A Systematic Review of Teachers’ Knowledge of Self-Regulated Learning and its Assessment

IF 11.9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Yves Karlen, Charlotte Dignath
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Teachers’ Knowledge of Self-Regulated Learning and its Assessment","authors":"Yves Karlen, Charlotte Dignath","doi":"10.1007/s10648-026-10171-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This systematic review synthesizes and organizes existing research on teachers’ professional knowledge related to self-regulated learning (SRL) and its assessment. Although teachers play a central role in fostering and evaluating students’ SRL, the field lacks conceptual clarity regarding the types of knowledge required for these tasks. Drawing on established models of teacher professional competencies and knowledge, this review distinguishes three interrelated dimensions that together constitute the Teacher Knowledge of SRL (TK-SRL) framework: content knowledge of SRL (CK-SRL), pedagogical content knowledge for promoting SRL (PCK-SRL), and assessment knowledge for diagnosing SRL (AK-SRL). Across 33 included studies, substantial variability was evident in how teachers’ knowledge of SRL was conceptualized and operationalized. Definitions of SRL ranged from comprehensive theoretical accounts to broad, implicitly stated descriptions, thereby limiting comparability across studies. Methodological heterogeneity and the use of non-standardized assessment approaches further constrained the synthesis of findings. CK-SRL was by far the most frequently examined dimension, whereas PCK-SRL and, particularly, AK-SRL received considerably less empirical attention. Overall, the evidence suggests that teachers have partial, unevenly developed knowledge across all three dimensions, with limited and inconsistent associations between knowledge and other aspects of professional competence or instructional practice. These findings highlight the need for clearer, shared conceptualizations of SRL and more coherent, theory-driven approaches to assessing teachers’ knowledge of SRL. Building on this synthesis, we discuss implications for teacher education, propose directions for future research, and emphasize the importance of sustained professional development to strengthen all facets of teachers’ knowledge of SRL.","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10171-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This systematic review synthesizes and organizes existing research on teachers’ professional knowledge related to self-regulated learning (SRL) and its assessment. Although teachers play a central role in fostering and evaluating students’ SRL, the field lacks conceptual clarity regarding the types of knowledge required for these tasks. Drawing on established models of teacher professional competencies and knowledge, this review distinguishes three interrelated dimensions that together constitute the Teacher Knowledge of SRL (TK-SRL) framework: content knowledge of SRL (CK-SRL), pedagogical content knowledge for promoting SRL (PCK-SRL), and assessment knowledge for diagnosing SRL (AK-SRL). Across 33 included studies, substantial variability was evident in how teachers’ knowledge of SRL was conceptualized and operationalized. Definitions of SRL ranged from comprehensive theoretical accounts to broad, implicitly stated descriptions, thereby limiting comparability across studies. Methodological heterogeneity and the use of non-standardized assessment approaches further constrained the synthesis of findings. CK-SRL was by far the most frequently examined dimension, whereas PCK-SRL and, particularly, AK-SRL received considerably less empirical attention. Overall, the evidence suggests that teachers have partial, unevenly developed knowledge across all three dimensions, with limited and inconsistent associations between knowledge and other aspects of professional competence or instructional practice. These findings highlight the need for clearer, shared conceptualizations of SRL and more coherent, theory-driven approaches to assessing teachers’ knowledge of SRL. Building on this synthesis, we discuss implications for teacher education, propose directions for future research, and emphasize the importance of sustained professional development to strengthen all facets of teachers’ knowledge of SRL.
教师自主学习知识及其评价的系统回顾
本系统综述对教师自主学习相关专业知识及其评价的现有研究进行了综合和整理。尽管教师在培养和评估学生的SRL方面发挥着核心作用,但该领域缺乏关于这些任务所需知识类型的概念清晰度。根据已建立的教师专业能力和知识模型,本文区分了共同构成教师专业知识框架的三个相互关联的维度:教师专业知识的内容知识(CK-SRL)、促进教师专业知识的教学内容知识(PCK-SRL)和诊断教师专业知识的评估知识(AK-SRL)。在33项纳入的研究中,教师的SRL知识如何概念化和操作化存在明显的实质性差异。SRL的定义范围从全面的理论解释到广泛的、隐含的描述,从而限制了研究之间的可比性。方法的异质性和非标准化评估方法的使用进一步限制了研究结果的综合。CK-SRL是迄今为止最常检查的维度,而PCK-SRL,特别是AK-SRL得到的经验关注要少得多。总体而言,证据表明教师在所有三个维度上都有部分的、不均衡的知识发展,知识与专业能力或教学实践的其他方面之间的联系有限且不一致。这些发现强调需要更清晰、共享的SRL概念和更连贯、理论驱动的方法来评估教师的SRL知识。在此基础上,我们讨论了对教师教育的启示,提出了未来研究的方向,并强调了持续专业发展对加强教师SRL各方面知识的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Educational Psychology Review
Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书