Self-reports of achievement goal orientations diverge markedly from traced goal orientations, which predict reading achievement while self-reports do not¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2–r3 · q2 · i1–i3
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2022: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i3 For all goal orientations, significant differences existed between self-reported and traced goal orientations, with effect sizes between d = 1.39 and d = 3.94. → Rovers 2019 q2 i1 Traced goal orientations correlated with reading achievement posttest (r = .17 to .23), but self-reports did not. → Rovers 2019 (2)

Evidence¶

Rovers 2019¶

Rovers, S. F. E., Clarebout, G., Savelberg, H. H. C. M., de Bruin, A. B. H., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2019). Granularity matters: comparing different ways of measuring self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-019-09188-6

q2 · i3 · review · r2

Review reports Zhou and Winne (2012), in which goal orientations were self-reported via the AGQ and inferred in gStudy from hyperlink clicks and tag use while studying a hypnosis article; large divergences (d = 1.39–3.94) were found.

"For all goal orientations, there were significant differences between students'self-reports of their goal orientations and the traces collected in gStudy, with effect sizes ranging between d= 1.39 and d= 3.94"

Rovers 2019 (2)¶

Rovers, S. F. E., Clarebout, G., Savelberg, H. H. C. M., de Bruin, A. B. H., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2019). Granularity matters: comparing different ways of measuring self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-019-09188-6

q2 · i1 · review · r3

Same review-reported study: traced goal orientations significantly related to posttest reading achievement, with correlation coefficients of r = .17 and r = .23, whereas self-reported goals did not; achievement was operationalized as text recall and comprehension.

"A significant correlation with reading achievement posttest performance was found for traced goal orientations (correlation coefficients ranging between rτ = .17 and rτ = .23), but not for self-reports"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students' conceptions of self-regulated learning can diverge from their reported self-regulated learning activities
• Trace data tend to predict achievement better than self-reports, but self-reports of global SRL intensity can outperform traces — related
• Learning goals predict more positive subjective appraisals of memory performance after controlling for actual performance — related
• Substantial differences existed between the time distribution of trace-extracted and think aloud-coded SRL processes: 41.66% of session duration had no think aloud code while only 3.19% had no trace process — related
• Motivational SRL factors correlate with but do not directly predict Japanese EFL learners' proficiency — related
• Low- and high-proficiency EFL learners differ significantly in self-efficacy, intrinsic goal orientation, and test anxiety — related
• A gap exists between prescriptive readings on learner-generated drawing and research-based understandings — related