Abstract:

This research aims to investigate the impact of incorporating "Choice Boards" in the study of biological and chemical processes on students' learning activity self-regulation skills. The study seeks to explore diverse ways in which the implementation of Choice Boards influences students' ability to regulate their learning activities and engagement in the context of complex scientific subjects. Through a comprehensive examination of student outcomes and perceptions, the research aims to provide insights into effective pedagogical strategies for fostering self-regulated learning in the fields of biology and chemistry. The findings from this study could contribute valuable information for educators seeking to optimize instructional methods and enhance students' autonomy in the learning process.

Introduction

The Institute for the Future (IFTF) [1], a California-based social forecasting organisation, has released a list of 10 professional skills that are scientifically grounded and appropriate for a 21st-century individual. The capacity for projective thinking, which includes setting objectives and organising the steps necessary to reach them while considering the unique circumstances of each situation, ranks first on this list. It also includes selecting the best way to accomplish each task and allocating all available resources, including efficient time management. Stated differently, a young person in the present era needs to learn how to autonomously plan and manage his own activities. It is the responsibility of the school to help students acquire the capacity to self-regulate learning activities based on the content of all disciplines, including biology and chemistry. Thus, it appears that a pertinent and significant issue is the development of students' self-regulation of educational activity during the teaching of chemistry and biology, based on their psychological features and the creation of an appropriate technique.

Adolescence, which spans from 14 to 17 years old and corresponds with the time spent studying biology and chemistry in school, is a critical stage for the development of self-control. Students acquire ideals and views throughout this period, as well as attitudes towards others, themselves, and society at large. Adolescence also brings with it the demand for independence, which entails taking personal responsibility, creating one's own standards and evaluations, or accepting others as best in particular circumstances. During adolescence, the development of self-regulation of activities facilitates increased independence. Adolescents acquire motivation for accomplishment, goal-setting, and teamwork; they are more prepared for a wider range of collaborative tasks. American social psychologists reached an intriguing conclusion [2]: they believed that contemporary teens are acquiring the following self-regulation skills: perseverance in finishing difficult, extended projects; problem-solving skills to reach a particular goal; self-monitoring while pursuing the goal; and behavior management based on future objectives.

Researchers from all around the world have been very interested in the issue of schoolchildren's and students' self-regulation of their educational activities over the past 25 years. The ability to effectively monitor and regulate one's own learning through the use of a variety of cognitive, metacognitive, and behavioural strategies, such as maintaining volitional effort, managing resources, organising and processing information, and self-testing, is accepted in foreign psychological and pedagogical practice [3]. In Western pedagogy, the terms "self-regulation of educational activity" and "self-regulated learning" first surfaced in the 1980s. The primary expert in the field of study on schoolchildren's self-regulation of their educational activities abroad is B. J. Zimmerman [3] of New York University (USA). This researcher has been publishing psychological and pedagogical resources since 1989 that focus on how students regulate their own learning, how to assess and develop it, and how it relates to learning achievement. P.H. Winn [4], S.G. Paris [5] examined the nature, composition, and aspects of self-regulation as well as its function in learning processes.

A group of educators, including teachers from the Nazarbayev Intellectual School (NIS) of Astana Abilmazhinova T. (chemistry teacher), Nazarbayev Intellectual School (NIS) of Kokshetau Baiguzhina Zh., Melnikova I., and an international teacher, Siita Puobi (from Ghana), collaborated on the research project. Students from Kokshetau and Astana NIS were the study's participants. An examination of their own work as well as the experiences of other colleagues showed that most students lack the autonomy and self-control necessary for effective learning, which lowers the effectiveness of the lesson. It was decided to apply the "Choice Board," one of the student-centred learning tools, to address this issue. Through the development of activity, independence, initiative, and self-confidence, this technique ultimately empowers the student to make independent decisions about the scope of their work. The teacher's job is to set up group areas and zone them according to the needs of the students, not to force his or her opinions on them. "Choice board" incorporates differentiated instruction at the same time. The ensuing research concerns duly addressed included: 1. In what ways does using the Choice Board support students' growth in learning autonomy? 2. How much have the pupils' analytical abilities grown? 3. In what ways does the choice board's use encourage students' motivation to learn? The writers' collective focus was on enhancing self-regulation abilities through the utilisation of "Choice Board" technology. In order to ascertain the students' interests, preferences, and learning styles, the study was initially carried out using questionnaires. Throughout the research, multi-level activities with all the required instructions and evaluation criteria were created for every lesson. The assignments were completed either alone or in teams. Students were given the freedom to plan and carry out activities of their choosing by leaving one square marked "Free Choice" on some tasks. Teachers used a variety of "Choice Boards" to teach numerous lessons. Resources for this tactic were gathered, lesson plans were written, several kinds of "choice boards" were made, and interviews with research participants were conducted to gather data. Instructors created guidelines for using selection boards in differentiated instruction.

The study's findings led to the formulation of the following initial recommendations: 1. It is critical that teachers strategically prepare the implementation before introducing board choices. Establish the learning objective or the main topic of study. 2. Choose the kind of board that you want to use. Some choices include 3x3, bingo, cross-pins, combined (pen and paper, digital activity), digital, etc. However, throughout the study's execution, some drawbacks of the technology were noted: • The possibility of an uneven student distribution within the group based on the activities selected • Due to varying student speeds, not all students are able to complete assignments at the same time. • It takes the teacher longer to prepare a lesson like this. 3. Ascertain what adjustments pupils might require in order to collaborate with the selection board. 4. “Choice boards” can be used for long-term assignments across the block, homework, or the classroom. Choices actually give students autonomy and choice in their education, as primary results processing has demonstrated, and they also enable teachers to differentiate, monitor, and assess in real time. All subject areas and classes can readily adopt this tactic. Shoe boards increase student accountability and give teachers the ability to support and modify instruction for each student based on their unique learning style.

1. Davies A., Filder D., Gorbis M. Future Work Skills 2020. Palo Alta, CA: Institute for the Future for the University of Phoenix Research Institute, 2011. 12 p. 2. Murray D. W., Rosanbalm K. Promoting Self-Regulation in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Practice Brief. OPRE Report #2015-82. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2017. 6 p. 3. Zimmerman B. J. Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective // Handbook of self-regulation. Orlando, FL: Academic Press., 2000. Pp. 13–39. 4. Winne P. H. Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing // Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives / B. Zimmerman, D. Schunk (Eds.). Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2001. Pp. 153–189. 5. Paris S. G., Paris A. H. Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning // Educational psychologist. 2001. No. 36 (2). Pp. 89–101.