential problem, however, is the incongruence between
individual teacher objectives and school objectives. Even if schools decide to include SRL promotion as an
important objective, teachers just like students can set personal objectives that might compete with the school
5

Jeltsen Peeters et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2013) 000000

priorities (Butler & Cartier, 2005). Conversely, teachers could include SRL promotion as one of their instructional
objectives while it is not being adopted by the school agenda. A school-wide approach to the implementation of
SRL promotion is therefore highly recommended.
3.6. School wide approach of SRL promotion
If teachers self-regulate their learning and teaching, SRL becomes more generally integrated in the entire school
practice. Indeed, the implementation of SRL promotion cannot be seen as a stand-alone topic that stays within the
four walls of a particular classroom. If we want students to be empowered, teachers need to be empowered as well
(Wehmeyer et al., 2000). As teacher empowerment does not just happen, schools will need to deliberately create an
environment and structure in which teachers are encouraged to reflect on and take responsibility for their learning
and teaching (Butler, Lauscher, Jarvis-Selinger, & Beckingham, 2004; Van Eekelen et al., 2005). Due to their
impact on teacher control and power, school power structures will need to be addressed. When acknowledging SRL
as an instructional objective, school and classroom management systems should articulate similar objectives
(Gordon et al., 2007; Wehmeyer et al., 2000). Such a broad approach to SRL promotion will not only aim at creating
SRL classroom practices, but also try to stimulate a school wide learning environment conducive to SRL
development.
One illustration of a broader approach of the implementation of SRL promotion is to simultaneously enhance
student and teacher SR (Kramarski & Michalsky, 2009; Randi & Corno, 2000; Randi, 2004). Kramarski and
colleagues, moreover, suggest stimulating both types of teacher SR, i.e. SR of teaching and learning. Through the
use of the IMPROVE metacognitive training, Kramarski promoted both types of teacher SR. She found that
compared to the promotion of only one type of teacher SR, the combined promotion of both types resulted in a
deeper understanding of task demands, an increased focus on student-centered teaching and increases in teacher
performance (Kramarski & Michalsky, 2009; Kramarski & Revach, 2008, 2009). Also other educational
interventions that aimed at the development of both teacher and student SR showed that teachers own SR skills
enabled them to efficiently adopt instructional strategies fostering SRL development in students (e.g. BartimoteAufflick, Brew, & Ainley, 2010; Butler, Lauscher, Jarvis-Selinger, & Beckingham, 2004; Kramarski & Revach,
2008, 2009; Perels, Merget-Kullmann, Wende, Schmitz, & Buchbinder, 2009; Perry, Hutchinson, & Thauberger,
2008). Within the study of Perry and colleagues (2004), for example, teachers were encouraged to develop their own
SR by explicitly appealing on their role as inventors, decision makers and problem solvers. Teachers engaged in a
community of practice and were guided by other teachers and researchers (Perry et al., 2004). As Butler and
colleagues (2004) stated, these training programs were deliberately built on the same assumptions and instructional
principles as those underlying the subject of the intervention study, i.e. the development of SRL.
4. Discussion
The current paper provides a theoretical framework for the hypothesized association between teacher SR and the
promotion of student SRL. A first group of arguments i.e. practice what you preach, modeling and SRL
knowledge explains how teacher SR enables teachers to better understand the process of SRL development and
promotion. The second group of arguments provided in this paper, regards the introduction of SRL classroom
practices as an example of an educational innovation project. Based on theoretical arguments, teacher SR is believed
to increase the success rate of educational innovation projects. First, it supports teachers learning processes that are
required to efficiently adopt the new instructional knowledge and strategies. It thus supports the effect of
professional development activities associated with the innovation process. Second, SRL proves to be an interesting
framework to involve teachers as independent and responsible professionals in order to facilitate successful and
sustainable change. Third, a focus on teacher SR development stimulates a school wide implementation of SRL
promotion and reckons with important school determinants of SRL promotion.
The current paper theoretically underpinned the hypothesis that teacher SR affects the introduction of SRL
classroom practices. Although some researchers already investigated and confirmed the relationship between teacher
6

Jeltsen Peeters et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2013) 000000

SR and SRL promotion, further empirical research is highly recommended (Bartimote-Aufflick, Brew, & Ainley,
2010; Gordon, Dembo, & Hocevar, 2007; Kramarski & Revach, 2009). Due to the parallels between student and
teacher SR, future research could explore the possibilities to transfer classroom level strategies that promote student
SRL to the school level, aiming at the promotion of teacher SR. Likewise, both students and teachers can engage in
a school environment and structure that facilitates SRL development. We follow Kramarski and Michalsky (2009) in
their suggestion to explore the learning conditions required to design such high-SRL environments for teachers
professional development. Furthermore, it could be interesting to include student data in order to explore the impact
of teacher SR on student motivation and achievement, and thus to examine the influence on teachers success in
teaching (Klusmann, Kunter, Trautwein, Ldtke, & Baumert, 2008; Kramarski & Revach, 2008, 2009; Randi &
Corno, 2000).
Acknowledgements
The authors are especially grateful to the Research Foundation Flanders for their financial support enabling the
research presented in the present paper.
References
Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164-180.
Bartimote-Aufflick, K., Brew, A., & Ainley, M. (2010). University teachers engaged in critical self-regulation: How may they influence their
students? In A. Efklides & P. Misailidi (Eds.), Trends and prospects in metacognition research. (pp. 427-444). Boston, MA: Springer US.
Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated learning: Where we are today. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 445-457.
Butler, D. L. (2003, August). Self-regulation and collaborative learning in teachers professional development. Paper presented at the biannual meetings of the European Association for Research in Learning and Instruction (EARLI). Padua, Italy.
Butler, D. L., & Cartier, S. C. (2005, April). Multiple complementary methods for understanding self-regulated learning as situated in context.
Paper Presented at the April 2005 annual meetings of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, QC.
Butler, D. L., Lauscher, H. N., Jarvis-Selinger, S., & Beckingham, B. (2004). Collaboration and self-regulation in teachers professional
development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(5), 435-455.
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(1),
245-281.
Cardelle-Elawar, M., & Sanz de Acedo Lizarraga, M. L. (2007). A cross cultural analysis of motivational factors that influence teacher
identity. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 5(3), 565-592.
Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment program: A school-based program to enhance self-regulated and selfmotivated cycles of student learning. Psychology in the Schools, 41(5), 537-550.
Delfino, M., Dettori, G., & Persico, D. (2010). An online course fostering self-regulation of trainee teachers. Psicothema, 22(2), 299-305.
Dembo, M. H. (2001). Learning to teach is not enough: Future teachers also need to learn how to learn. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(4),
23-35.
Dembo, M. H., & Eaton, M. J. (2000). Self-regulation of academic learning in middle-level schools. The Elementary School Journal, 100(5),
473-490.
Dignath-van Ewijk, C., & Van der Werf, G. (2012). What teachers think about self-regulated learning: Investigating teacher beliefs and teacher
behavior of enhancing students self-regulation. Education Research International, 2012, 1-10.
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gersten, R., Vaughn, S., Deshler, D., & Schiller, E. (1997). What we know about using research findings: Implications for improving special
education practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(5), 465-476.
Gordon, S. C., Dembo, M. H., & Hocevar, D. (2007). Do teachers own learning behaviors influence their classroom goal orientation and
control ideology? Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 36-46.
Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Trautwein, U., Ldtke, O., & Baumert, J. (2008). Teachers occupational well-being and quality of instruction: The
important role of self-regulatory patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 702-715.
Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2009). Investigating preservice teachers professional growth in self-regulated learning environments. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 161-175.
Kramarski, B., & Revach, T. (2008, July). The role of self-regulated learning in professional growth of mathematical elementary teachers.
Paper presented at the 11th International Congress in Mathematical Education, Mexico.
Kramarski, B., & Revach, T. (2009). The challenge of self-regulated learning in mathematics teachers professional training. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 72(3), 379-399.
7

Jeltsen Peeters et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2013) 000000
Kremer-Hayon, L., & Tillema, H. H. (1999). Self-regulated learning in the context of teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education,
15(5), 507-522.
Lapan, R. T., Kardash, C. M., & Turner, S. (2002). Empowering students to become self-regulated learners. Professional School Counseling,
5(4), 257-265.
Lombaerts, K., Engels, N., & Van Braak, J. (2009). Determinants of teachers recognitions of self-regulated learning practices in elementary
education. Journal of Educational Research, 102(3), 163-173.
Manning, B. H., & Payne, B. D. (1993). A Vygotskian-based theory of teacher cognition: Toward the acquisition of mental reflection and selfregulation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(4), 361-371.
Martin, J. E., Mithaug, D. E., Cox, P., Peterson, L. Y., Van Dycke, J. L., & Cash, M. E. (2003). Increasing self-determination: Teaching
students to plan, work, evaluate, and adjust. Exceptional Children, 69(4), 431-447.
Martinez-pons, M. (2002). Parental influences on children s academic self-regulatory development. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 126-131.
Murphy, J. (1993). Restructuring schooling: The equity infrastructure. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 4(2), 111-130.
Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89-101.
Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (2003). The role of self-regulated learning in contextual teaching: Principles for teacher preparation. A
Commissioned Paper for the U.S. Department of Education project, "Preparing Teachers to Use Contextual Teaching and Learning
Strategies to Improve Student Success in and beyond School.", Washington, DC.
Perels, F., Otto, B., Schmitz, B., & Bruder, R. (2007). Evaluation of a training program to improve mathematical as well as self-regulatory
competences. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of schools. The final report on the DFG Priority Programme (pp.
197-220). Mnchen: Waxmann.
Perels, F., Dignath, C., & Schmitz, B. (2009). Is it possible to improve mathematical achievement by means of self-regulation strategies?
Evaluation of an intervention in regular math classes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 24(1), 17-31.
Perels, F., Merget-Kullmann, M., Wende, M., Schmitz, B., & Buchbinder, C. (2009). Improving self-regulated learning of preschool children:
evaluation of training for kindergarten teachers. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 311-27.
Perry, N. E. (1998). Young childrens self-regulated learning and contexts that support it. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 715-729.
Perry, N. E., Hutchinson, L., & Thauberger, C. (2008). Talking about teaching self-regulated learning: Scaffolding student teachers
development and use of practices that promote self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 97-108.
Perry, N. E., Phillips, L., & Dowler, J. (2004). Examining features of tasks and their potential to promote self-regulated learning. Teacher
College Record, 106(9), 1854-1878.
Perry, N. E., & Vandekamp, K. J. O. (2000). Creating classroom contexts that support young childrens development of self-regulated
learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 33, 821-843.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational
Research, 31(6), 459-470.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219225.
Randi, J. (2004). Teachers as self-regulated learners. Teacher College Record, 106(9), 1825-1853.
Randi, J., & Corno, L. (2000). Teacher innovations in self-regulated learning. In P. R. Pintrich, M. Boekaerts & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook
of self-regulation (pp. 651-685). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Randi, J., Corno, L., & Johnson, E. (2011). Transitioning from college classroom to teaching career: Self-regulation in prospective teachers.
New Directions for Teaching and Learning, (126), 89-98.
Scheerens, J. (2004). Review of school and instructional effectiveness research. Paper commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report
2005, The Quality Imperative. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001466/146695e.pdf.
Tillema, H. H., & Kremer-hayon, L. (2002). Practising what we preach - Teacher educators dilemmas in promoting self-regulated learning:
a cross case comparison. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 593-607.
Van Eekelen, I. M., Boshuizen, H. P. A, & Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Self-regulation in higher education teacher learning. Higher Education,
50(3), 447-471.
Wehmeyer, M. L., Agran, M., & Hughes, C. (2000). A national survey of teachers promotion of self-determination and student-directed
learning. The Journal of Special Education, 34(2), 58-68.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Self-regulatory dimensions of academic learning and motivation. In G. D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook
of academic learning: Construction of knowledge (pp. 105-125). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk., D. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement. MahWah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation. A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Ed.),
Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego: Academic Press.