Recently, self-regulation has received an increasing attention among the educational researchers. Although several different self-regulation models exist in the literature, they have some common assumptions and features (Pintrich, 2000). Among these models, Zimmerman’s model (1989, 2000), which is based on the social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) got considerable attention. Zimmerman (1989, 2000) defined self-regulation as ‘self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions that are planned and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals’ (p. 14). From Zimmerman’s (2000) perspective, self-regulation processes can be described in three cyclical phases: forethought (e.g., setting goals and planning actions), performance or volitional control (e.g., monitoring performance and adjusting strategies), and self-reflection (e.g., self-evaluation and self-reaction of performance.

In the field of education, self-regulation has been researched mostly with students and pre-service teachers as learners, however little is known about teachers’ self-regulation for teaching. Based on Zimmerman’s (1989, 2000) perspective, Capa-Aydin, Sungur, and Uzuntiryaki (2009) defined teacher self-regulation as ‘an active process through which teachers direct and maintain their metacognition, motivation and strategies for effective instruction’ (p. 346). Because, self-regulation is regarded as an important indicator of future behaviors (e.g., Pintrich & De Groot, 1990), effective teachers are expected to use self-regulation strategies in their teaching environment to succeed in their profession and enhance desired student outcomes. For example, in their study with German math teachers, Klusman, et al. (2008) found that teachers’ self-regulation pattern is important for their occupational well-being, quality of instruction, and students’ motivational experiences. Moreover, gender has been regarded as an important factor that affecting the degree of using self-regulation strategies and several studies have examined whether males and females differ in their use of self-regulated learning strategies (e.g., Bidjerano, 2005; Lee, 2002; Senler & Sungur, 2012; Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990). In most of these studies, either females reported higher degree of self-regulated strategy use (e.g., Bidjerano, 2005; Senler & Sungur, 2012) or no statistical difference between males and females was found (e.g., Caliskan & Sezgin-Selcuk, 2010; Yukselturk & Bulut, 2009). On the other hand, the effect of gender on teachers’ self-regulation is unknown. Therefore, current research has potential to provide valuable information about how teachers use self-regulation strategies in their teaching environment and how gender affects their self-regulation for teaching.

In the light of the theoretical notions and empirical findings discussed above, the following research questions were derived:

(1)   To what extent Turkish elementary science teachers use self-regulation strategies in teaching environment?

(2)   Does Turkish elementary science teachers’ degree of using self-regulation strategies in teaching environment differ according to the gender?

Bidjerano, T. (2005, October). Gender differences in self-regulated learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, Kerhonkson, NY, USA. Caliskan, S., & Sezgin-Selcuk, G. (2010). Pre-service teachers’ use of self-regulation strategies in physics problem solving: Effects of gender and academic achievement. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, 5(12), 1926-1938. Capa Aydin, Y., Sungur, S., & Uzuntiryaki, E. (2009). Teacher Self-Regulation: Examining a Multidimensional Construct. Educational Psychology, 29(3), 345-356. Klusman, U., Kunter, M., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., & Baumert, J. (2008). Teachers’ occupational well-being and quality of instruction: The important role of self-regulatory patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology. 100(3), 702-715. Lee, I.-S. (2002). Gender differences in self-regulated on-line learning strategies within Korea’s University context. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(1), 101-109. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner, Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Pintrich, P, R, & De Groot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40. Senler, B., & Sungur, S. (2012, September). Pre-service science teachers’ use of self-regulation strategies related to their academic performance and gender. Paper presented at the annual meeting of European Conference on Educational Research (ECER), Cadiz, Spain. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329–339. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P.R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (1), 51-59.