can be interpreted as a sign of overregulation and may inhibit some forms of
learning (Morgan, 1985), that perspective ignores the importance of time
management to the success of students’ in school and to a wide range of ex-
perts who plan their time and place of learning to enhance their creativity
(Zimmerman, 1998). Concerns that self-regulatory efforts might stifle cre-
ativity must be reconciled with evidence that professional writers use a wide
variety of self-regulatory processes to optimize their creative endeavors
rather than awaiting an unconscious visit by the muse (Zimmerman &
Risemberg, 1997). Thus, although efforts to self-regulate one’s intellectual
functioning are often initially ineffective, students are better advised to focus
on adapting their goals and choice of methods rather than relying on the for-
tuity of unconscious methods (Kitsantas & Zimmerman, 1998).
CONCLUSION
How students conceive of achievement tasks—whether as opportunities to
improve key processes as the means for increasing their competence or to im-
prove their outcomes as ends in themselves—greatly affects the cyclical self-
regulatory path they take and the sources of self-motivation they will experi-
ence. Because of their process orientation to learning and performance,
proactive self-regulators engage in more effective forethought, performance,
and self-reflection phase processes than reactive learners. By understanding
this cycle of phases, especially the way that advantageous forethought proc-
esses set the stage for superior forms of performance and self-reflection,
teachers can help students to pursue a proactive path. Students who become
proactive self-regulators will experience a heightened sense of personal
agency because their process orientation not only changes their approach to
learning but also their perspective on its ultimate end.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank David Y. Dai and Robert J. Sternberg for their help-
ful comments on an earlier draft of this chapter.
REFERENCES
Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In D. H. Schunk &
J. L. Meece (Eds.),Student perceptions in the classroom(pp. 327–348). Hillsdale, NJ: Law-
rence Erlbaum Associates.
Anderson, C. A., & Jennings, D. L. (1980). When experiences of failure promote expectations of
success: The impact of attributing failure to ineffective strategies.Journal of Personality, 48,
393–405.
Bandura, A. (1969).Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
- SELF-REGULATION 345