comes attributed their unsuccessful responses to strategy use indicating that
the means–end relationship was clearly understood. Students who set process
goals also made strategy attributions unlike students setting outcome goals.
Similar sequential goal setting effects were found in a study conducted with a
motor learning task with high school girls (Zimmerman & Kitsantas, 1997).
These studies indicate the importance of the various sources of self-
regulatory development at each level in the hierarchy (see column 2 of Table
12.1), such as the quality of modeling, social feedback, process goals, and
performance outcomes. Regarding the means–end issue, these studies reveal
that although learning process goals were more effective than performance
outcome goals in enhancing motivation and achievement, the latter were very
effective when they were linked sequentially to effective prior learning experi-
ences. But how are goal setting, self-efficacy, as well as other self-regulatory
processes and self-motivational beliefs, interrelated, and how do they lead to
self-sustaining learning?
A Cyclic Phase Model of Academic Self-Regulation
Zimmerman (2000) hypothesized that self-regulatory beliefs and processes
are linked in a cycle involving three major phases: forethought, performance
control, and self-reflection (see Fig. 12.3). Forethought refers to influential
learning processes and motivational beliefs that precede efforts to learn and
set the stage for such learning. The performance phase involves processes that
occur during learning and affect concentration and performance, and the
self-reflection phase involves processes that occur after learning and influ-
ence a learner’s reactions to that experience. These self-reflections, in turn, in-
fluence forethought regarding subsequent learning, which completes the self-
regulatory cycle. Although all students attempt to self-regulate their personal
functioning in some way, those who are most successful in academics, sport,
as well as other fields, focus proactively on learning processes (i.e., as a means
to an end) during the forethought and performance control phases rather
than merely focusing reactively on outcomes (i.e., ends) during self-reflection.
Forethought Phase. Two major categories of forethought are task analy-
sis and self-motivational beliefs. To analyze the tasks effectively, students
need to set effective goals for themselves and plan an effective strategy for at-
taining those goals. As we have already discussed, setting learning goals, es-
pecially if they are specific, proximal, and challenging, are associated with
greater learning and motivation than outcome goals, which are not linked in-
tentionally to learning processes. The goal systems of the most effective self-
regulators are proactively organized in a hierarchy, with proximal process
goals linked to distal outcome goals (Bandura, 1986; Carver & Scheier, 2000).
Hierarchical goal systems enable these learners to guide their learning over
- SELF-REGULATION 339