The learner perception toward
an English self-study within aframework of self-regulated
learning:
An analysis of Q methodology
Akiko Fukuda (akikof@rikkyo.ac.jp)
Graduate School of Intercultural Communication, Rikkyo University
3rd SSU Conference, Osaka, Japan, October 15, 2019Outline
1. Previous studies: Self-regulated learning and Q methodology
2. Research design: when and how the Q method was conducted
3. Method: The procedure of the Q method and analysis
4. Result: One-factor solution and the patterns of learners’ viewpoints
5. Discussion: Theoretical significant and implication
6. Future research: Comparison of the pre- and post- Q method,
Qualitative investigation of the change in self-regulated learning ina self-studySelf-regulated learning (SRL) in self-studyüSRL is “the ways that learners systematically activate and sustain
their cognitions, motivations, behaviors, and affects, toward theattainment their goals.” (Schunk & Greene, 2018, p. 1)
Performanceand volitionalcontrol

Forethought

Self-reflection(Zimmerman, 2000)

Self-regulated learning (SRL) in self-study• Chang (2005) confirmed that motivation and self-efficacy for L2 readingsignificantly increased by SRL activities through web-based instruction• Liu, Lan, & Ho (2014) explored that vocabulary learning with the webbased instruction enhanced not only to acquire vocabulary knowledge but
also to learn self-regulatoryèWhat about the outside of the classroom?
èNecessity of understanding the viewpoint that learners hold preceding
their actual self-study

Research design
for seven to eight months

English self-study(interview and observation research)
Q-Method(pre)Q-Method(post)

Research design
for seven to eight months

English self-study(interview and observation research)
Q-Method(pre)Q-Method(post)

What is Q methodology?
üA quantitative and qualitative research approaches = factor analysis
and interviews/ document analysis
üIt “will reveal a series of shared viewpoints or perspectives pertaining
to your topic of interest.” (Watts & Stenner, 2005, p. 53)
üIt “leads to consistency and comparability across studies, andtransparency for the attitude.” (Irie, 2014, p. 14）
è Little research in SLA applied Q method; it is suitable to capture thesubjectivity on SRL capacity

Previous studies applying Q methodologyPemberton & Cooker (2012): Q-method * Self-Directed Learning (SDL)• SDL as well as SRL are the concepts that evaluate the process oflearning; Data collection by one-shot treatment is meaningless• Applied Q-method as a mixed-method approach
Irie & Ryan (2014): pre & post Q-method * studying abroad• Examined the change of L2 self-concept using Q-method: Focus on theformation of self-concept during studying abroadQ method steps
1. Create the collection of the statements
2. Select 40-60 statements from the collection
3. Select participants
4. Participants rank order selected statements
5. Interview participants about ranking statements
6. Analyze the patterns of statements
7. Interpret the factor generated

1. Create the collection of the statements
2. Select 40-60 statements from the collection• Modified the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire(MSLQ) (Pintrich et al., 1991; 1993)• Conducted it for 112 EFL university students à Factor analysis
extracted three motivational and four strategic components with 48items

Motivation section

Learning strategy section

Self-efficacy
Learning beliefs
Test anxiety

Metacognitive strategies

Problem solving
Learning maintenance
Learning effort

Mana (19/ F)

Amo (21/ F)

Kaya (20/ F)

Literature
3. Participants:
Ten university students
Literature
TOEIC580
6 years/ N.A.

Takushi (18/ M)

InterculturalCommunication
TOEIC805
6 years/ 3weeks inAustralia

Literature
TOEIC735
12 years/ 1 monthin USA

TOEIC750
14 years/ N.A.

Lisa (19/ F) (Age/Ayumi(18/ F)
Anonymous
Gender)Sociology
Literature
TOEIC600 Major
TOEIC490
7 years/
N.A. TOEIC6score
years/ N.A.
The
latestShiori (19/ F)

Literature
TOEIC500
7 years/ 1 year inGermany

Year of learning English /Naomiexperience(18/ F)
ofKeistudying(20/ M) abroad
Maya (19/ M)
Intercultural

Communication
TOEIC450
6 years/ N.A.

Marketing
TOEIC700
9 years/ N.A.

Education
TOEIC495
7 years/ N.A.

Mana (19/ F)
Literature
TOEIC580
6 years/ N.A.

Takushi (18/ M)

Intercultural
Communication
TOEIC805
6 years/ 3weeks inAustralia

Amo (21/ F)

Literature
TOEIC735
12 years/ 1 monthin USA

Lisa (19/ F)

Sociology
TOEIC600
7 years/ N.A.

Naomi (18/ F)

Intercultural
Communication
TOEIC450
6 years/ N.A.

Kaya (20/ F)

Literature
TOEIC750
14 years/ N.A.

Ayumi (18/ F)
Literature
TOEIC490
6 years/ N.A.

Kei (20/ M)

Marketing
TOEIC700
9 years/ N.A.

Shiori (19/ F)

Maya (19/ M)
Education
TOEIC495
7 years/ N.A.

Literature
TOEIC500
7 years/ N.A.

Mana (19/ F)
Literature
TOEIC580
6 years/ N.A.

Amo (21/ F)

Literature
TOEIC735
12 years/ 1 monthin USA

Summary

Kaya (20/ F)

Literature
TOEIC750
14 years/ N.A.

Takushi (18/ M)

Shiori (19/ F)

age Ayumi= 19.1(18/ F)
LisaAverage(19/ F)Intercultural
Literature
Sociology
Literature
Communication
Male = 3; Female = 7
TOEIC500
TOEIC600
TOEIC490
TOEIC805
7 years/ 1 year in
Average
TOEIC score= 610.5
7 years/ N.A.
6 years/N.A.
6 years/ 3weeks inGermany
Australia Average year of learning English = 8 years
Naomi (18/ F) of studying abroad = 2 students
Experience
Kei (20/ M)
Maya (19/ M)
Intercultural
Communication
TOEIC450
6 years/ N.A.

Marketing
TOEIC700
9 years/ N.A.

Education
TOEIC495
7 years/ N.A.

4. Participants rank order selected statements
5. Interview participants about ranking statements-5-4-3-2-1

0+1+2+3+4+5s1s48
statement 1・・・statement 48

6. Analyze the patterns of statements• The “by-person” factor analysis was conducted for 10 participants(Principal Component Analysis, varimax rotation)
Scree plot of the unrotated factors
65EV432
10EV

Factor 1

Factor 2

Factor 3

Factor 4

Factor 5

Factor 6

Factor 7

Factor 8

4.80581.11220.9359

0.824

0.651

0.51840.4036

0.3466

Q sortFactor matrix• * = p < .01• Significant factor loading = 2.58 ×(1÷√# of items in Q set)
= 0.3723 rounded up to ±0.38• Factor name
“Emphasizing the value of learning
English; being bad at schedulemanagement”

Loadings of Factor
1Mana.5114*
Amo.8712*
Kaya.6011*
Takushi.7546*
Lisa.6332*
Ayumi.7639*
Shiori.6264*
Kei.7273*
Naomi.6864*
Maya.6910*
48 % of study varianceFinal Q sort of the Factor 1 (10 participants)-5-4-3-2-1

0+1+2+3+4+5438

13635

2224131715107451929322539463714124402214364131114226283344916202334830275341887. Main components of the learners’ perception
on SRL in self-study
Trait 1: More value than self-efficacy forlearning English
Trait 2: Effective learning for taking tests

Trait 3: Difficulty of self-control

Trait 1: More value than self-efficacy
General self-efficacy
9: I am certain that I can master English skills. (+2)
16: If I study English in appropriate way, then I will be able to master it. (+3)

Specific self-efficacy
4: I expect to do well in English learning. (-4)
1: I am certain that I can do well with the difficult English materials. (-3)
2: I am confident that I can understand the difficult questions or contents
when I am learning English. (-2)

Trait 1: More value than self-efficacy
High value of learning English
10: It is essential for me to acquire English skills. (+5)
12: I think that English learning will be useful in the future. (+5)
15: I am very interested in English. (+4)
11: Understanding English is important to me. (+4)

Not satisfied with just getting good scores
7: Getting a good grade or score in the test is the most satisfying for me. (-5)

Trait 2: Effective learning for taking tests
Train English rather than expand the knowledge
23: I try to think through a topic and decide what I am supposed to learn
from it rather than just reading it over when studying English. (-1)
27: When I learn English, I pull together information from different
resources. (-1)

Strategies for understanding contents
39: When reading English, I write brief summaries of the main idea andimportant words. (+1)
34: When I learn English, I try to determine which part of contents I don’t
understand well. (+1)

Trait 3: Difficulty of self-control
Weakness of managing schedule

47: I begin to learn English as scheduled. (-5)
45: I make sure I keep up with what I plan to do in learning English. (-4)

Confusion by lack of concentration

44: During learning English, I often miss important points because I am
thinking of other things (rev.) (+1)

Giving-up posture without enjoyment
42: Even when learning English is dull and uninteresting, I manage to keep
working until I finish it. (-3)

Problem-solving capacity
37: When I cannot understand English well, I ask other people for help orsearch on the web. (+3)
31: When I become confused about English readings, I go back and try tofigure them out. (+3)
30: I ask others who are good at English to clarify concepts I do notunderstand well. (+2)

Responsibility of acquiring English
14: If I do not get enough English ability, it is because I did not try hardenough. (+4)
17: It is my own fault if I do not learn English. (+3)
13: If I try hard enough, then I will master English skills for sure. (+2)

How the learners conceive L2 self-study: Trait1
Not satisfied with justgetting good grades

Specific
selfefficacy

Generalself-efficacy

High value oflearning English• Self-efficacy is key to improve and sustain SRL (Pajares, 2008)
à General self-efficacy can be a trigger to start learning English
à Specific/ concrete self-efficacy may be helpful to establish the cycleof SRL

How the learners conceive L2 self-study: Trait 2
Train English ratherthan expand theknowledge

Thus,

Strategies forunderstanding
contents• SRL strategies for tests might be caused by learning background:
examination-oriented learning.
• Expanding meta-sociocultural interactive strategies can bring them
deep understanding of the content (Habok & Magyar, 2018)

How the learners conceive L2 self-study: Trait 3
Weakness ofmanaging schedule
Confusion by lack ofconcentration
Giving-up posture
without enjoyment

A sense of responsibilityof acquiring English
However,

Problem-solving
capacity• Making a plan for learning English and accomplishing it seemed tothe most difficult part of SRL in L2 self-studyà Goal-Setting Theory as instruction of SRL (Latham & Locke, 2007)

Future researchpCompare pre- and post-Q method
Capture the change on the viewpoints of SRL inter- and intra-personallypConduct the Q method with other/ multiple sources for collection of thestatements
pConduct a longitudinal experiment
Trace how these learners who showed high value of learning English,emphasis on cramming English, and difficulty of self-control change
their SRL attitudes over timeReferences• Habok, A. & Magyar, A. (2018). Validation of a Self-Regulated Foreign Language Learning Strategy Questionnaire throughmultidimensional modelling. Frontiers in Psychology, 9: 1388.
• Irie, K. (2014). Q methodology for post-social-turn research in SLA. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4(1), 13-32.
• Irie, K., & Ryan, S. (2014). Study abroad and the dynamics of change in learner L2 self-concept. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry(Eds.), Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning (pp. 343-366). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2007). New developments in and directions for goal-setting research. European Psychologist, 12(4), 290–300.
• Pajares, F. (2008). Motivational role of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivationand self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and application (pp. 111-139). NY: Routledge.
• Pemberton, R., & Cooker, L. (2012). Self-directed learning: Concepts, practice, and a novel research methodology. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, &M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning: Insights from research, theory, and practice (pp. 203-219). England: Palgrave
Macmillan.
• Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire(MSLQ). The Education Resources Information Center (ERIC).
• Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and Predictive Validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning
Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801-813.
• Schunk, D. H., & Greene, J. A. (2018). Historical, contemporary, and future perspectives on self-regulated learning and performance. In D.
H. Schunk, & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 1-15). NY: Routledge.
• Watt, S., & Stenner, P. (2005). Doing Q methodology: Theory, method and interpretation. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 67-91.
• 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: Academic Press.

Thank you for listening!
Akiko Fukuda
Graduate school of Intercultural Communication at Rikkyo University(akikof@rikkyo.ac.jp)