Self-Regulation as primary mission...

What exactly is Self-Regulation?

As it turns out, it depends on a number of factors.

The most popular or common concept of Self-Regulation does not necessarily agree with the definition we are faced with in the Ontario Educational system. 

I'm not going to try to outline what psychologists use as a definition - that's simply out of my area. What I can do is outline what the ministry indicates as the concept of Self-Regulation with respect to the Learning Skills.

Every report card Grade 1-12 has the learning skills indicated with sample behaviours to clarify the content being evaluated.

Here's the set of sample behaviours for Self-Regulation:

Self-Regulation
 Sets own individual goals and monitors progress towards achieving them.
 Seeks clarification or assistance when needed.
 Assesses and reflects critically on own strengths, needs, and interests.
 Identifies learning opportunities, choices, and strategies to meet personal needs and achieve
goals.
 Perseveres and makes an effort when responding to challenges.

It is evident from this list of sample behaviours that the goal is to have this be a reflection of students' capacity for Self-Regulated Learning. It really does point to Meta-Cognition. If teachers are not familiar with this set of sample behaviours, then they may have a tendency to default over to the more common definitions including arousal states or self-control.

It is here that I am able to clarify the reasoning behind the title of this post. Self-Control is by no means what I'm suggesting as the primary mission of Education. But this particular definition of Self-Regulation - or, rather, Self-Regulated Learning - could be considered of primary importance, if we want to supply the world with life-long learners.

So it seems that the Ministry of Education in Ontario has taken this approach to Self-Regulation and it may not align with other common definitions. In presentations by the ministry regarding the roll-out of Growing Success and Assessment Of/For/As learning, a strongly articulated goal is the need for a 'Common Understanding' of the Growing Success concepts - assessment, report cards, evaluation, instruction.

But with the sample behaviours listed on every report card that lands in parents' hands, it seems evident that the common understanding is troublesome when the most common understanding of Self-Regulation is not in alignment with the report card sample behaviours.

So it's clear that a special effort has to be made to clarify what is meant by Self-Regulation in this context. This effort is required to shift what may be the most 'common' understanding of Self-Regulation to a 'common understanding' of what the Ministry expects it to be.

Exacerbating the problem are two facts that are very troublesome indeed:

• Teachers are not faced with these sample behaviours at any time; They often complete report card work without seeing the full printout of the report card with the sample behaviours in front of them;
• Learning Skills in general, and Self-Regulation in particular are not outlined with specific or general expectations anywhere else but in these sample behaviours on the report card. e.g. A search of the curriculum document for Grade 1-8 Language for the term 'Self Regulation' retrieves no matches.

So where do we stand?

There is a real danger that teachers and administrators can fall into the trap of considering Self-Regulation to be the wrong thing (with respect to the report card that will be signed and handed to parents with Self-Regulation achievement indicated) and proceed to evaluate, assess and instruct this content with the wrong thing in mind.

What do we do?

Very simply: work hard at promoting a 'common understanding' of Self-Regulation. 

Whereas:

1. Teachers are expected to evaluate Learning Skills in general, and Self-Regulation in particular;
2. Evaluation implies instruction;
3. Instruction implies explicit expectations and planning;

It would make sense that there be a clearly articulated and firmly communicated set of expectations in this area - not just an assumption that we have a  'common understanding' of what it contains.

And it's an exciting prospect. If we were to establish a 'curriculum' of sorts identifying the expectations, benchmarks, instructional strategies and assessment practice to really address how students learn about their own learning we can hope to have a lasting positive impact beyond the barriers of curricular content.

Many teachers do this because it's a wise use of their instructional time. Many students are witnessing modelling of these skills through participating in the structured work that teachers put in front of them. better yet, some students are given the opportunity to be a manager or controller of the process. And some are asked to articulate the elements of the process which compels them to buy into the process, or perhaps even take ownership of the process. If they are assessed and judged to be 'literate' in their own learning technique, these students are poised to be successful in facing learning challenges outside of the school and subject area.

So shouldn't it be a course of study unto itself?