ABSTRACT

Self-regulated learning strategies for the on-line adult distance learners

A case of Universiti Teknologi MARA

Shireen Haron, Norshidah Mohd Nordin and Rohaya Abdul Wahab

The rapid expansion of the Web as a potential course delivery and the competitive platform, combined with
the increasing interest in lifelong learning has created a significant incentive for universities to develop on-
line programs. Due to this mode of learning adult learners need to be highly regulated and responsible for
organizing and reflecting on their learning. Hence this study intends to identify self-regulated learning
strategies used by adult learners and its relationship on their academic achievement. The findings show that
there was a positive but low relationship between organization, meta-cognition, effort regulation, extrinsic
goal orientation on academic achievement. In terms of determining the contributions of the significant
predictive power of self-regulated learning in explaining academic achievement, the result revealed that
17.9% of the variance in academic achievement is explained by meta-cognition and effort regulation.

Keywords: Self-regulated learning strategies, Motivational belief, Academic achievement

Background of the study

Development of technologies available for the design and delivery of education system
have been constantly revolutionized at a rapid pace in relation to the advancement of
technologies. One of the products of this venture is the birth and growth of e-learning in the
Malaysian educational scene, in particular at the higher education scenario. E-learning based
model proposed that the instructor and learners are separated by physical distance, and on-line
delivery media are used to bridge the instructional gap (Hwang & Konstantinous, 2002). Hence,
the question of providing accessibility to the potential learners becomes an issue of paramount
importance among distance education providers. Blass and Davis (2003) also reiterated that the
question of accessibility has two strands: the physical flexibility of e-learning in terms of time,
place, etc allows for participation in learning of those who would otherwise be unable to access
learning experiences; and offering the opportunity of being accessibly in the sense of recognizing
learners’ needs and designing an experience to address them. Both of these interpretations then
recognize the importance of the learners as the recipients and beneficiaries of these educational
programs and processes. Recognizing such importance means utilizing and providing learning
experiences that are learner centered. Recognizing this further provided for the need to look at
issues that relate to individual differences among the learners such as issues on adult learners’
characteristics in relation to their learning styles and learning strategies.

Recently, much research related to active and meaningful learning has yielded significant
insights and has lead to the theories concerning self-regulating learning (Zimmermen, 1990). In
fact, the expanded interest in learning strategies is a result of the large and growing number of
academically under- prepare or disadvantage students entering the college Weinstein (1988).
Furthermore, with the new mode of learning, that is, focusing on the web-based or the internet
base learning, it is likely that students need to be highly self-regulated and responsible for
organizing and reflecting on their learning (Haziah, 2004). For instance, in such setting, learners
are required to complete many assignments, projects and folios independently; hence competency
in self-regulated learning plays an important role in determining the success of learning,

1
particularly in the on-line web-based learning. Hence, self-regulated learning is required for
academic performance by the on-line adult learners. Lack of learning strategies is one of the
important variables that explained learners’ difficulty (Balajthy, 1990). Apparently, some experts
have argued that self-regulation of learning has a positive influence on academic success (Corno
and Mandinach, 1983; Corno and Rohrkemper, 1985). However, a great deal of knowledge about
students learning strategies has been accumulated in recent years but very little is known about
their use in the new environment. Furthermore, the existing empirical literature supports the trend
established in research with more traditional classroom setting for effective learning and
performance (Schunk & Zimmerman (1998) and still lacking in the area of web-based or online
learning (Artino and Stephen, 2006). Thus, this study, aims to fill such gaps in the research of
self-regulated academic learning by answering one overriding question that is: Does self-
regulated learning strategies influence academic achievement of the on-line adult learners of
higher learning institutions?

Objectives of the study

1. To identify the self-regulated learning strategies used by the adult on-line distance
learners of UiTM, Shah Alam
2. To identify the significant difference between academic achievement and self-regulated
learning strategies of the adult on-line distance learners of UiTM, Shah Alam
3. To identify the contribution of each of the significant self-regulated learning strategies
dimensions towards the variance of the academic achievement

Review of the literature

One of the factors that determines successful student learning is the ability to use the
appropriate learning strategies (Styles and Zariski, 2000). However, literature showed that much
of the studies done on online or web based learning is the comparison between traditional
classroom learners and the online distance learners (Sitzmann, Kraiger, Stewart, & Wisher, 2006,
Artino (in press). With few exceptions, findings from these studies indicated that, there were no
much different between learning outcome of the online distance learners and those with the
traditional face-to face learning (Phipps & Merisotis, 1999). Studies shown that were several
deficiencies in past research in distance learning (Abrami & Bernard, 2006; Saba, 2000). In this
sense, Artino and Stephen (2006) assert that two important issues have been identified. First, a
large proportion of the distance education research has emphasized comparisons of achievement
outcomes between groups of distance and traditional learners, at the expense of any consideration
for within group variation in achievement and satisfaction among distance learners. Second, much
of the research has lacked a theoretical or conceptual framework. In response to these problems,
experts in the field of distance education (Abrami & Bernard, 2006; Saba, 2000) have challenged
researchers to (1) focus future studies on within group differences among distance learners;
specifically, those attribute such as motivational, cognitive, and otherwise that contribute to
success in distance learning environments; and (2) conduct research that is grounded in learning
theory and which builds on the work of others. Subsequently a substantial body of evidence has
accrued exemplifying the role of self-regulated learning behavior in academic achievement. Much
of this research has however, been conducted in Western educational settings. Besides, a wide
range of educational and cultural differences could contribute to differences in the self-regulated
learning behavior of Western and Asian students (Artino & Stephens, 2006). Whilst research
investigating cultural influences on the self-regulated learning of students is meager, there is
reason nevertheless, to expect that the self-regulated learning behavior of students may vary
between cultures, particularly in the Malaysian context. Recent research in educational
psychology has identified self-regulation of learning as a key characteristic that appears to be
related to academic success in learner-controlled environments such as online courses

2
(Zimmerman, 2000; Corno & Mandinanch, 1983). Besides, many experts believe that self-
regulatory skills are essential for success in highly autonomous learning and that the development
of the self-regulated skills can be supported by web-based pedagogical tools (Zimmerman and
Tsikalas, 2005). Pintrinch and De Groot (1990) noted that three components of self-regulated
learning strategies seem especially important for learners are:
1) Self-regulated learning include students’ meta-cognitive strategies for planning,
monitoring and modifying their cognition (Zimmereman & Pon, 1988)
2) Students’ management and control effort on academic tasks has been proposed as another
important component.
3) Another important aspect of self-regulated learning is the actual cognitive strategies that
students use to learn, remember and understand the material.
Self-regulated learning describes how learners meta-cognitively, motivationally and behaviorally
promote their own academic achievement ( Zimmerman, 1990). Meta-cognitively, self-regulated
learners plan, organize, self-monitor and self-evaluate at various stage of the learning processes.
Motivationally, self-regulated learners perceived themselves as competent, self efficacious,
autonomous and they work hard to achieve their academic goals. Behaviorally, self-regulated
learners select structure and even create environments that optimize learning.

Methodology
This study was based on conceptual framework of social cognitive theory and literature
reviews. Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory views that human functioning as interactions
between behavior, environmental and personal factors. Based on this theory, self-regulated
learning process such as self-observation, self- judgment and self-reaction are influenced by
environmental and personal factors. The MSLQ or Motivated Strategies for Learning
Questionnaire which was developed by Pintrich, Smith, Gracia and Mckeachie (1991)consists of
two sections; a motivational and a learning strategies, was used to measure the self-regulated
learning strategies used by the adult on –line learners. The samples were drawn from the faculty
of Public Administration adult learners undertaking on-line a Diploma in Public Administration
(DPA) program. Based from a table mathematical formula taken from Cohen, Manion and
Morrison (2000), a sample size of 278 was determined. The data analysis involved the descriptive
statistics and inferential statistics. The first step in the data analysis involved the descriptive
statistic namely mean scores, frequency count and percentages were used to describe the profile
of the respondents. The second steps in the data analysis involved the measuring the strength and
direction of the relationship between the CPGA and the sub-scales of the self-regulated learning
and study strategy. Therefore, Pearson’s Product –Moment Correlation Coefficient (r) will be
used. Lastly to identify the contribution of each of the significant self-regulated learning
strategies dimensions towards the variance of the academic achievement, multiple regression test
was utilized. To check if the assumption on normality, a statistical normality test using
kolmgrorov –Smirnov test was also performed on the data set to provide confirmation pertaining
to the distribution of the data. Apart from that, the data of this study were also tested for potential
problems related to multicollinearity, where its presence could violate the used of the multiple
regressions analyze.

Findings
An analysis on the self-regulated learning and study strategies used by the adult on-line distance
learners of UiTM, Shah Alam

Table 4.0:The self-regulated learning strategies used by adult online learners

Self-regulated Learning strategies Mean Std deviation
Learning strategies
Effort regulation 5.369 1.041
Elaboration 5.221 0.948

3
Organization 5.134 1.118
Rehearsal 5.020 1.104
Meta- cognitive 4.713 0.849
Critical thinking 4.543 0.937
Help seeking 4.443 1.094
Time and study environment 4.371 0.830
Peer learning 4.220 1.242

Motivational belief
Anxiety 5.623 0.926
Intrinsic goal 5.582 1.017
Extrinsic goal 5.479 0.969
Self-efficacy 5.344 0.887
Task value 5.292 0.917
Control belief 4.763 1.018

Table 4.0 show the mean scores of the self-regulated learning strategies used the adult online
learners. The mean scores of above 5.00 indicate that sub-scales of the learning strategies were
highly used by the respondents. Results indicated that, effort regulation (5.369), elaboration
(5.221), Organization (5.134) and rehearsal (5.020) were rank high. Other sub-scales of the
learning strategies such as Meta-cognition (4.713), critical thinking (4.543), help seeking (4.443),
Time and study environment (4.37) and peer learning (4.22) were rank moderately used. The
findings suggest that in trying to understand and control learning environment, these adult on-line
learners have placed the cognition and meta-cognition aspects of the learning namely,
elaboration, organization rehearsal and effort regulation as their priority. This finding support
study done by Darts (1994) where the adult learners were inclined to use learning strategies for
developing their understanding (elaboration); for planning, directing and for planning their study
times (organizing). With regard to motivational belief, the finding show the students place
anxiety (5.623) as the highest mean score. This could indicate that majority of online adult
learners were nervous and worried towards their examinations. Anxiety in learning has
occasionally been described as helpful but more often treated in terms of its negative affects
(Aggasiz, 1971). Besides, the result also shows the students have high means score in intrinsic
goal orientation (5.582) and extrinsic goal orientation mean score (5.479). The intrinsic goal
orientation could infer that these adult learners desire to gain understanding for the sake of
participating in their studies. On the other hand, the finding also indicates the extrinsic goal is
also important for example getting good grades perhaps. However, control belief has the lowest
mean scores that is, 4.763. This could indicate that the students’ perception on the locus of
control of the learning behavior and outcomes is not much matter as compare to other learning
and study strategies.

An analysis on the relationships between CGPA and self- regulated learning strategies.
Table 4.1: summary statistic and zero order correlations for self-regulated learning strategies and
academic achievement
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
1 1.00
2 .082 1.00
3 .199 .580 1.00
4 .225* .686 .698 1.00
5 .157 .487 .634 .586 1.00
6 .397* .595 .727 .692 .624 1.00
7 .192 .341 .312 .447 .271 .482 1.00
8 .325* .363 .521 .485 .350 .552 .571 1.00
9 .013 .476 .480 .335 .414 .441 .312 .276 1.00
10 .104 .326 .444 .538 .294 .383 .297 .299 .657 1.00
11 .195 .451 .545 .469 .380 .534 .248 .360 .261 .247 1.00
12 .251* .378 .489 .483 .298 .545 .250 .436 .193 .188 .801 1.00
13 .091 .507 .498 .380 .420 .545 .164 .339 .313 .237 .733 .632 1.00
14 .055 .405 .415 .302 .400 .512 .216 .319 .246 .137 .472 .462 .531 1.00

4
15 .172 .477 .542 .429 .289 .464 .119 .401 .309 .269 .678 .578 .727 .375 1.00
16 .1.05 .651 .502 .528 .448 .369 .479 .078 .275 .297 .230 .615 .592 .640 .505 1.00
* correlation is significant at 0.05 level
The relationship between organizational CGPA and self-regulated learning strategies was examined
using the Pearson product moment correlation as presented in the table 4.1 Out of 15 sub-scales of
the self-regulated learning strategies used in this study, there were only four sub-scales show a
significant relationships. The results show that there was as positive and low (r = 0.225, p =0.000)
linear relationship between CGPA and organization. Regarding the relationship between
organizations learning strategy and academic achievement indicate adult learner could excel in the
academic performance because they are able to sort and information or reading material
systematically and arranged them in short and long term memory. The result also reveals that there
was a positive and low (r = 0.397, p = 0.000) linear relationship between CGPA and meta-
cognition. The results of this study were consistent with study done by Hwang & kanstantinos
(2002). In fact, it is reported that a high academic performers tend to report that they planned and
set realistic goals for extending knowledge, monitored and evaluated their learning processes
(Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Mischel and Patterson, 1978). Besides result also shows that the
relationship between CGPA and extrinsic goal orientation show a positive and low (r = 0.251, p =
0.000) linear relationship. This findings is in line with the study done by Pintrich & Garcia, 1991;
Zimmermen, 1990). According to Deci & Ryan (1996) extrinsic motivation may produce positive
academic achievement long as it is personally regulated however; students who are mainly
motivated by extrinsic factors tend to engage in the academic tasks that require low level cognitive
strategies (Pintrich and De Groot, 1990).

An analysis on the contribution of each of the significant predictors variables towards the
variance of the criterion variables
Table 4.3: Multiple Regression analysis on academic achievement
variables Un std coefficient Std coefficient t Sig (p)
(beta)
Constant 1.612 3.350 0.001
rehearsal -0.077 -0.173 -1.212 0.230
elaboration -0.101 -0.194 -1.010 0.316
organization 0.034 0.086 0.487 0.528
critical thinking 0.026 0.058 .324 0.747
meta-cognition 0.271 0.107 2.545 0.013*
time & study 0.010 0.018 0.124 0.902
effort -regulation 0.134 0.066 2.023 0.047*
peer learning -0.065 -0.184 -1.177 0.244
help seeking -0.001 -0.002 -0.009 0.993
intrinsic goal 0.081 0.166 0.744 0.460
extrinsic goal 0.011 0.020 0.119 0.906
task value control -0.089 -0.175 -0.944 0.349
belief -0.076 -0.171 -1.087 0.281
self-efficacy 0.065 0.113 0.770 0.445
anxiety 0.013 0.025 0.118 0.907

F Statistic = 2.102, sig. < 0.05, Adjusted R-squared = 0.179

R2 = 0.341

Based on the ENTER method, as shown in table 4.3, the finding reveals that only two predictor
variables were found to be significance. The two predictor variables were meta-cognition and
effort regulation with their respective t and p values ( t = 2.545 p = 0.013, t = 2.023, p = 0.047)

5
The total amount of variance of the criterion variable that was predictable from the two predictors
was 34.1%, and the adjusted R square change of 17.9%. Hence, since the adjusted R square could
give a better estimation of the true population value, the contribution of the predictor variables
towards the variance in the criterion variable in this study was reported based on the adjusted R-
square value. Therefore, the overall regression model was successful in explaining approximately
17.9 % of the adjusted variance in academic achievement. In sum, meta-cognitive self regulation
and effort regulation were found positively linked to academic achievement at a significant level
at 0.05. Based from the multiple regression analysis, the result showed that meta-cognition and
effort regulation account for 17.9% explained the variance of academic achievement. This finding
is parallel to the study done by Chen (2002), Doljanac, (1994) and Lee (1997). Thus, this result
also confirming the evidence from the literature showing that meta-cognition is one of the most
important determinants in academic achievement (Zimmermen 2001, Chen, 2002). The main
aspect of self regulation is meta-cognition and it includes planning, monitoring and self-
regulating activities (Pintrich et al, 1991). The findings also showed that effort regulation was the
learning strategy that led to the achievement of the adult online learners. This finding indicated
that when adult learners could handle distractions and could maintain concentration in order to
achieved test scores.

Conclusions
The current research findings highlighted the need to acknowledge the significant relationship
of self-regulated learning strategies and academic achievement. The following section aims to
highlight the conclusions drawn from the findings of the study. However, the limitation to the
generalizability of the research findings to the larger population should be noted. The subjects
of this study were selected based on simple random sampling of the adult online learners
undertaking Diploma in Public Administration of UiTM taken from main branch in Shah
Alam. Hence, the conclusions were limited to adult on-line learner in Shah Alam and
therefore could not be generalized to online adult learners in other higher learning
institutions. Based on that limitation, the findings of the present study permitted the following
conclusions related to the objectives of the study to be drawn.
1. There was a positive and low linear relationship between effort regulation, meta-
cognition, organization on academic achievement
2. Meta-cognition self-regulation and effort regulation were the significant predictors
of academic achievement.
This investigation has yielded consistent results with the previous studies. Firstly, the results
of this study demonstrate a positive but low relationship between CGPA and self-regulated
learning strategies of the on-line adult learners. However, only two sub scales of the learning
strategies namely meta-cognition self regulation and effort regulation and one sub scales of
motivational belief namely extrinsic goal orientation show positive but low correlation with
academic achievement. The finding suggests that these sub-scales of self-regulated learning
strategies are more probable to have direct tied with academic achievement. However, the
proponents of self-regulated learning strategies contented that self-regulated learning is not an
isolated process but need integrated process of the various self-regulated constructs
(Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1990). Hence, Weinstein (1988) recommends that students
consider improving their weaker learning strategies in order to optimize their academic
performance. Secondly, the findings statistically showed that meta-cognition self-regulation
had contributed the strongest unique contribution to explain academic achievement. Thus,
this finding suggests that students who are able to plan, monitor and evaluate their learning
could possibly result in higher levels of achievement. The result also show the effort
regulation predict academic achievement. This suggests that adult on-line learner is
committed to completing their study goals by controlling their energy toward them (Chen,
2003). In sum, the findings of the present study contributed to a better understanding on the

6
self-regulated learning strategies in enhancing academic achievement among online adult
learners. The interplay between meta-cognition and effort regulation and academic
achievement is consistent with social cognitive theory, who emphasized that self-regulation
involves three interrelated processes; self-observation, self-evaluation, and self-reaction
(Bandura 1986). Hence, understanding these processes and using them deliberately is the
meta-cognitive part of self-regulated learning strategies.

References

Abrami, P. C., & Bernard, R. M. (2006). Research on distance education: In defense of field
experiments. Distance Education, 24(1), 5-26.

Artino, A. R. (in press). Online military training: Using a social cognitive view of motivation and
self-regulation to understand students’ satisfaction, perceived learning, and choice. Quarterly
Review of Distance Education.

Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2006). Learning online: Motivated to self-regulation? Academic
Exchange Quarterly, 10(4), 176-182.

Balajthy, E (1990) Hypertext, hypermedia and meta-cognition: research and instructional

implication for disabled readers, Reading, Writing and Learning Disabilities, 6, PP 183-202

Bandura , A., (1986) Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Erlbaum.

Bandura, A & Schunk, D. H. (1981) Cultivating competence, self-efficacy and intrinsic

motivation through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and social psychology, 41,
586-598

Blass, E. and Davis, A. (2003). Building on solid foundations: Establishing criteria for e-learning
development. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 27(3), 227-245.

Chen, C.S (2002) Self-regulat and ed learning strategies and achievement in an introduction to
Information Systems course, Information Technology Learning and Performance Journal, Vol, 20
(1), spring.

Cohen, L, Manion, L, & Morrsion, K (2000) Research Methods in Education. Routledge Falmer
London

Corno, L., and Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning
and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88-100.

Corno, L., and Rohrkemper, M. (1985). The intrinsic motivation to learn in classrooms. In C.
Ames and R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation: The classroom milieu (Vol. 2., pp. 53-90).
New York: Academic Press.

Deci E.L, & Ryan, R.M. (1996) need satisfaction and the self-regulation of Learning. Learning
and individual Differences, 8(3), 165-184

7
Doljanac, R. F (1994) Using motivational factors and learning strategies to predict academic
success. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56 (01), 142A(UMI 9513340)

Haziah, J (2004). The Learning Strategies of Online Learners. The International Journal of
Education Development, Vol. 1 september.

Hwang, Y.S., & Konstantinous, V (2002). Elementary In service teachers’ self regulated learning
strategies related to their academic achievement, Journal of international Industrial Psychology,
Vol. 29, p.147.

Lee, L.H. (1997) Goal orientation, goal setting and academic performance in colledge students:
An integrated model of achievement motivation in schools setting Dissertation Abstarcts
International, 569 (06), 142A(UMI 9835095)

Mischel, W & Patterson, C.J. (1978) Effective plans for self-control in children. In A. Collins
(ED) Minnesota Symposium on Child psychology, Vol 11, pp 199-230. Hillsdale , NL Erlbaum.

Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on
the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC: The Institute for
Higher Education Policy.

Pintrich, P. R, Smith, D.A., Gracia, T.,& Mckeachie, W.J. (1991) a manual for MSLQ. University
of Michigan: National centre for research to improve Post-secondary teaching and learning.

Pintrich, P. R. & De Groot, E (1990) Motivational and self-regulated learning componets of

classroom academic performance, Journal of Educational psychology , 82, 33-40

Pintrich, P.R. & Garcia, T. (1991) Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college
classroom. In Mehr M.I. & Printich P.R. Advances in motivation and achievement: Goals and
self-regulatory processes, Vol 7, Pp 371-402

Saba, F. (2000). Research in distance education: A status report [Electronic version]International

Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 1(1), 1-9.

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (1998). Self-regulated learning: From teaching to
self-reflective practice. New York: The Guilford Press.

Style, I. & Zariski, A (2000). Student’s Learning Strategies in On-lone Environment. Journal of
Reading, 30)7), 590-695

Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. A. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of
Web-based and classroom instruction: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 59, 623-664.

Weinstein, C.E. (1988) Assessment and training of student learning strategies. In R. R. Schmeck
(Ed) Learning Strategies and Learning Styles New York. Plenum Press

Zimmerman, B. (2000). Attaining self-regulated learning: A social cognitive perspective, In

Boekaerts, Pintrinch, P & Zeidner M (eds) handbook of self-regulation, San Diego, CA Academic
Press.

8
Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated academic learning and achievement: The emergence of
a social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 2(2), 173-201.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Tsikalas, K. E. (2005). Can computer-based learning environments

CBLEs) be used as self-regulatory tools to enhance learning? Educational Psychologist,
40, 267-271.

Zimmerman, B. J., and Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy

model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 284-
290.

Zimmerman, B. J., and Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning:

Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82, 51-59.