15Nov 2017

APPLYING PROGRAM THEORY AND LOGICAL MODEL TO DESIGN, IMPLEMENT, AND EVALUATE SELF-REGULATED STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

  • National Changhua University of Education; Ming-Chuan University; Yun Lin Junior High School, Taiwan.
Crossref Cited-by Linking logo

  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • Cite This Article as
  • Corresponding Author

This study aimed to apply Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) theory and logical model to design, implement, and evaluate SRSD program (SRSDP) in order to learn the impacts of SRSDP on junior high school students? self-regulated learning strategy of writing, writing performance, and learning motivation of writing. The participants consisted of 31 seventh graders. The SRSDP had been implemented for 12 weeks. During the research period, the data were collected through teaching journals, worksheets, teacher?s observation records, focus group interview, and scales of writing learning motivation, writing self-regulated strategy, and writing performance. This study only reported the findings of quantitative results. Quantitative data analysis included descriptive analysis and t-test. The findings of this study confirmed SRSDP had positive influences on students? writing learning including enhancing students? self-regulated learning strategy of writing, writing performance, and learning motivation of writing. Based on the findings, the conclusion and discussion were also made in this study.

  1. Astbury, B., & Leeuw, F. L. (2010). Unpacking black boxes: Mechanisms and theory building in evaluation, American journal of evaluation, 31(3), 363-381.
  2. Bakry, M. S., & Alsamadani, H. A. (2015). Improving the persuasive essay writing of students of Arabic as a foreign language (AFL): Effects of Self-Regulated Strategy Development. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182, 89-97.
  3. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  4. Brandt, D. (1992). The cognitive as the social--An ethnomethodological approach to writing process research. Written Communication, 9 (3), 315-351.
  5. Campbell, W. K., & Campbell S. M. (2009). On the self-regulatory dynamics created by the peculiar benefits and costs of Narcissism: A contextual reinforcement model and examination of leadership. Self and Identity, 8, 214-232.
  6. Chen, H. T. (2006). A theory-driven evaluation perspective on mixed methods research. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 75-83.
  7. Chen, H. T., & Rossi, P. H. (1983). Evaluating with sense: The theory-driven approach. Evaluation Review, 7, 283-302.
  8. Donaldson, S. I. (2007). Program theory-driven evaluation science. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  9. Donaldson, S. I., & Leeuw, F. L. (2015). Theory in evaluation: Reducing confusion and encouraging debate. Evaluation, 21 (4), 467-480.
  10. Festas, I., Oliveira, A. L., Rebelo, J. A., Dami?o, M. H., Harris, K., & Graham, S. (2015). Professional development in self-regulated strategy development: Effects on the writing performance of eighth grade Portuguese students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 17-27.
  11. Fitzgerald, J. (2013). Struggling writers: Constructing their instruction: What and how. Annals of Dyslexia, 63, 80-95.
  12. Flower, L. & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387.
  13. Gao, W. Z. (2006). Analysis of Writing errors in sentences for elementary school students in Taiwan city (unpublished master?s thesis). National Taichung University of Education, Taiwan.
  14. Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of RSD studies. In L. Swanson, K. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning disabilities (pp. 323-344). New York: Guilford Press.
  15. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2009). Almost 30 years of writing research: Making sense of it all with the wrath of khan. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 58-68.
  16. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Mason, L. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and motivation of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 207-241.
  17. Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhare, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 879-896.
  18. Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Adkins, M. (2015). Practice-based professional development and self-regulated strategy development for Tier 2, at-risk writers in second grade. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 5-16.
  19. Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Mason, L. H. (2006). Improving the writing, knowledge, and motivation of struggling young writers: Effects of self-regulated strategy development with and without peer support. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 295-340.
  20. Harris, K., & Graham, S. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation (2nd). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
  21. Harris, K., & Graham, S. (2009). Self-regulated strategy development in writing: Premises, evolution, and the future. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 6, 113-135.
  22. Hayes, J. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 1-27). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  23. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1983). Uncovering cognitive processes in writing: An introduction to protocol analysis. In P. Mosenthal, L. Tamor, and S. Walmsley (Eds.), Research on writing: Principles and Methods (pp. 207-220). New York: Longman.
  24. Hillocks, G. (1984). What works in teaching composition: A meta-analysis of experimental treatment studies. American Journal of Education, 93 (1), 133-170.
  25. Jiang, M. Y. (2013). The study on writing development and teaching effectiveness of self-regulated learning strategy (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation). National Chen Kung University, Taiwan.
  26. Mason, L. H., Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2011). Self-regulated strategy development for students with writing difficulties. Theory Into Practice, 50, 20-27.
  27. Millar, A., Simeone, R. S., & Carnevale, J. T. (2001). Evaluation and Program Planning, 24(1), 73-81.
  28. Nakata, Y. (2010). Toward a framework for self-regulated. Language-Learning TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 1-10.
  29. Psychological and Educational Testing Research and Development Center (2013). Criteria of writing test of basic academic competence for Junior high school students. Taipei, Taiwan: National Taiwan Normal University.
  30. Reynolds, A. J. (1998). Confirmatory program evaluation: A method for strengthening causal inference. American Journal of Evaluation, 19(2), 203-221.
  31. Santangelo, T., Harris, K. R. & Graham, S. (2008). Using self-regulated strategy development to support students who have trouble getting things into words. Remedial and Special Education, 29 (2), 78-89.
  32. Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (2nd), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 125-151). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  33. Skibbe, L. E., Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., Jewkes, A. M. (2011). Schooling effects on preschoolers? self-regulation, early literacy, and language growth. Early Child Res Q. 26(1), 42-49.
  34. Wang, Y. P. (2009). A comparison study of self-regulated strategy development writing teaching and concept mapping writing teaching to improve the writing of self-regulation, writing performance, and writing motivation for sixth graders (unpublished master?s thesis). National Pingtung University of Education, Pingtung, Taiwan.
  35. Xu, Y. H., & Yang, S. H. (2010). Detection and analysis on the fourth graders? narrative writing skills in central Taiwan. Education Records, 23, 37-82.
  36. Yang, R. X. (2006). Sampling analysis of elementary schoolers? Grammar errors. In K. F. Wang & L. G. Chen (eds.). Theory and practice of Chinese Writing. Taipei, Taiwan: Psychology Publication.
  37. Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Development of self-regulated learning: Which are the key sub-process. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 307-313.
  38. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice (pp.1-25). New York: Springer-Verlag.
  39. Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 1-19). New York: The Guilford Press.
  40. Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: theoretical perspectives (2nd) (pp.2-37). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

[Su-ching Lin, Ming-sui Wu and Yu-ying Chu. (2017); APPLYING PROGRAM THEORY AND LOGICAL MODEL TO DESIGN, IMPLEMENT, AND EVALUATE SELF-REGULATED STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. Int. J. of Adv. Res. 5 (Nov). 674-704] (ISSN 2320-5407). www.journalijar.com

Su-Ching Lin
NATIONAL CHANGHUA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION; MING-CHUAN UNIVERSITY;YUN LIN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, TAIWAN

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/5823      
DOI URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/5823

Download Full Paper

Download PDF No. of Downloads: 17 | No. of Views: 83