The employment of self-Regulated strategies in writing process by english-major freshmen at ho chi minh city open university

ng strategies was found in 
this study since the p-value of this option was 
slightly smaller than .05. Table 8 also shows 
that the MR (male students) = 37.28 while the 
MR (female students) = 49.66. As could be 
seen, the MR of the male students were 
significantly smaller than the MR of the 
female students. The data implied that the 
female students frequently took notes of the 
useful vocabulary and grammar structures 
than the male students. From the points, the 
study confirmed that the female first-year 
students could use keeping record and 
monitoring strategies better than the male 
 Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University – No. 4 (16) 2015 – December/2015 105 
first-year students. The similar finding about 
gender difference in using keeping record and 
monitoring strategies which was more 
significant for females was also found in the 
prior study by Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons 
(1990). The finding of this prior study 
(p=.010) was more significant than the current 
study (p=.034). 
Regarding the gender difference in using 
self-efficacy strategy to refocus on task 
performance, the data from Table 8 expose 
that the U score of this option (U=553.00), the 
Z score of this option (Z=-2.11), and the p-
value of this option (p=.035) also accepted the 
H1. The data showed that the use of this kind 
of SRS by the male students was different 
from that by the female students since the p-
value of this strategy was moderately smaller 
than .05. From the data of Table 8, the 
statistics showed that the MR (male students) 
= 38.15 whereas the MR (female students) = 
49.42. As being shown, the MR of the male 
students was moderately smaller than the MR 
of the female students. The data exposed that 
the female students were able to reconcentrate 
on their task implementation faster than the 
male students. The fact was that the female 
students tended to stay away from the 
distractions and disturbances and they 
frequently prepared a quiet writing 
environment when they carried out their 
writing assignments. In case they were 
distracted from the task implementation, they 
were able to refocus on their writing 
immediately. The study deduced that the 
female first-year students were able to use 
self-efficacy strategy to refocus on writing 
when they were distracted to other things 
better than the male first-year students. 
In sum, the study concluded that the first-
year male and female students differently used 
two kinds of SRS including keeping record 
and monitoring strategies for note taking of 
useful information and self-efficacy strategy 
to regulate their behaviors during writing. 
To respond to the second research 
question, the study concluded that the male 
and female first-year learners differently used 
five SRS in forethought phase and 
performance phase. None of the gender 
difference was found in self-reflection phase. 
5. Implications and conclusion 
From the results of this study, it is 
implied that self-regulated strategies (SRS) 
are beneficial and satisfactory for successful 
learning, particularly in writing. Using the 
strategies can enhance learners’ learning 
proficiency and evoke the capacity of 
independent learning (Field, Duffy, and 
Huggins, 2014, p.2). Learners can alter SRS 
to systemize and organize their learning in an 
effective way so that they have a feeling of 
being motivated, consider learning as their 
own responsibility, and feel comfortable to 
cooperate with others for their own sake in 
learning (Zimmerman, 1986, p.308; cited in 
Field, Duffy, and Huggins, 2014, p.2). They 
become autonomous in their own learning 
when they control their learning with a proper 
schedule, arrange time for learning 
scientifically, and understand their learning 
competence towards the tasks deliberately. 
They are provided with opportunities to 
accumulate learning experiences through 
motivation and curiosity, self-confidence, and 
self-reliance basing on their comprehension 
and ability. 
 The knowledge in human’ mind can be 
forgotten and the perception of SRS is not the 
exception. Hence, this study is a reminder 
about the manipulation of SRS which 
principally aims to evoke its contents in 
learners’ minds so that they can continue to 
make use of the usefulness of the strategies in 
their own learning, particularly in writing 
performance. Additionally, the unfamiliar SRS 
are approached to them so that they can exploit 
the use of these strategies in the further tasks. 
106 The employment of self-regulated strategies in writing process by english... 
REFERENCES 
Castelló, M., Inesta, A., &Monereo, C. (2009). Toward self-regulated academic writing: An 
exploratory study with graduate students in a situated learning environment. Electronic 
Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7 (3). 1107-1130. 
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research method in education. New York, NY: 
Routledge. 
Field, R. M., Duffy, J., & Huggins, A. (2014). Independent learning skills, self-determination 
theory and psychological well-being: Strategies for supporting the first year university 
experience. International First Year in Higher Education Conference.1-10. Darwin 
Convention and Exhibition Centre, Darwin, NT. 
Hammann, L. (2005). Self-regulation in academic writing tasks. International Journal of 
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17 (1). 15-26. 
Huie, C. F., Winsler, A., &Kitsantas, A. (2014). Employment and first-year college achievement: 
The role of self-regulation and motivation. Journal of Education and Work, 27 (1). 110-135. 
Routledge. 
Kaplan, A., Lichtinger, E., &Gorodetsky, M. (2009). Achievement goal orientations and self-
regulation in writing: An integrative perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101 
(1). 51-69. American Psychological Association. 
Lane, L. K., et al. (2011). Self-regulated strategy development at tier 2 for second-grade students 
with writing and behavioral difficulties: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Research 
on Educational Effectiveness 4. 322-353. Routledge. 
Limpo, T., & Alves, A. R. (2013). Modeling writing development: Contribution of transcription 
and self-regulation to Portuguese students’ text generation quality. Journal of Educational 
Psychology 105 (2). 401-413. American Psychological Association, Inc. 
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the 
literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19. 139-158. Taylor & Francis Group. 
Pajares, F., and Valiante, G. (1986). Predictive utility and causal influence of the writing self-
efficacy beliefs of elementary students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the 
American Educational Research Association. Eric. 
Pajares, F., and Valiante, G. (2001). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement 
of middle school students: A function of gender orientation? Contemporary Educational 
Psychology, 26. 366-381. Elsevier. 
Pajares, F., Britner, L. S., and Valiante, G. (2000). Relation between achievement goals and self-
beliefs of middle school students in writing and science. Contemporary Educational 
Psychology, 25.4 06-422. Elsevier. 
 Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University – No. 4 (16) 2015 – December/2015 107 
Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2014). How do students self-regulate? Review of 
Zimmerman’s cyclical model of self-regulated learning. Anales de Psicología, 40 (2). 
Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia. 
Peggy, A. E., & Timothy, J. N. (1996). The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and 
reflective. Instructional Science, 24. 1-24. Springer. 
Timothy, J. C., & Zimmerman, J. B. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment program: A school-
based program to enhance self-regulated and self-motivated cycles of student learning. 
Psychology in the Schools, 41 (5). 357-550. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 
Zimmerman, J. B. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal 
of Educational Psychology, 81 (3). 329-339. American Psychological Association, Inc. 
Zimmerman, J. B. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. 
Educational Psychologist, 25 (1). 3-17. Lawrence Erlbaum Associated, Inc. 
Zimmerman, J. B. (1998). Academic studying and the development of personal skill: A self-
regulatory perspective. Educational Psychologist, 33 (2/3). 73-86. Lawrence Erlbaum 
Associated, Inc. 
Zimmerman, J. B. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary 
Educational Psychology, 25. 82-91. Elsevier Inc. 
Zimmerman, J. B. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, 
methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research 
Journal, 45 (1). 166-183. Sage Publication. 
Zimmerman, J. B., & Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing course 
attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31 (4). 845-862. Sage Journals. 
Zimmerman, J. B., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for 
assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Education Research 
Journal, 23 (4). 614-628. Sage Journals. 
Zimmerman, J. B., & 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. American Psychological Association, Inc. 
Zimmerman, J. B., &Risemberg, R. (1997). Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social cognitive 
perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22. 73-101. Elsevier Inc. 
Wiliams, D. J., and Takaku, Seiji. (2011). Gender, writing self-efficacy, and help seeking. 
International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 1 (3). 46-54. ResearchGate.