Evidence for The learning cycle: plan, do, review #

Every substantive claim on the The learning cycle: plan, do, review page is checked against current research. Here is each claim, how well today’s evidence supports it, and the sources. The full, de-duplicated source list lives on the references page.

Supported · strong evidence — Self-regulated learning is commonly described as a cyclical process of three phases — forethought (planning and motivation), performance (self-monitoring and self-control during study), and self-reflection (self-judgement and reaction afterwards).

Zimmerman’s three-phase cyclical model (forethought, performance, self-reflection) is the canonical framework for self-regulated learning and is the standard reference used across educational psychology.

Sources: Zimmerman (2002), Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview, Theory Into Practice — https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2 · full reference ›

Supported · strong evidence — Self-regulated learning is cyclical and feedback-driven: the outcome of one learning attempt (the self-reflection phase) feeds forward into the planning of the next, rather than learning being a one-way linear sequence ending in review.

Panadero’s review of the major self-regulated-learning models finds they converge on a cyclical, feedback-loop structure in which reflection on one cycle informs the next, despite differences in their components.

Sources: Panadero (2017), A Review of Self-Regulated Learning: Six Models and Four Directions for Research, Frontiers in Psychology — https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422 · full reference ›

Supported · strong evidence — The forethought phase of learning includes both strategic planning (setting goals and selecting methods) and motivational beliefs, notably self-efficacy and the perceived value of the task.

Zimmerman explicitly locates task analysis (goal setting, strategic planning) and self-motivation beliefs (self-efficacy, task value, goal orientation) within the forethought phase; this composition is standard in the literature.

Sources: Zimmerman (2002), Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview, Theory Into Practice — https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2 · full reference ›

Supported · strong evidence — During study, self-monitoring of one’s own attention, comprehension and progress is a core component of self-regulated learning and allows learners to adjust their approach while they work.

Self-observation/metacognitive monitoring during the performance phase is a defining feature of self-regulated learning in Zimmerman’s model and across SRL frameworks reviewed by Panadero.

Sources: Zimmerman (2002), Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview, Theory Into Practice — https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2 · Panadero (2017), A Review of Self-Regulated Learning: Six Models and Four Directions for Research, Frontiers in Psychology — https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422 · full reference ›

Supported · moderate evidence — Learners who plan, monitor and reflect on their own learning (i.e. who self-regulate, including using metacognitive strategies) tend to achieve better academic outcomes than those who do not.

Meta-analytic evidence links self-regulated-learning and metacognitive strategy use to higher achievement; effects are positive and educationally meaningful but vary by strategy, measure, age group and how SRL is operationalised.

Sources: Dignath & Büttner (2008), Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students: A meta-analysis on intervention studies, Metacognition and Learning — https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9029-x · Zimmerman (2002), Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview, Theory Into Practice — https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2 · full reference ›

Supported · moderate evidence — Self-regulated learning skills are learnable and can be taught: interventions that train planning, monitoring and reflection strategies improve students’ self-regulation and performance.

Dignath & Büttner’s meta-analysis of SRL training studies (primary and secondary school) found instruction in self-regulation strategies produced positive effects on achievement and self-regulation, supporting the trainability claim while noting variability across implementations.

Supported · strong evidence — People are often poor judges of their own learning in the moment: fluent, familiar material feels well learned when it is not, so a deliberate review (especially one that tests recall) is needed to reveal what has actually been retained.

It is well established that subjective fluency from rereading inflates judgements of learning relative to actual retention, and that monitoring accuracy improves when learners self-test; Dunlosky et al.’s review and the broader metacognition literature support this.

Sources: Dunlosky, Rawson, Marsh, Nathan & Willingham (2013), Improving Students’ Learning With Effective Learning Techniques, Psychological Science in the Public Interest — https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266 · Koriat & Bjork (2005), Illusions of Competence in Monitoring One’s Knowledge During Study, Journal of Experimental Psychology: LMC — https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.2.187 · full reference ›