Cognitive structure and/or development	241

Evaluation

Pintrich’s framework draws extensively on leading-edge psychological research about SRL, a field in which he has a substantial reputation. He successfully synthesises the work of leading theorists, notably Boekaerts and Niemivirta (2000), Butler and Winne (1995), Corno (1993), Pintrich and De Groot (1990), Pintrich, Wolters and Baxter (2000), Pressley (1986), Schunk (1994), Schunk and Zimmerman (1994), Winne (1995) and Zimmerman (2000).

As a synthesis of current theorising, his framework differs from other leading theorists such as Boekaerts (1997) whose model is divided into cognitive and motivational self-regulation; and Zimmerman (2000) whose triadic model emphasises personal self-regulation (which involves monitoring and regulating one’s thoughts and feelings to aid performance), behavioural self-regulation (where one observes and modifies one’s performance), and environmental self-regulation (which involves gauging and altering one’s current environment). In addressing the comprehensiveness of his framework, Pintrich points out that not all academic learning falls within the four phases outlined, as there are many occasions when students learn implicitly or unintentionally, rather than in a focused, self-regulatory fashion. The phases are presented as an heuristic device to organise thinking and research on SRL. They can also be seen as an organising ‘plan-do-review’ principle for classifying the thinking skills involved in SRL.

It is also important to recognise that the four phases are not necessarily passed through in a linear sequence, and often phases may operate simultaneously. Indeed, Pintrich argues that recent research provides little evidence that monitoring (phase 2) and control (phase 3) are separate in people’s experiences. The appropriateness of the fourth column, context, might seem questionable to some, as in many conceptions, self-regulation refers only to aspects of the self that are being controlled or regulated. In line with Zimmerman (2000), however, Pintrich’s model is based upon a belief that one’s attempts to monitor and control the environment are an important aspect of SRL. Perhaps the most valuable part of Pintrich’s framework, for those with a good knowledge of the field, is his discussion of motivational factors

– an area where he is a leading theorist.

242 Frameworks for Thinking

Pintrich’s main focus is essentially academic: theory building and empirical research. His classificatory framework is a useful introduction to self-regulation and is helpful for those who wish to examine similarities and differences between different theoretical models. Pintrich also hopes that his formulation will draw attention to areas which are currently under-researched and may require further investigation. While there are likely to be important implications for practitioners, he tends to leave the detailed articulation of these to others. For practitioners, each of the various cells in the framework table may need to be fleshed out in greater detail through reference to other publications.

Summary: Pintrich

				Relevance for
					teachers and
Purpose and structure		Some key features			learning
Main purpose(s):		Terminology:		Intended audience:
•	to synthesise common	•	some familiarity with	•	academics
	features of several SRL		psychological terms is	•	educationists
	models in order to		assumed
	provide a means of
	examining learning and
	motivation in academic
	contexts
Domains addressed:		Presentation:		Contexts:
•	cognitive	•	the framework is	•	education settings
•	affective		outlined in an	•	Pintrich recognises
•	conative		academic book		that the model
•	context		chapter		reflects Western
		•	the tabular		values and
			presentation		perspectives and
			is helpful		may not apply in
					all cultures
Broad categories		Theory base:		Pedagogical stance:
	covered:	•	educational psychology
•	self-engagement	•	personal epistemology