Two Major Theories In Educational Psychology: Self-Regulation And Critical Thinking

In the preceding sections of this article, I outlined two major theories in educational psychology: self-regulation and critical thinking. Situating these two theoretical orientations within one framework, my conceptualization in this article addresses two fundamental issues: (i) that critical thinking, as a cognitive practice, helps in self-regulated learning, and (ii) the sub-processes involved in self-regulation assist in the development of critical thinking skill. The theoretical facets of both frameworks, as indicated previously, suggest that the sub-processes involved in self-regulation and critical thinking coexist in a dynamic system of change. In the advancement of this discussion, I adhere closely to existing literature and contend

Learners actively participate in the environment to construct meaning and to reorganize existing knowledge with new knowledge (Perkins, 1992). In this analysis, self-regulation provides a self-initiated action that enables learners to do the following: set goals, regulate one's own effort, to monitor and evaluate existing performance and engage in time management. It is an important feat, as reflected by the various writings in self-regulation (e.g., Corno, 1993, 2001; Graham, Harris, & Troia, 1998; Ley & Young, 2001; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1998), that educators encourage the teaching of self-regulatory skills (see Montalvo & Torres (2004) for detailed analysis; Martínez & De la Fuente, 2004; Villach & Llanos,

Unlike other areas of psychology (Baron, 2000; Sternberg, 2003; Watson & Glaser, 1980; West et al., 2008; Yanchar et al., 2008), critical thinking is emerging as a disciplinary practice in educational psychology. By all means, taking into consideration the long history and debate surrounding the meaning of critical thinking (Thayer-Bacon, 2000; Yanchar et al., 2008), I realize that no definition or paradigm is likely to be universally accepted or that it could capture the nuance that surrounds its complexity. As a separate disciplinary practice in educational psychology, critical thinking may include a number of key characteristics that I outlined previously. Indeed, from the approach that I have taken, there is evidence at present to confirm the complexity of critical thinking (e.g., Kember et al., 2000; Leung & Kember, 2003; Phan, 2007, 2009), and how this high order level of reflective thinking affects students' academic learning and development. The positive interrelatedness with other motivational variables also validates the potent role of critical thinking in the learning process. One critical facet of critical thinking that may be advanced further includes its intricate association to the strategies of self-regulation. Extrapolating the theoretical contentions and empirical evidence from these two lines of research