Relations between Self Regulation, Future Time Perspective and the Delay of Gratification in University Students.

Abstract

Introduction We should wait a certain amount of time in order to receive the rewards for most of our actions in life. The reward for most of the academic work conducted in school comes later. Academic success increases in parallel with the force of the connection perceived between the reward achieved and the academic studies conducted in the school environment. Not every student understands the connection between rewards or future goals and current actions in the same way. Due to these differences, there is a difference between students in terms of the importance they give to their academic work, the efforts made for that, and time spared for it. In the present study, an attempt was made to determine the relation between self regulation (SR), the future time perspective (FTP) and delay of gratification (DOG) in order to explain the differences in the academic success levels of the students. Self Regulation In the 1980s, when the research on student-centered education intensified, one of the subjects under consideration was the processes with which students realized their own learning. The studies in the field were dealt with under the heading of self regulated learning as a whole. Self regulated learning is the process by which an actively takes part in his/her own learning process in metacognitive, motivational, and behavioral terms (Zimmerman, 2001). The uses cognitive abilities for his/her academic work in SR. Self regulated learners have a clear knowledge of their purposes, learning styles, and their strengths and weaknesses. In accordance with their goals, they design their learning processes and they move forward in a motivated manner. When they reach or fail to reach the desired ends, they evaluate their performances and arrange their behaviors accordingly toward the next goal. These processes are consciously preferred by the student (Zimmerman, 2002). The SR model of Zimmerman, depending as it does on social cognitive learning theory, has a circular structure comprised of preliminary thoughts (pre-performance), performance control (performance) and self-reflection (post-performance) steps. During the pre-thought step, the student sets a goal for himself/herself and plans strategies to be used for learning. The self efficacy perspective of the student for understanding the subject, the personal expectation regarding the subject, his/her interest in the subject and the value he/she attributes to the learning process are among the elements of the process. In performance control, which is the second stage, the realizes the strategies he/she prefers in order to reach the goal set in the previous stage. In this way, he/she tries to discover his/her own learning style by trial and error and records the findings on his/her own. During the self reflection stage, the makes evaluations regarding the consequences of his/her actions. The The findings of the present study provide information on the prediction stage of subsequant SR circulation (Schunk, 2001; Zimmerman, 2000; Zimmerman, 2002). Future Time Perspective Time is a concept that is difficult for people to grasp, one which does not have a clear definition, even although it surrounds us. According to Soykan (2003), the complication in defining time results from the fact that time is accepted as an entity and he stated that in order to understand what it meant, the usage of time in various fields needed to be examined by disclaiming that time is an entity. For the purposes of the present study the view expressed in psychology science has been focused on. The definition of time in the New Webster s Dictionary of the English Language (1981) as a period between two actions perceived by an individual can be evaluated in this respect. According to Passing (2003), time has three types: physical, biological and psychological. While physical time relates to time and the calendar (Passing, 2003), biological time relates to the life cycle of living things (Whitrow, 1972). …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 60 citations exist upstream.