The Situated Dynamics of Purposes of Engagement and Self-Regulation Strategies: A Mixed-Methods Case Study of Writing

Abstract

Background Common conceptions of motivation and self-regulation view them as related but distinct entities. Most research on motivation and self-regulation investigates quantitative relations between level (e.g., self-efficacy) or type of motivation (e.g., mastery goals) and level of self-regulation. Purpose Alternatively, the current study proposes that motivation and self-regulation strategies are integrated in purpose-strategies action orientations, which are constructed through a situated and dynamic meaning-making process. Participants and Setting The current study presents a case analysis of one Israeli ninth-grade female student who engaged in a writing task. Research Design The qualitative case study employed mixed-methods data that included traces in the written product, microprocesses observation, stimulated-recall interview, and a general interview. Analysis sought to triangulate findings from the multiple data sources in order to construct the dynamic and situated flow of purpose of engagement and strategies. Findings Triangulation of data from these different sources demonstrated that individual and contextual characteristics interacted to result in a dynamic flow of situated purpose-strategies actions along the student's engagement in the writing task. Conclusions The findings suggest that the situated purpose of engagement should be an integral element in conceptions of self-regulation; that different purposes may call for different types of self-regulation; that conceptualization and investigation of motivation and self-regulation should be domain specific; and that mixed methods, as used in this article, can provide productive tools to assess the dynamic and situated process of self-regulation.

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 — 30 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.