چكيده لاتين :
Background & Objectives: Academic buoyancy, academic achievement, and self–regulation are to some extent correlated with each other.
Self–regulation is a multi–dimensional concept, i.e., its aspects have concurrent inner and independent relations. Besides, it refers to cognitive, metacognitive, motivational, behavioral, and affective activities. Self–regulation learning strategies include overt approaches (controlling the
task situation & others in the task setting) and covert methods (meta–cognitive control, motivation control & emotion control). On this basis,
learning self–regulation strategies significantly impact eliminating or decreasing students’ numerable academic problems, such as academic
languish and poor academic achievement, which encompass numerous female students. Therefore, the current research aimed to investigate the
effects of self–regulation learning strategies training on academic buoyancy and academic achievement among female students with academic
buoyancy and academic achievement problems.
Methods: This was an experimental study with a pretest–posttest and a control group design. The research statistical population consisted of all
the second–grade female high school students in Kerman City, Iran, in the 2015–2016 academic year. The study participants were selected using
a multiphase cluster sampling method in the final forth cluster of a school, as well as a simple cluster sampling approach. Accordingly, among
all schools in the region one, 9 high schools were randomly recruited. Then, 4 classes were considered among them. The sample size was
estimated to range between 32 and 50 individuals using Cohen’s table. This number was confirmed by GPower software concerning the effect
size, the alpha 0.05, and the test power indices. Subsequently, 46 students with academic buoyancy and academic achievement problems were
identified. By simple random clustering method, the selected students were placed into two groups of experimental and control (n=23/group).
The Academic Buoyancy Scale (ABS) (Dehghanizadeh & Hosseinchari, 2012) and the Grade Point Average (GPA) of the first semester of the
students were considered as the screening tools (diagnosing academic problems) and as the pretest scales; the second semester GPA was
considered as the posttest measure. The inclusion criteria of the study were not using any medicine, not participating in any workshop
simultaneously or in the previous three months, the lack of any mental health disorders (according to the school counselor), acquiring low scores
in the ABS, presenting low academic achievement, and providing written informed consent forms of the participating parents and their children.
Furthermore, the study exclusion criteria included absence from even one training session, experiencing a sudden poor academic achievement
for any reason, initiating pharmacotherapy, beginning to participate in any instructional workshop or any other treatment, and unwillingness to
continue participation in the experiment for any reason. The experimental group received 8 sessions of training, each lasting two hours and two
times a week. The study instruction was based on Zimmerman and Risemberg’s model of instruction (1997), i.e., conducted by the researcher.
After the end of the instructional sessions, the posttest was administrated (reconducting the ABS) and the GPA was recorded for the experimental
and control groups. The obtained data were analyzed using Multivariable Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) in SPSS.
Results: The age of the individuals in the experimental and control groups (summed together or separated from each other) ranged from 15 to
17 years. The mean (SD) age of the study groups was 16.173(0.491) years; the experimental and control groups’ mean (SD) age scores were
16.043(0.638) and 16.043(0.562) years, respectively. The descriptive analysis data indicated an increase in the explored students’ academic
buoyancy and academic achievement in the posttest phase. In terms of inferential analysis, the ultimate findings suggested the significant
effectiveness of the self–regulation learning strategies training on students’ academic buoyancy (p˂0.001) and their academic achievement
(p˂0.001). Additionally, based on the effect size, the instruction–induced effectiveness (the effect of the independent variable) on the academic
buoyancy was approximately 60% (p˂0.001) with the test power of 1. Moreover, the later effect (the experimental effect) on academic
achievement was around 26% (p˂0.001) with the test power of 0.963.
Conclusion: The self–regulation learning strategies training was effective in enhancing female high school students’ academic buoyancy and
academic achievement; thus, through presenting these training strategies to students with academic buoyancy or academic achievement problems, it is possible to improve their academic conditions.
