1

Deidra McDowell
EDUF7130: Educational Research
Dr. Ann E. Marshall
Summer 2012

Article Critique Assignment
Lewis, J. P., & Litchfield, B. C. (2011). Effects of self-regulated learning strategies on
preservice teachers in an educational technology course. Education, 132(2), 455-464, 10p.
Abstract
Lewis and Litchfield included the major aspects of research in the abstract; however they did not
give a title to the abstract section. The authors included the purpose, subjects, instruments,
procedures/treatment and results. These will be discussed further in this critique.
Introductory Section
In the introductory section of the article, Lewis and Litchfield discussed the significance of the
study and the instructional materials used. The researchers introduce the problem area by
discussing how advanced technology can be used in schools and that preservice teachers should
be prepared to incorporate technology in their curriculum. In addition, the researchers note, they
should also be prepared to provide their students with the ability to achieve academic successes
and apply strategies to learn. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011) Both issues were considered as
challenges by the researchers. They further explain why the challenges regarding technology and
preservice teachers assisting students is important, and the reason given is that they present
opportunities for exploration in applying self-regulation strategies into educational technology
2

classes. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011) A theoretical perspective or conceptual framework was not
included in the problem statement; however it is included in the literature review section of the
article. Although the researchers mentioned these challenges and its significance, they did not
provide a clear explanation of the research problem; it is up to the research consumer to find the
research problem because it is hidden in the text.
In the literature review of this study, Lewis and Litchfield discussed self-regulated
learning, characteristics of self-regulated learners, self-regulated learning strategies, which are all
related to the problem area. They also present the research questions in this section. The authors
indicate theoretical framework in their literature review. They also provide background
information as well as define key terms used throughout the article, including self-regulated
learning. They define key terms from different theoretical perspectives, however, according to
Lewis and Litchfield, SRL (self-regulated learning) refers to different aspects of behavior that
contribute to achieving a goal. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011)Upon reading the literature review,
this reader evaluated the references at the end of the article, which indicate that the authors
provide credible resources and most of their sources are from published academic journals and
books.
In this study, there are two research questions, which are: Is there a difference in SRL
skills as measured by the posttest MSLQ between students in the WebQuest group, Survey Only
Group and Control group and which components of MSLQ test predict final course grade? These
questions are specific and answerable based on the method Lewis and Litchfield used which will
soon be discussed. The purpose of the study is described in the abstract, which is to investigate
self-regulated learning and academic performance in preservice teacher education by
3

incorporating self-regulated learning training into an undergraduate educational technology
course. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011) The hypothesis used was Students in the WebQuest
Group will score higher on the posttest MSLQ than students in the Survey Only group and
Control group

Method Section
The authors indicate that there were 71 participants in the study who were students enrolled in a
micro computing course in the College of Education at a southeastern university. The researchers
specified that seventy-two percent of the participants were Caucasian, twenty-five percent
African American and three percent classified as other. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011) In addition,
researchers mention that the participants range from freshman to senior classification with the
majority being sophomores and juniors. Researchers did not provide information on how these
participants were selected, nor did they mention including an international review board (IRB)
prior to conducting the study. The researchers only provided information on how the
participants were selected to groups in the study which will soon be discussed. Since the method
for selecting participants was not established, it cannot be determined if the method is
appropriate for the research questions and study design.
The instrument used in this study was the MSLQ, which was used to measure SRL.
According to Lewis and Litchfield, The MSLQ was developed for undergraduate college
students to measure motivation and use of learning strategies. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011) The
MSLQ consists of 81 items that cover learning strategy and motivation scales. Although the
4

researchers explain what MSLQ is, they do not mention what it stands for. One would assume it
stands for Motivation Scales Learning Strategies, since that is what the instrument consists of.
The MSLQ is appropriate for this study because the scales within are motivation and learning
strategies, which correlate with self-regulation learning. Another form of instrumentation used in
this study was training modules. According to Lewis and Litchfield, each training module
included a WebQuest and several self-report forms. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011)
The design used for this study was a randomized pre-test-posttest control group design.
According to Lewis and Litchfield participants were randomly assigned to the WebQuest,
Survey Only and Control groups. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011) In order for the participants to be
randomly assigned to the three groups, the researchers used a website called Graph-Pad. The
researchers also used training modules for participants to complete weekly questionnaires. The
researchers design is appropriate and by using it, they are able to answer their proposed research
questions. Researchers provide a separate Variables section to describe the independent and
dependent variables. The independent variable was the training module with three levels, and the
dependent variables were posttest scores on the MSLQ and final course grade. Unfortunately, the
researchers did not provide a procedures section, they just include a Collection of Data
section that does not go into great detail of the procedures used to compile the data from the
MSLQ and self-report forms. A threat to validity to this design would be selection. The authors
did not state how the participants of this study were selected.
Results Section
The researchers used ANCOVA to statistically associate the control and experimental
groups. In addition, data analysis of the MSLQ scales was completed in the Statistical Package
5

for the Social Sciences. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011) The researchers mentioned these
procedures; however they did not include how they used them to interpret their data. This reader
was unable to determine if ANCOVA and Statistical Package for Social Science are appropriate
procedures for this study because the researchers did not adequately explain how these
procedures worked in this study.
According to Lewis and Litchfield, a preliminary analysis was conducted to evaluate the
homogeneity-of-slopes assumption by checking for a group by covariate (i.e. MSLQ pretest)
interaction for each scale. (Lewis & Litchfield, 2011) With this, researchers found that it was
not statistically significant.
Discussion Section
The researchers provide a Conclusion of Results and Limitation of the Study section
within the Methods Section and include a separate Conclusion Section. The limitations of
this study as given by the authors were sample size, difficulty of course, number of instructors,
access of group information, student exposure to WebQuests, and student feedback on MSLQ.
Difficulty of the course was a limitation because research on SRL indicates that SRL is more
likely to increase in areas that are more difficult. The lack of difficulty of the course for some
students may have limited the increase in self-regulation. When students are not challenged, they
are less likely to use self-regulated skills. The instructor variable was also a limitation due to the
difference in teaching styles, course projects criteria, and grading. Participants only had three
face-to-face interactions with the principal investigator. Due to the design of the study with
checking completion of weekly questionnaires and grading of WebQuests, feedback for all 71
participants was also not feasible.
6

The purpose of this study was to investigate self-regulated learning and academic
performance in preservice teacher education by incorporating self-regulated learning training
into an undergraduate educational technology course. Self-regulated learning was measured by
the Motivated Strategies for Learning. The results of this study indicated a significant difference
between WebQuest group and Survey Only group on the MSLQ component, time and study
environment. Most research on SRL has not attempted to teach SRL in courses not centered on
related topics such as educational psychology or study strategies. Results also indicated that
control of learning beliefs was a predictor of final course grade. The authors stated that control of
learning beliefs was the component of the MSLQ that was statistically significant in predicting
course grade. The results of this study indicated that only the use of SRL questionnaires on a
weekly basis is necessary to increase students' study time and selection of study environment.