Motivation and Self-Regulation (Self-Regulation)

Motivation is intimately conjoined with self-regulation (Pintrich, 2003; Wolters, 2003). Individuals who are motivated to attain a specific goal will engage in self-regulatory activities, predicated on their belief that such activities shall facilitate their attainment (e.g., organisation and rehearsal of material, monitoring of learning progress, and adjustment of strategies). In turn, self-regulation fosters learning, and the perception of heightened competence bolsters motivation and self-regulation in the pursuit of novel objectives (Schunk & Ertmer, 2000). Ergo, motivation and self-regulation exert a mutual influence.

The nexus between motivation and self-regulation is patently manifest in theoretical models (Pintrich, 2000b; Vollmeyer & Rheinberg, 2006; Zimmerman, 2000; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2004). Pintrich's model is fundamentally contingent upon motivation, as motivation underpins the learner's establishment and pursuit of objectives, and also constitutes a focal point of their self-regulation as they undertake sundry tasks. In Zimmerman's model, motivation permeates all phases: forethought (e.g., self-efficacy, outcome expectations, interest, value, goal orientations), performance control (e.g., attentional focus, self-monitoring), and self-reflection (e.g., self-evaluation of goal progress, causal attributions).

Further corroboration of this connection is evident in the research conducted by Wolters (1998, 1999; Wolters, Yu, & Pintrich, 1996). In these investigations, the researchers ascertained the correlation between diverse strategies designed to sustain optimal task motivation (e.g., exertion of effort, persistence, cultivation of interest in the task, self-reward) and the utilisation of self-regulatory strategies during learning (e.g., rehearsal, elaboration, planning, monitoring, organisation). The results indicated that the motivation regulation activities employed by learners were predictive of their self-regulation. The adoption of a learning-goal orientation was associated with augmented self-efficacy, task value, and achievement.

One facet of self-regulation that is currently attracting increased scholarly attention is volition, which shall be deliberated upon in the subsequent section. Certain researchers define volition as an integral component of a more expansive self-regulatory system, encompassing motivation and other cognitive processes (Corno, 1993, 2001, 2008; Snow, 1989). Numerous other motivational components are also garnering research interest for their role in self-regulation—for example, goal properties, goal orientations, self-efficacy, interest, attributions, values, self-schemas, and help-seeking behaviours (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2008). We have scrutinised the roles of goal properties (Zimmerman, 2008), goal orientations (Fryer & Elliot, 2008), self-efficacy (Schunk & Pajares, 2009), interest (Hidi & Ainley, 2008), and attributions (Schunk, 2008) in motivation; the remainder of this section shall address volition and the latter three influences.

Volition hath been a subject of interest for a considerable time. Early psychologists, drawing upon the writings of Plato and Aristotle, conceived of the mind as comprising knowing (cognition), feeling (emotion), and willing (motivation). The will refleclted one’s desire, want, or purpose; volition was the act of employing the will (Schunk et al., 2008).

Philosophers and psychologists have debated whether volition was an independent process or a mere by-product of other mental processes (e.g., perceptions). Wundt held that volition was a central, independent factor in human behaviour, which presumably accompanied such processes as attention and perception, and aided in translating thoughts and emotions into actions. James (1890, 1892) also believed that volition was the process of translating intentions into actions and had its greatest effect when different intentions competed for action. Volition laboured to execute intended actions by activating mental representations thereof, which served as guides for behaviour.

Ach (1910) pioneered the experimental study of volition. Ach considered volition the process of dealing with implementing actions designed to attain goals. This is a somewhat narrow view of motivation, as it doth not address the process whereby individuals formulate goals and commit themselves to attaining them (Heckhausen, 1991; Schunk et al., 2008). Processes that allow goals to be translated into action are determining tendencies; they compete with previously learned association tendencies to produce action even when the action conicts with prior associations.

The conceptual basis for contemporary work derives from action control theory by Heckhausen (1991) and Kuhl (1984). These theorists proposed differentiating predecisional processing (cognitive activities involved in making decisions and setting goals) from postdecisional processing (activities engaged in subsequent to goal setting). Predecisional analyses involve decision making and are motivational; postdecisional analyses deal with goal implementation and are volitional. Volition mediates the relation between goals and actions to accomplish them. Once students move from planning and goal setting to implementation of plans, they cross a metaphorical Rubicon that protects goals by self-regulatory activities rather than reconsidering or changing them (Corno, 1993, 2001, 2008).

Debate continues over whether motivation and volition are separate constructs or whether the latter is part of the former. Nonetheless, separating pre- from postdecisional processes seems worthwhile. Some motivational indexes used in studies of performance are not useful in learning. Choice of activities is a common index, yet in school students often do not choose to engage in tasks. There often is little predecisional activity by students. In contrast, postdecisional activity offers more latitude, especially if multiple ways are available to accomplish tasks or deal with distractions. Choice is an integral component of self-regulation (Zimmerman, 1994, 1998, 2000), but students still can have many choices available even when they do not choose whether to work on a task. Volitional activities presumably direct and control information processing, affects, and behaviours directed toward accomplishing goals (Corno, 1993).

Corno (1989, 1993, 1994, 2001, 2008; Corno & Kanfer, 1993; Corno & Mandinach, 2004) has written extensively about the role of volition in self-regulation:

Corno, 1993, p. 16:

Volition can be characterised as a dynamic system of psychological control processes that protect concentration and directed effort in the face of personal and/or environmental distractions, and so aid learning and performance.

It is useful to distinguish two aspects of volitional function with respect to self-regulation: action control and volitional style (Corno, 1994). The action-control function refers to potentially modiable regulatory skills or strategies. This function would include the focus of many interventions aimed at enhancing self-regulation, such as metacognitive monitoring (self-observation), self-arranged contingencies, redesign of tasks, strategies of emotion control, and management of environmental resources. Kuhl (1985) proposed a taxonomy of volitional strategies; Corno (1993) discussed two such strategies with educational examples. Many examples are available of successful training efforts for action-control strategies (Corno, 1994).

A second function, volitional style, refers to stable, individual differences in volition, as opposed to the specic skills and strategies involved in action control. Volitional style includes personality variables that should be less amenable to change through instruction—for example, impulsiveness, conscientiousness, and dependability (Snow, 1989). Corno (1994) cited research showing that these dispositions predict various student academic outcomes.

The case for treating volition as a separate construct has some merit. One problem with separating goal setting from implementation stems from research showing that learners adjust or set new goals during task performance (Locke & Latham, 1990; Zimmerman, 2008). Another concern is how such motivationally germane processes as attributions and self-efcacy relate to volition. Researchers continue to address these issues.

A cardinal component of motivation, pertaining to self-regulation, resides in the valuation that students ascribe to learning (Wigfield, Hoa, & Klauda, 2008). Pupils who do not hold in esteem that which they are learning are less inclined to exhibit motivation toward self-improvement or exercise self-regulation in their endeavours (Wigfield et al., 2004).

Wigfield (1994; Wigfield et al., 2008) hath discoursed upon the process whereby the valuation of a task doth conduce to augmented self-regulation. Values bear a direct connexion to achievement behaviours such as persistence, choice, and performance. Values may relate favourably to sundry self-regulating processes, encompassing self-observation, self-evaluation, and the setting of goals. By way of illustration, pupils who value the study of history are more prone to diligently prepare for examinations, establish learning objectives, monitor their progress, persevere despite impediments, and adapt their strategies as required. Conversely, those who hold history in lesser regard are less apt to engage in such activities.

Research doth lend credence to the notion that the valuation of achievement tasks correlates with the efficacious employment of cognitive learning strategies, perceived self-regulation, and academic performance (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; Wigfield, 1994; Wigfield et al., 2004, 2008). Pokay and Blumenfeld (1990), for instance, ascertained that students' valuation of mathematics did prompt their utilisation of diverse cognitive strategies, which in turn, did influence their performance in mathematics. Wigfield (1994) noted that task values may correlate positively with the strategies of volitional action control propounded by Kuhl (1985).

Alas, research doth reveal that children often value academic tasks to a lesser degree as they advance in age (Eccles & Midgley, 1989). Numerous approaches to the enhancement of student motivation are directly linked to perceptions of task value, encompassing the demonstration to students of the significance of tasks in their lives and how learning these tasks doth aid them in attaining their objectives. In the opening scenario, Kim may not value her courses, yet Connie endeavours to encourage her by emphasising that the employment of strategies can assist her in performing better, which may augment the esteem in which she holds her studies. Linking learning to real-world phenomena doth ameliorate perceptions of value. Instructors ought to incorporate methodologies for enhancing perceived value into their planning to ensure benefits for learning and self-regulation.

Self-schemas are, in essence, 'cognitive manifestations of enduring goals, aspirations, motives, fears, and threats' (Markus & Nurius, 1986, p. 954). They encompass cognitive and affective evaluations concerning one's capabilities, volition, and personal agency. Fundamentally, they represent conceptions of ourselves in diverse circumstances, or of what we might become. The theoretical import of self-schemas lies in their putative role as mediators between situational contexts and behaviour. Individuals conduct themselves, in part, upon their self-perceptions. The self-concept comprises a multitude of self-schemas, a subset of which are actively engaged at any given moment. These active schemas constitute the working self-concepts. Self-schemas possess an affective dimension (self-conceptions are positively or negatively valued), a temporal dimension (experiences begetting concepts of past, present, and prospective possible selves), an efficacy dimension (beliefs concerning our capacity to attain our desired selves), and a value dimension (the significance or centrality of the self to the individual).

As organised knowledge structures, possible selves furnish means of interlinking multiple motivational beliefs at a superordinate level (Garcia & Pintrich, 1994). Thus, goals are significant motivational processes, and self-schemas are organised knowledge structures that conjoin multiple goals. Self-schemas may proffer a connection between motivation and the application of strategies. Should individuals harbour notions of their potential and their capabilities, then possible selves can serve as guides to action, encompassing strategies for implementation.

Possible selves can assume a salient role in self-regulation, inasmuch as the notion of one's potential underpins the employment of self-regulatory strategies (Garcia & Pintrich, 1994). Individuals regulate their behaviours to approximate or realise their possible selves, and to eschew becoming negative possible selves. It is incumbent upon individuals to comprehend the requisite actions to attain their possible selves. Garcia and Pintrich have discoursed upon motivational strategies that individuals might employ to attain their desired selves, and to safeguard their sense of self-worth. Research pertaining to self-schemas evinces considerable promise, and its results lend credence to the assertion that self-schemas serve to conjoin motivation and self-regulation.

The solicitation of aid constitutes a manner of modulating the social milieu to the betterment of erudition. Self-governed scholars are predisposed to beseech assistance when confronted with arduous tasks and upon perceiving a exigency for succour (Newman, 1994, 2000, 2002, 2008). It is of particular note that those of superior attainment oft seek aid from pedagogues and compeers (Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990).

Newman (1994) did propound a model wherein adaptive supplication for aid:

• Ensues upon a scholar's lack of comprehension.
• Doth encompass the scholar's deliberation upon the necessity for aid, the substance of the entreaty, and the object of the same.
• Implies the articulation of the exigency for aid in the most apposite fashion, considering the circumstances.
• Doth necessitate that the seeker of aid receive and process such aid in a manner as shall optimise the probability of success in subsequent attempts at seeking aid.

The seeking of aid is a relatively intricate undertaking, encompassing more than the mere verbal petition for assistance. Motivational factors do come into play. Divers motivational processes have been scrutinised for their relation to the seeking of aid, most especially the roles of self-efficacy and the setting of goals. Scholars with a heightened sense of self-efficacy for learning are more apt to seek aid than are those of lesser efficacy (Ryan, Gheen, & Midgley, 1998). Scholars with a task-oriented goal are more like to seek assistance to ascertain the correctness of their work, whereas ego-involved scholars may seek aid to determine how their work compares with that of others (Newman & Schwager, 1992; Ryan et al., 1998).

This research doth intimate that differing motivational patterns may prompt various forms of aid-seeking. From the purview of self-regulation, the most adaptive type of aid-seeking is that which provideth feedback upon learning and progress. Pedagogues may labour with scholars to encourage their seeking of assistance when it is like to aid them in the development of their academic skills.