The pooled effect of self-regulated learning does not differ significantly by strategy type (cognitive, metacognitive, resource management, motivational)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? Moderator analysis found no significant difference in the common effect size across the four self-regulated learning strategy types (Qb = 2.994, p > .05). → Ergen 2017
Evidence¶
Ergen 2017¶
Ergen, B., & Kanadli, S. (2017). The effect of self-regulated learning strategies on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 69, 55-74. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2017.69.4
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Categorical moderator analysis under the random effects model comparing subgroups coded as cognitive (k=11), metacognitive (k=10), resource management (k=2), and motivational (k=4) strategies; Qbetween was not significant (p > .05).
"It was found in this study that the common effect size of self -regulated learning shows no significant difference according to self -regulated learning strategies (cognitive, metacognitive, motivational and resource management) (Qb=2.994, p>.05)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
-
Strategy Instruction Improves Academic Performance — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
-
In a randomized trial of SRL interventions in an online mathematics preparation course, group and time interacted significantly on SRL knowledge, self-efficacy and the SRL overall score, with Group TDP (training + diary + peer feedback) showing the most prominent gains — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- The pooled effect of self-regulated learning does not differ significantly by school level — related
- The effect of SRL interventions does not differ significantly by course type, SRL strategy type, school level, or learning context — a broader claim this one bears on
- The pooled effect of self-regulated learning does not differ significantly between empirical and relational study designs — related
- Effect sizes across SRL intervention studies are highly heterogeneous, requiring a random effects model — related
- Self-regulated learning strategies have a large pooled effect (d = 0.859) on academic achievement across 21 Turkish studies — related
- Evidence indicates socially shared regulation of learning occurs across SRL areas and may promote learning and performance — related
- Feedback in course design predicts larger SRL training effects for metacognitive strategies, resource management strategies, and motivation — related
- Provision of learning protocols predicts larger SRL training effects for resource management strategies — related
- SRL training effects vary by outcome category, largest for metacognitive strategies (g = .40) and smallest for cognitive strategies (g = .32) — reports the opposite
- SRL training programs targeting older students and students with lower prior academic achievement show larger effects on resource management strategies — related
- No group differences appear in self-regulation, strategies, or motivation across the four mathematics achievement groups — related
- Self-regulated learning facets that are conceptually common across three popular questionnaires appear empirically disparate — related
- Learners perceive AI applications as useful for regulating their learning but not for regulating motivation — related
- Self-regulated learning improves achievement — related
- Self Regulated Learning Predicts Achievement — related
- Most direct SRL promotion targeted cognitive capabilities and rarely mentioned the benefit of strategy use — related
- Metacognitive Strategies Improve Learning — related
- Cooperative learning arrangements predict larger SRL training effects for cognitive and metacognitive strategies — related
- Corno and Mandinach's foundational framework identifies three nonideal learner engagement types alongside the self-regulated ideal — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
srl-effect-no-strategy-type-difference |
title |
The pooled effect of self-regulated learning does not differ significantly by strategy type (cognitive, metacognitive, resource management, motivational) |
description |
The pooled effect of self-regulated learning does not differ significantly by strategy type (cognitive, metacognitive, resource management, motivational) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2017 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — ergen-2017 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.