Self Control Research

Running head: STRATEGIES OF SELF-CONTROL

Modeling Explicit Strategies of Self-Control

for 5th Grade Students With Behavioral Problems

Mark R. Anderson

The City College of New York

Table of Contents

Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Review of Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Abstract

This study explores the concept of self-control in its relation to both teacher and student reactions to

stressors in the classroom. By examining what strategies of self-control were effective in coping with

emotional and aggressive outbursts from students, the teacher hoped to better model and explicitly

teach these strategies to students in need of effective methods for coping with the acute and chronic

stressors in their academic, social, and emotional lives. This study was conducted over a period of two

months in a high poverty 5th grade 12:1:1 classroom with students who demonstrated challenging

behaviors. Data was collected through teacher self-assessment, journaling, and observations of student

behavior in conjunction with student measures of self-assessment and self-monitoring. Results indicate

that even a tentative focus on self-control can have significant impact on a teacher's self-awareness and

work to prevent escalation of conflicts with students while building positive and therapeutic

relationships in the classroom. Further research will need to be conducted to better determine what

specific strategies are most effective and how those strategies can most effectively be taught.

STRATEGIES OF SELF-CONTROL 1

Rationale

Introduction

As a novitiate teacher of special education in a 5th grade self-contained classroom, I have found

that the challenges that face an educator can often lie beyond knowledge, management, and delivery of

strictly academic content. My students struggle primarily with the capability to effectively manage

their responses to stressors, whether academic or social or otherwise. They act out in ways that can

seem to go beyond the demands or challenge of the academic task before them. In this sense, my

students often require immediate, empathetic, and highly responsive forms of contextual therapy, and I

am not always able to provide it to them, both due to the fact that I am not a trained counselor and

because I have other students with sometimes just as urgent needs to attend to. In fact, in response to

student outbursts and acting out behavior, I have found myself engaging in conflicts with students and

yelling or otherwise acting aggressively, often out of frustration. Though such responses can in certain

circumstances be effective in regaining control of the classroom as a whole, they generally drain me of

energy and tend to typically result in greater instances of negative student behaviors.

The very fact that I am sometimes unable to control my own emotions in response to student

aggression, defiance, and other acting out behaviors parallels the inability of my own students to

control and regulate their emotions in response to stressors. In reflecting on this critical need for self-

control—both for myself and for my students—I began to consider what strategies and methods of self-

control could be considered effective in an active application in a classroom. If I could determine what

explicit measures were effective in my own personal use, I could then model and provide direct

instruction on their use to my students.


Problem Statement

The issue of self-control in a classroom—especially in that of a classroom with students that

evidence frequent emotional and behavioral issues—could be considered of paramount importance to

both the student and the teacher. If a student cannot control their impulses or emotional responses to

stressors, then they are unlikely to perform well academically nor cultivate positive relationships with

adults and peers. If a teacher cannot control their emotional responses to student behaviors, then it is

unlikely that they will be able to have much academic impact on their students nor establish effective

working relationships with their students. It could also be argued that a lack of self-control could be

construed as one of the primary obstacles in the path of life-long learning and development in the lives

of students diagnosed with learning disabilities and raised in areas of high poverty. If they cannot learn

to control and regulate their responses to the stressors in their lives, then they unlikely to be sustainably

successful in many endeavors, whether academic or otherwise.

Gaining clarity and insight on effective strategies of self-control and regulation of emotions,

therefore, could potentially have both short- and long-term impact on teacher effectiveness and on

student academic gain, especially for students with frequent behavioral problems.

Problem Statement Question

What strategies of self-control can I apply in order to explicitly model and teach these methods

to 5th grade students with behavioral problems?


Review of Literature

The concept of self-control, or self-regulation, is researched and applied in a number of

different fields, such as criminology, political science, cognitive science, psychology, sports, education,

and management. The specific focus of this literature review will be to examine the research as it can

be utilized and conjoined in leadership, therapeutic, and educational applications. Surprisingly—given

the extent to which self-regulation has been studied in the last thirty years—successful strategies

building self-control capacity in an individual in order to model and teach them have not been well

fleshed out, nor have many studies attempted to unify findings across fields. The purpose of this

literature review will be to survey the research on self-control across different fields, attempt to find a

synthesis in suggested methods in utilizing self-control, and to elucidate what strategies can be used in

a classroom by a teacher and leader to most effectively teach and guide troubled adolescents towards

building self-regulatory capacity.

The Concept of Self-Control

Self-regulation has been said to be one of the most defining traits of human nature (Baumeister,

Gailliot, DeWall, & Oaten, 2006). It is a process, as explicated by Muraven and Baumeister (2000), by

which a human personality exerts control over its own impulses in order to attain long term interests (as

cited in Barkley, 1997; Kanfer & Karoly, 1972; Mischel, 1996). Another function of self-regulation, or

self-control (these terms will be used interchangeably in this review), is to suppress individual

differences in order to conform or adapt to social norms (Hofmann, Friese, & Strack, 2009). This

function of self-control was also otherwise worded by Tangney, Baumeister, and Boone (2004) as the

“capacity to change and adapt the self so as to produce a better, more optimal fit between self and

world” (p. 275, as cited in Rothbaum et al., 1982).

Self-control is a broad, general regulatory concept which includes regulatory tasks such as


dieting, managing finances, doing homework, refraining from drug or alcohol use, fulfilling promises,

monitoring sexual behavior, and so on (Hofman et al., 2009; Tangney et al., 2004; Tice, & Bratslavsky,

2000). Self-control could thus be viewed as a means of resisting temptation or refraining from

indulgence in hedonistic impulses (Hofman et al., 2009). In fact, Hofman, Friese, and Strack, before

defining self-control, first found it fruitful to extensively define the word “impulse” (p. 2). Inherent in

self-control, therefore, is the concept of “delayed gratification.” As Mansfield, Pinto, Parente, and

Wortman (2009) explained, delayed gratification can lead to achievement of future goals and increased

rewards (p. 505). Boekaerts and Corno (2005) also pointed out that there really is no simple and

straightforward definition of the construct of self-regulation, for its system of functions are complex,

bridging across several different fields of psychological research, each domain with its own paradigms

and content (p. 200).

According to Muraven and Baumeister (2000), self-control can be delineated between

automatic and controlled processes of the personality (as cited in Bargh, 1994; Hasher & Zacks, 1979;

Shiffrin & Schneider, 1977). As might be expected from this distinction, processes such as self-

regulation require a great more deal of effort (Baumeister, et al., 2006 ; Muraven et al., 2000). In fact,

research has demonstrated that self-control is a consumable resource, like a muscle, and when

overused, will lead to a state of depletion termed “ego depletion” (Baumeister et al., 2006; Hofman et

al., 2009). Significantly, just as a muscle can be built up through training, so too can the broad

resources utilized in self-control be built up through practice (Baumeister et al., 2006; Mansfield, Pinto,

Parente, and Wortman, 2009). This is encouraging most especially to educator and therapist attempts to

build and reinforce self-control capacity.

The benefits of self-control are extensive: a greater capacity for self-control leads to higher

grade point averages, fewer reports of psychopathology, higher self-esteem, less binge eating and

alcohol abuse, better relationships and interpersonal skills, and more optimal emotional responses (p.


271, Tangney et al., 2004). In fact, possessing higher levels of self-control acts as a better predictor of

academic success than IQ tests (p. 111, Sodian & Frith, 2008). Furthermore, developing higher levels

of self-control have been demonstrated to consistently decrease aggressive and delinquent behavior in

early adolescent boys and girls (de Kemp et al., 2009). As presented by Graziano, Reavis, Keane, and

Calkins (2007), children with greater capacity for emotion regulation have been found to display higher

levels of social competence, better social skills, and greater popularity among their peers (p. 4, as cited

in Dunn & Brown, 1994; Eisenberg et al., 1993, 1996, 1997; Fabes et al., 1999; Graziano, Keane, &

Calkins, 2007). Similarly, Graziano et al. present the converse of that concept: students with poor

emotion regulation capabilities were more likely to have poor interpersonal skills and greater

behavioral problems such as defiance, hyperactivity, and fighting (p.4, as cited in Dunn & Brown,

1994; Rydell, Berlin, & Bohlin, 2003). It has been theorized that one could have too much self-control,

leading to obsession and compulsion; however, research has not found any negative correlation with

higher levels of self-control (Tangney et al., 2004).

Tice and Bratslavsky (2000) found it important to distinguish emotion regulation from other

regulatory tasks such as refraining from hedonistic impulses. According to their research, emotion

regulation can be differentiated as a special form of self-regulation in that failure to regulate emotions

will lead to failure in all other attempts at self-control (Tice, & Bratslavsky, 2000). Furthermore, Tice

and Bratlavsky found that spending energy to focus on the regulation of moods and feelings can lead to

a failure of self-control in other areas.

According to Graziano, Reavis, Keane, and Calkins (2007), emotion regulation is a facilitator of

adaptive functioning (as cited in Garber & Dodge, 1991; Keenan & Shaw, 2003). Adaptive functioning

in children includes academic functioning as a “significant component” (p. 2, Graziano et al., 2007);

however, a lack of capacity to regulate emotion can “physiologically inhibit a child's use of higher

order cognitive processes (e.g., working memory, attention, and planning) in the classroom” (p.3, as


cited in Blair, 2002). Emotion regulation has also been shown to aid performance on cognitive tasks in

adults (p. 2, Graziano et al.)

Self-control is therefore a regulatory capability wielded by an individual personality that allows

a person to gain significant long-term rewards while also adapting to larger society. This regulatory

capacity can be diminished through over-use, leading to ego depletion, but can also be strengthened

deliberately, like muscles. One of the core components of self-control lies in emotion regulation, as

failure in this area of self-control will lead to failure in all other areas. With this introduction to the

concepts of self-regulation, the next section of review will focus on self-control more specifically in the

context of education and self-regulated learning. Also, self-control and its relation to coping will be

examined.

Self-Regulated Learning

According to Montalvo and Torres (2004), one of the primary goals of education is for students

to learn to become their own teachers, which therefore includes the movement from teaching to self-

reflective practice (p. 2, as cited in Schunk & Zimmerman, 1998). This independent development in

learning is known as self-regulated learning. What characterizes self-regulating students is their active

participation in learning from a metacognitive, motivational, and behavioral point of view (as cited in

Zimmerman, 2001, 2002). Montalvo and Torres argue that the capability to develop self-regulated

learning requires both the motivation, or will, to achieve, and knowledge of the skills required (p. 2, as

cited in Blumenfeld & Marx, 1997; McCombs & Marzano, 1990).

According to Sodian and Frith (2008), cognitive control is based on self-knowledge (p. 111).

The emergence of this self-knowledge arises from the ability to recognize one's own and other's mental

states (as cited in Carlson, Moses, & Breton, 2002; Perner & Lang, 1999). This ability has also been

found to be a key to success in teaching and learning: mind reading is important in school for social


competence and for inferring the teachers' intentions in classroom discourse (as cited in Jenkins &

Astington, 2007; Davis-Unger & Carlson, 2008). Research in the area of cognitive development calls

the “development of the intuitive ability to attribute mental states to oneself and others” theory of mind

(p. 112, Sodian & Frith, 2008). Theory of mind has been furthermore correlated with metacognition,

which is a field that has been more heavily researched in its implications for school-based learning (p.

112, Sodian & Frith, 2008). For example, Butler (2003) stresses that task interpretation (a

metacognitive capability) is a critical aspect of student self-regulation, since all further learning

activities are based on a student's perception of what they are trying to achieve (p. 5, as cited in Butler

& Winne, 1995). Butler elaborates on this by stating that based on these perceptions, learners then can

select, adapt, or even invent strategies to achieve their objectives (p. 5).

According to Stoeger and Ziegler (2008), there is a great lack of evaluated classroom

implementations of self-regulatory learning (p. 207, as cited in Boekaerts et al., 2000; Schunk and

Zimmerman, 2003). However, Stoeger and Ziegler's research demonstrate that self-regulated learning

techniques can be implemented effectively in classroom instruction and will significantly increase self-

regulatory skills, self-efficacy, and motivation in students.

One criticism of self-regulated learning perspectives put forth by Boekaerts and Corno (2005) is

that the scope of self-regulated learning research is narrowed solely to learning and achievement goals,

while ignoring students who may not be mindfully engaged in learning and their divergent goals, such

as “belonging, social support, safety, entertainment, and self-determination goals” (p. 202). Boekaerts

and Corno state that these goals—which can be viewed as adaptive mechanisms of students in search

of well-being—can be employed by students as a coping strategy in response to home and school-

related stressors (p. 204). In comparison to other students, those who have exceptional learning needs

due to learning disabilities are faced with chronic internal and external stressors, and thus judge

classroom situations primarily through the lens of well-being; emotions tend to overwhelm learning


goals and activities as students weigh their coping potential against any potential threats to their well

being (p. 204-205, as cited in Frijda & Mesquita, 1995). Similar to students with learning disabilities,

students living in poverty are also subject to frequent acute and chronic stressors in their daily lives

(Buckner, Mezzacappa, & Beardslee, 2009).

The mechanisms involved in emotion regulation have been found to correlate extensively with

those used in coping (Martin & Dahlen, 2005). Perhaps this is because coping could be viewed as

adaptive behavior, much as one of the definitions reviewed earlier explicated self-control as the

adaptation of the individual to social norms or standards (Hofmann, Friese, & Strack, 2009; Tangney,

Baumeister, and Boone, 2008). Furthermore, as quoted by Eisenberg, Valiente, & Sulik (2009), “coping

is a subset of broader self-regulatory processes (as cited in Compas, Conner, Saltzman, Thomsen, &

Wadsworth, 2001). As presented by Martin and Dahlen, there can be two forms of coping: problem-

focused coping and emotion-focused coping (p. 1250, as cited in Lazarus, 1993). Emotional responses

to stressful events can be regulated via the use of cognitive coping strategies (as cited in Folkman &

Moskowitz, 2004; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Ridder & Schreurs, 2001). In this sense, coping is most

strongly correlated with emotion-related self-regulation (p. 76, Eisenberg, Valiente, & Sulik, 2009).

In coping with stressors, Buckner et al. (2009) explain that self-regulation is the main

mechanism behind a proactive--or problem-focused—approach. Furthermore, self-regulation also lies

behind reactive—or emotion-focused—coping with stressors after they have occurred. Therefore,

reactive, emotion-focused coping refers to the management of negative emotions, while proactive,

problem-focused coping refers to goal-directed efforts to resolve stressful circumstances (p. 20, as cited

in Eisenberg, Fabes, & Guthrie, 1997).

Self-regulated learning, therefore, refers to the metacognitive capability of a student to manage

their own learning process. Fundamental to self-regulated learning is knowledge of self, which arises

from theory of mind. Also, self-regulated learning requires motivation on the part of the learner and


knowledge of metacognitive skills and strategies. Current self-regulated learning perspectives do not

fully account for divergent objectives in a classroom, which can be better understood as adaptive

coping mechanisms. Finally, coping mechanisms--which rely heavily on emotion regulation--can be

portrayed as either proactive (positive emotion prevalent and problem focused) or reactive (negative

emotion prevalent and emotion focused) depending on their relation to the event of stress. In the next

section of review, self-control will be reviewed from the perspective of therapy, followed by a review

of self-control from the perspective of leadership.

Self-Control in Therapy

Certain therapies seek to strengthen an individual's capacity for self-regulation. Specifically,

Life Space Crisis Intervention, Emotionally-Focused Therapy, and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy will

be examined in this context.

An extremely successful model of therapy used in educational environments and designed to

support and strengthen the self-regulatory capacity of children in stress is called Life Space Crisis

Intervention (LSCI). As demonstrated by Dawson (2003), LSCI has been demonstrated to be highly

effective in schools serving students with emotional disturbance. In another study by Forthun,

McCombie, and Payne (2009), LSCI was furthermore demonstrated to be effective not only with

special education students, but with all students in a particular school district. Significantly, LSCI, as

presented by Long, Wood, and Fescer (2001), defines successful self-regulatory capacities in children

as emerging from “understanding people and events in their environment, motivation to change

unpleasant conditions, and trust in adults” (p. 3, italics in original). LSCI focuses on the immediate

experience and context (termed “life space”) in which a crisis or conflict has occurred (p. 4).

Another model of therapy—this one in a clinical setting—termed Emotionally Focused Therapy

(EFT), as described by Efron and Bradley (2007), similarly focuses on the present in order to initiate


change in behavior (p. 4). Akin to LSCI's focus on understanding people and events in context and

building trust between adults and children, EFT focuses on the creation of safe and secure bonding in

relationships; this bond allows individuals to develop self-regulation of their emotions (p. 3). EFT's

success has been mainly noted in the areas of marital and family therapy (Johnson, Hunsley,

Greenberg, & Schindler. 2006); however, its successes have not yet been transferred into educational or

other non-clinical settings.

The relation between cognition and emotion regulation is explored in a therapeutic manner in a

clinical setting through cognitive-behavioral therapy (Butler, Chapman, Forman, & Beck, 2006).

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has been demonstrated to be highly effective in treating adult and

adolescent depression, anxiety disorder, panic disorder, social phobia, and childhood depressive and

anxiety disorders (p. 28, Butler et al., 2006). According to Butler et al., the defining feature of CBT is

the idea that symptoms and dysfunctional behaviors are generally cognitively mediated; therefore,

improvement will be made by modifying dysfunctional thinking and beliefs (as cited in Dobson &

Dozois, 2001). In fact, the positivist notion that new ways of thinking, behaving, and feeling are even

possible is a break from many previous psychotherapy approaches (p. 243, Jackson, Nissenson, &

Cloitre, 2006). Some CBT interventions have been found to transfer effectively into non-clinical

settings and will be reviewed later in the section on strategies of teaching self-control.

In CBT, the modification and expansion of cognition in order to develop greater self-regulation

capacity also parallels the long-term outcomes achieved through the non-clinical verbal therapy of

LSCI (Long, et al., 2001). Through the process of LSCI, students gain insight and understanding into

their relationships with others and develop independent problem-solving skills (p. 11). Through

neuroimaging, research has demonstrated that the metacognition required in emotional self-regulation

selectively alters the way the brain processes and reacts to emotional stimuli (p. 231, Beauregard,

2007). This research demonstrating the plasticity of neural networks supports the positivist hypothesis


behind therapies (and instruction) that attempt to alter and transform ways of thinking and behaving.

Life Space Crisis Intervention also offers a key insight into the importance of self-awareness in

working with troubled students:

Understanding and self-control is required to disconnect from the struggle, putting aside

personal emotions that arise in reaction to a student's behavior. Again, the expression

“dispassionate compassion” is a useful way to think about emotional reactions during the

Conflict Cycle. Reject the natural instinct to win out over the student; it is not necessary.

Through careful self-monitoring, you can stop your own potentially destructive involvement in

the Conflict Cycle. By recognizing the existence of your own counteraggressive feelings, you

can exercise choice and control over your own behavior, and not allow yourself to be drawn

into the Conflict Cycle (p. 35)

Selected therapies, therefore, can seek to support and strengthen self-regulation in individuals

through the building of cognitive and emotional capacities. Cognitive and emotional capacities in

therapy are built both through the fostering of trust and understanding in relationships, as well as

through modification of dysfunctional thought patterns. The success of LSCI and EFT, in particular,

seem dependent on the use of therapy within the present context of stress or dysfunction. It is

surprising, given LSCI's effectiveness in particular, that strategies implemented in these therapies have

not been more explicitly tied in with self-regulation research in other contexts. The next section of

review will focus on self-control in the context of leadership.

Self-Control in Leadership

The role of self-control and self-awareness in management and leadership contexts is widely

researched. Given the extensiveness of this research, it is startling that not much of it has been

correlated with self-regulation studies in education, especially given the strong emphasis on motivation


in self-regulated learning. In public and private sector leadership research, a critical area of focus is on

understanding the mechanisms of motivation and increasing performance. This section of review will

begin with literature on transformational leadership, then correlate that with a review of emotional

intelligence.

One of the most extensively researched forms of leadership in the last twenty years is known as

transformational leadership (Barbuto, & Burbach, 2006). There are four dimensions to

transformational leadership: charisma, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and

individualized consideration (p. 755, Judge, & Piccolo, 2004; p. 52, Barbuto et al., 2006). As noted by

Barbuto et al., the first dimension, charisma, was later changed to idealized influence (as cited in

Antokani, Avolio, & Sivasubramaniam, 2003). Leaders who exhibit these four positive dimensions of

leadership have been demonstrated to achieve greater employee performance, effort, satisfaction and

organizational effectiveness (as cited in Lowe, Kroek, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996). According to

Ashkanasy and Tse (2000), one of the key components of transformational leadership is emotional

control: the control of self and influence over others' emotions (p. 223).

This correlation of transformational leadership with emotion regulation has led to the pairing of

transformational leadership with the concept of emotional intelligence (Barbuto et al., 2006; Ashkanasy

et al., 2000). Emotional intelligence, as explicated by Kark and van Dijik (2007), consists of five

qualities: empathetic response, mood regulation, interpersonal skill, internal motivation, and self

awareness (as cited in Carson, Carson, & Birkenmeirer (2000). Ashkanasy and Tse (2000) also

explained emotional intelligence as the ability to appraise and express emotions, the regulation of

emotion, and the ability to utilize emotion in the right manner (p. 232, as cited in Salovey and Mayer,

1990). As presented by Barbuto and Burbach (2006), emotional intelligence has been demonstrated to

be a strong component of effective leadership (as cited in Higgs & Aitken, 2003; Sosik & Megerian,

1999). And as summarized by Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, and Walumbwa (2005), emotional self-


awareness is a critical part of emotional intelligence (as cited in Avolio, 2003; Caruso, Mayer, &

Salovey, 2001; George, 2000).

Integral to both transformational leadership and emotional intelligence is the concept of self-

control and self-awareness (Barbuto et al., 2006; Ashkanasy et al., 2000). Another term for self-

awareness is “self-concept clarity”. Individuals with higher levels of self-concept clarity have been

demonstrated to have greater problem solving skills in the event of social conflicts (Bechtoldt, Dreu,

Nijstad, & Zapf, 2010). In leadership, this capability to regulate and control oneself is what gives a

leader the capability to effectively influence and regulate others (van Knippenberg, van Knippenberg,

de Cremerc, & Hogg, 2005; Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, & Walumbwa, 2005).

Gardner et al. view self-awareness as fundamentally linked to self-reflection (p. 347).

Furthermore, the researchers argue that self-regulation is identified by several distinguishing features:

internalized regulation, balanced processing of information, “authentic” behavior (actions guided by

the leader's “true self”), and transparency in relations with others (p. 347). As van Knippenberg et al.

(2005) propose, effective leadership can only be measured by the leader's effect on followers (p. 826).

Kark and van Dijik (2007) point out that leaders exert their effects by engaging different aspects of

their followers' self-concept (as cited in Kark & Shamir, 2002; Lord & Brown, 2004; van Knippenberg

& Hogg, 2003). Van Knippenberg et al. (2005) present self-concept as something that can be “highly

dynamic” and dependent on the specific context of a situation (p. 827). The self could therefore be

viewed as a “collection of modular processing structures elicited in different contexts or situations that

have specific cognitive, affective, and behavioral consequences” (as cited in Lord et al., 1999).

Effective leaders, therefore, are capable of influencing selected aspects of self-concept in their

followers that can motivate them and increase their self-regulatory capacity.

In a paper produced on leadership development, OPP, ltd. (2009) presents two methods of

achieving insight into self-awareness: personality assessments and multisource feedback systems


(“360-degree feedback”) (p. 2). By taking a personality assessment, a leader can develop a better

understanding of their personality style as well as compare themselves with benchmarks in the form of

a score; by obtaining feedback from multiple perspectives, a leader can then compare this multisource

feedback with their personality assessment in order to gain credible insight into their strengths and

weaknesses (p. 2).

This section of review has focused on the presentation of self-regulation within the context of

leadership research. This research—which bridges across transformational leadership, emotional

intelligence, and authentic leadership theories—demonstrates that higher self-control within a leader

results not only in greater effectiveness as a leader, but in concurrent development of self-awareness

and self-control capacities in followers. The following section will focus on individual strategies of

strengthening and maintaining self-control.

Strategies of Self-Control

Teaching, as Sutton, Mudrey-Camino, and Sutton (2009) put it, is “an emotional endeavor” (p.

130). As such, teachers find that they must regulate their emotions in order to achieve their goals (as

cited in Sutton, 2004). Using a relational survey method, Polat and Ulusoy-Oztan (2009) correlated 4th

and 5th grade students' emotional intelligence levels with that of their teachers and discovered that a

teacher's level of emotional intelligence predicted that of their students. Therefore, development of a

teacher's emotional intelligence levels will directly affect the development of their students' emotional

intelligence (p. 8-9), a finding that correlates with research on emotional intelligence in leadership.

Sutton et al. (2009) also reported that elementary and secondary school student accounts of a teacher's

use of aggressive techniques, such as yelling, were related to higher levels of student disruption and

misbehavior (as cited in Lewis, 2001).

Some strategies of reactive—or response-driven—emotion regulation used by veteran teachers,


as presented by Sutton et al. (2009), can be modification of cognitive processes (such as stopping and

thinking), regulation of action tendencies (such as controlling facial expressions or resisting movement

towards the source of anger), and ”down-regulation” (suppressing or controlling) of negative emotions

(p. 131-132). Response strategies can be behavioral, such as moving away from students, deep

breathing, and controlling facial expressions; or cognitive strategy based, such as self-talk (p. 134).

Self-talk is also a cognitive strategy employed in sports psychology and used to alleviate stress and

suppress negative emotions. Wadey and Hanton (2008) define self-talk as positive statements about

personal accomplishments, positive verbalizations about training, and other positive verbal

affirmations, which can be either overt or covert (p. 369).

Another strategy used by athletes that is generally employed only in “potentially catastrophic

situations” is that of relaxation, such as listening to calm music, taking deep and long breaths,

stretching, or progressive muscle relaxation. (p. 370-371). These are strategies that could also be

effectively employed by a teacher or student under stress.

Van Eekelen, Boshuizen, and Vermunt (2005) present eight proactive skills important to self-

regulation processes: 1) setting specific proximal goals for oneself; 2) adopting powerful strategies for

attaining these goals; 3) monitoring one’s performance; 4) restructuring one’s learning environment to

make it compatible with one’s goals; 5) managing one’s time e ectively; 6) self-evaluating one’sff

methods; 7) attributing results to causation; and 8) adapting future methods (p. 451, as cited in

Zimmerman, 2002).

A social-cognitive approach to self-regulated learning is understood as an interaction among

personal (cognitive, motivational, and biological), behavioral, and environmental/contextual processes

(p. 208, Stoeger & Ziegler, 2008; p. 4, Montalvo & Torres, 2004). As presented by Montalvo and

Torres (2004) in addition to Stoeger and Ziegler (2008), these processes occur within a cycle of four

phases, which can be seen as a summation of the eight skills set out by van Eekelen et al.: 1) planning


and goal setting; 2) self-monitoring and self-evaluation; 3) control or strategy implementation; and 4)

outcome evaluation and reflection (as cited in Pintrich, 2000; Zimmerman et al., 1996). The strategy

implementation phase of the self-regulated learning cycle is ensured by self-control processes and self-

observation processes. As explicated by Stoeger and Ziegler (2008), self-control processes include

self-instruction, imagery, and attention focusing; while self-observation processes consist in self-

recording and self-experimentation (p.209).

Goal-setting and imagery are also strategies used by athletes prior to competition. Performance

and process goals increase an athletes' perceived control of anxiety and helps them to develop focus on

processes, realistic goals, and key parts of skill execution (p. 367, Wade & Hanton). In their use of

mental imagery, athletes use images of previous successful performances, positive images of

forthcoming scenarios, images of correct technique, and images of previous perfect starts. (p. 368,

Wade & Hanton). A cognitive-behavioral technique called process simulation has also been

demonstrated to be effective in controlling focus in a study with college students. Using process

simulation, a student imagines a simulation of themselves accomplishing a task (p. 214, Boekarts &

Corno).

Gerhardt (2007) designed a set of four tutorials based on stages of self-management: 1) self-

assessment, 2) goal-setting based on the S.M.A.R.T. model; 3) self-monitoring, which includes

components of time-management tool use (such as calendars and planners), and environment change

based on student learning preference (noisy or quiet); and 4) self-regulation, in which step students

self-evaluated their progress towards their goals (p. 12-13). Gerhardt coupled these tutorials both with

on-line individualized components and in-class reinforcement.

Other preventive strategies used by teachers are the modification of situations and self-

reflection (Sutton et al.). Richardson and Schupe (2006), in a presentation on the importance of teacher

self-awareness in working with students with emotional and behavioral disorders, ask five key


questions that can help a teacher to cultivate self-awareness:

1) Am I taking proactive steps to defuse my own “emotional triggers”? 2) Am I paying attention

to what I need to pay attention to?; 3) Am I using effective strategies to reduce burnout and

nurture my own mental health?; 4) Am I using an appropriate sense of humor to build

relationships, diffuse conflict, engage learners, and manage my own stress?; and 5) Do I

regularly acknowledge significant ways I (and others) are making a difference in the lives of

students? (p. 9-12)

Though these questions do not specifically address the issue of self-control, Gardner et al. (p.

347, 2005) and Sodian and Frith (p. 112, as cited in Marcovitch, Jacques, Boseovski, & Zelazo) argued

that capacity for self-control can be built through self-reflection. Furthermore, as Richardson and

Schupe explain, “awareness of our primary emotional triggers improves our chances of making rational

decisions based on conscious choice, rather than unconscious emotional conditioning” (p. 9). Finally,

as Sodian and Frith explain, “self-reflection transforms the way in which learning occurs” (p. 112,

2008).

Though explicit skills and steps in self-regulation have been articulated, research has not yet

demonstrated what strategies are most effective in individual moderation of emotion and behavior, nor

created a solid model that these strategies could operate by. Research in this area in sports and

educational contexts are heavily qualitative and rely mostly on survey and interview use. Furthermore,

most research has not been explicit on the delineations between reactive and preventive strategies of

self-control. In the final section of review, strategies for teaching self-control will be reviewed.

Strategies for Teaching Self-Control

Schunk (2005), in comments on a study by Perels, Gurtler, and Schmitz, states that in order to

be effective, self-regulation strategies should be embedded in content instruction (p. 175). Also, Schunk


points out that the promising results of the study demonstrated that “benefits in problem-solving and

self-regulation can be derived and maintained from relatively short interventions” (p. 175).

In a review of self-regulation concepts that can be applied to offender groups, Ross (2008),

introduces five target areas where treatment programs can benefit from research on self-regulation: 1)

improving executive functions (such as attention focusing); 2) improving effortful control (such as

exercises that improve delay of gratification skills); 3) teaching behavior change skills (specifically,

teaching and enhancing implementation intentions); 4) building self-regulatory resources; and 5)

improving non-conscious self-regulation (p. 74-76). For improving effortful control, Ross suggests

some high interest exercises such as cognitive teasers and attention and memory focused tasks such as

used in cognitive psychology and commercial games, in addition to cooperation enhancing tasks used

in social psychology (p. 75, Ross, 2008).

As Mitchell, Woloshyn, and Elliott (2003) point out, one commonly used teaching strategy that

has been especially demonstrated as effective (especially in reading and writing instruction) is explicit

teaching (p. 24, as cited in Butyniec-Thomas & Woloshyn, 1997; Gallagher & Woloshyn, 1999; Harris

& Graham, 1992; Montalvo and Torres, 2004; Pressley et al., 1992; Woloshyn & Elliott, 1998).

Through their research, Mitchell et al. (2003) furthermore demonstrated that explicit teaching can be

coupled effectively with cooperative learning; a study with 4th and 5th grade students found that explicit

teaching promoted positive attitudes towards cooperative learning and enhanced academic performance

(p. 34). Surprisingly, however, few teachers utilize explicit teaching techniques across curriculum,

which Mitchell et al. suggested may be due to the difficulty in understanding explicit teaching, as well

as the time-consumption involved in implementation (p. 35, Pressley, Goodchild, Fleet, Zajchowski &

Evans, 1989; Woloshyn, Elliott, & Riordon, 1998). Montalvo and Torres argue that in the 1970s,

explicit teaching was more heavily emphasized, whereas more current instructional models focus on

self-reflective practice and scaffolding. (p. 18, as cited in Paris & Paris, 2001).


Interestingly, research by Sun, Slusarz, and Terry (2005) suggests that there may be a

synergistic process between implicit and explicit learning, and that a bottom up approach in teaching

which introduces learning implicitly and then builds upon it explicitly may be more effective.

Modeling by the teacher as an introduction to a skill could be viewed as an implicit teaching strategy

until it is made explicit through instruction. This possible synergistic affect of modeling remains to be

explored by future research.

Montalvo and Torres state that modeling is one of the most recommended procedures for

teaching self-regulation (p. 17, as cited in Graham, Harris, & Troia, 1998; Schunk & Zimmerman,

1998, 2003). Also, one of the primary mechanisms in which a leader effectively influences the

development of followers is through positive modeling (p. 358, Gardner et al). More fundamentally,

Gardner et al. argue that positive modeling presents a key role in the formation of authentic

relationships between leaders and followers (as cited in Luthans & Avolio, 2003). By modeling self-

awareness and self-regulation, leaders encourage their followers to “likewise embark on a process of

self-discovery” (p. 359, Gardner et al.). This process of self-discovery has thus been transferred from

leader modeling of self-awareness and self-regulation capability, resulting in greater follower capability

in similar areas (Kark, & van Dijik, 2007). Tekleab, Sims, Yun, Teshuk, and Cox (2008) furthermore

discovered that the self-awareness of transformational leaders is not only related to leader effectiveness

and followers' satisfaction, but that the self-awareness of empowering leaders is related to followers'

self-leadership.

As Hattie and Timperly (2007) present in their review of meta-analyses, feedback can be a

powerful instructional tool (p. 82-83). However, not all feedback is demonstrated to be effective.

Hattie and Timperly therefore provide a model of effective feedback, which identifies three major

feedback questions: “Where am I going? How am I going? and Where to next?” Their feedback model

also presents four levels of feedback: the task, the processing, the regulatory, and the self. Feedback at


the level of the self, such as personal praise, has been demonstrated to be ineffective (p. 96-97).

Feedback that attends to self-regulation can be powerful “to the degree it leads to further

engagement. . . enhanced self-efficacy, and to attributions that the feedback is deserved and earned” (p.

102).

Nicoli and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) also present seven principles which should be considered in

feedback that aims to build self-regulatory capacity in students; such feedback should 1) clarify what

good performance is, 2) facilitate self-assessment, 3) deliver high quality feedback information, 4)

encourage teacher and peer dialogue, 5) encourage positive motivation and self-esteem, 6) provide

opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance, and 7) use feedback to

improve teaching.

According to Montalvo and Torres, practice using self-regulation strategies, first guided and

later independent, and gathering feedback from others regarding strategy effectiveness have been

demonstrated to improve student learning and motivation. These are essential components of many

instructional programs, such as scaffolding and reciprocal teaching (p. 17, as cited in Valle, Gonzalez,

Cabanach, Vieiro, & Suarez, 1998). Scaffolding operates by fading support for a student over time (p.

18, as cited in Graham et al., 1998). Reciprocal teaching is when a teacher models a strategy and then

students take over the process and critique each other (Boekaerts & Corno, as cited in Palincar and

Brown, 1984). Results from research show positive gains on skill learning from this strategy (p. 217,

Boekaerts & Corno).

According to Boekaerts and Corno, sociocultural theory encourages self-regulation in a subject-

specific context (p. 213). In other words, sociocultural programs recognize that every teaching act is

situated in a particular context, affecting to some extent what is taught. This awareness of environment

correlates with LSCI and EFT therapy in their focus on present and situational context of stress. As

noted by Montalvo and Torres, one effective strategy in teaching self-regulation can be to help students


create and structure favorable learning environments aimed at avoiding internal and environmental

distractions (p. 20, as cited in Ley & Young, 2001). According to Boekarts and Corno, modifying the

classroom environment has demonstrated potential in building self-control in students, if those

modifications attempt to increase student motivation to learn and decrease motivation to hide

weaknesses or outperform others (p. 216, based on Ames' 1990 TARGET program).

Research has demonstrated that collaborative learning in classrooms also can develop self-

regulated learning skills as a result of peer modeling and discussion (p. 220). This collaborative

learning does not have to be confined to a classroom, however. Based on the idea of “powerful learning

environments” developed by Design-Based Research Collective (2003), schools can develop self-

regulatory capacity at a school-wide level through fostering learning communities (p. 220).

According to Menzies, Lane, and Lee (2009), self-monitoring, self-evaluation, self-instruction,

goal setting, and strategy instruction are metacognitive skills that have been demonstrated to minimize

maladaptive behaviors and increase desirable social and academic behaviors (p. 27, as cited in Mooney,

Ryan, Uhing, Reid, & Epstein, 2005). Focusing specifically on self-monitoring, Menzies et al. offer

the following guidelines in implementing applications: 1) identify and operationally define the

behavior of concern; 2) design the self-monitoring procedures, including a self-monitoring form; 3)

teach the student the self-monitoring procedures (through modeling, coaching, and role-play); 4)

monitor student progress; and 5) maintenance and follow-up (such as fading the procedures) (p. 29-32).

Montalvo and Torres (2004) claim that self-monitoring depends on two processes: the establishment of

goals, and feedback from others and oneself (via self-talk) (p. 19).

Teaching self-control to students therefore relies on research proven methodologies such as

explicit teaching of self-regulatory skills, modeling by the teacher, guided practice with feedback

(utilizing scaffolding and/or reciprocal teaching), and establishing collaborative learning environments.

Self-control is a concept that spans a dizzying array of research across divergent fields of study.


Though there is a wealth of pointed and powerful findings, there is not yet a firm, convergent model of

self-control that can synthesize the research in a concrete manner to render it readily applicable in a

classroom. Further research can elucidate the linkages between therapeutic, educational, sports, and

leadership strategies and more clearly define strategies that are effective. Given the clear link in both

educational and leadership research between teacher/leader self-control capacity and development in

student/follower capacity, it remains to be seen what specific measures of self-control are most

effective on an individual level.


Methods

Introduction

Teaching children diagnosed with learning disabilities in areas of high poverty can be an

emotionally draining endeavor, fraught with high levels of anxiety and stress. Students with chronic

and acute stressors in their daily lives tend to have low levels of tolerance for frustration and are prone

to frequent and intense emotional outbursts. As a teacher in a 5th grade 12:1:1 classroom in the Bronx,

I find that my students' behaviors often provide a minute-by-minute challenge to my capacity to

regulate my own emotions. In positions of authority in retail and hospitality industries in the past, I

have considered myself patient, calm, and slow to anger; in the classroom, however, I sometimes find

myself yelling and becoming aggressive in response to student outbursts. The ability to control oneself

in the midst of emotional upwelling is the very skill that my students' so need to have modeled and

taught to them. In order to understand how to best employ – and thus teach – methods of self-control, I

therefore chose to research and explore the literature pertinent to self-control, and discover what

strategies and techniques I could utilize in my classroom.

Research Site

The site where research was conducted was an elementary school located in District 9 in the

Bronx. This Title I school serves grades K – 5. At the time of research, the population of students was

65% Latino and 30% Black, with over 90% of the students eligible for a free lunch and 25% labeled as

English language learners. 30% of the students were classified with disabilities.

Participants

The classroom where the research data was collected was a 5th grade self-contained, 12:1:1

special education classroom of nine students, with eight boys and one girl. This group of students were


with the same teacher in the building for the last two grades. There were two paraprofessionals in the

classroom, one of them assigned as a one-to-one crisis paraprofessional. Three students were labeled as

English language learners, and six were labeled as over-age. Six of the students were furthermore

categorized as Latino and two were categorized as Black. The students remained with their assigned

classroom teacher for seven out of nine periods a day. Some students received additional support

services such as speech therapy, occupational therapy, and counseling.

Design of the Study

There were two foci of data collection in this research: the teacher and the students. Teacher

data collection based on self-observation and self-assessment was thus necessarily heavily reliant on

journal entries or logs. Student data utilized methods of self-assessment and self-evaluation, but was

supplemented with teacher observation.

Strategies selected for focus were delineated into reactive and preventive methods of self-

control. Reactive methods refer to strategies of emotion regulation within the moment, while faced

with the source of stress (negative emotion regulation). Preventive methods refer to strategies of self-

regulation used after the event has passed (up-regulation of positive emotion).

The focus for students was on reactive strategies. The teacher modeled and taught these

strategies explicitly. Preventive strategies were mostly utilized by the teacher in response to student

feedback and self-reflection. However, once self-regulatory capacity began to be built in students, the

logical next step would have been to explicitly teach the preventive strategy of modification of

environment, and to guide students in creating the proper kind of classroom learning environment they

require to learn best.


Data Sources

An outline for the data collected for teacher and students is as follows:

Teacher:

• Self-assessment/survey: pre-assessment/mid-point assessment/post-assessment

• Goal-setting

• Strategies tied to goals

• Self-reflection/Journal

Student:

• Self-assessment/Survey

• Goal-setting

• Strategies

• Teacher Observation/Feedback

• Student Self-monitoring Daily Charts

Data Analysis

For the teacher, the self-reflection journals were utilized daily both prior to student data

collection and during. The teacher also took a self-assessment at the beginning, the middle, and the end

of the research process. The students were administered the self-assessment survey, followed by

conferencing with the teacher to create goals that utilized targeted strategies of self-control. The teacher


provided direct, explicit instruction on the use of these strategies with teacher modeling. The teacher

then recorded observations of the students' use of strategies and provided feedback for guidance. The

students were also provided with daily self-monitoring charts which were used in individual

conferencing with the teacher to provide further feedback.


Teacher Self-Assessment

What are the behaviors that get you most upset in the classroom?

How do you typically react to these behaviors?

Does your reaction have a positive outcome?

Teacher Goal-setting

SMART Goal:

Teacher Strategies of Self-Control

Reactive Strategies:

• Stop and Think

• Self-talk

• Deep Breathing

• Controlling Facial Expressions and Body Posture

• Moving Away from Source of Conflict

Preventive Strategies:


Self-Reflection:

• Journaling/Log

• Coping:

◦ Talking with Colleagues/Friends

◦ Relaxation/self-talk/visualization

Self-Awareness (based on feedback):

• Goal-setting for instruction

• Visualization

• Self-talk

• Modification of Environment

Self-Monitoring

• Self-evaluation

• Student feedback


Student Self-Assessment

What is the behavior that gets you in the most trouble in school or that prevents you most from learning?

Use the examples below to guide your response.

• I get angry or upset easily• I have difficulty controlling my impulse to talk• I talk back to the teacher when I am asked to change my behavior• I am upset about something that happened at home or outside of class• I forget what I am supposed to be working on

Student Goal-setting

SMART Goal:

Student Strategies of Self-Control

• Stop and Think

• Self-talk

• Deep Breathing

• Controlling Facial Expressions and Body Posture

• Moving Away from Source of Conflict


Results

Table 1 delineates the different results between teacher and student development of self-control,

based on the measures of teacher observation, self-assessment, and daily journaling. Both teacher and

students incorporated the language of strategies of self-control into their classroom vocabulary and

discussions on an increased basis. The teacher spent less time engaged in conflict cycles with students

and more time engaged in therapeutic conferencing. Both students and teacher demonstrated an

increase in intentional strategy use. The teacher discovered that as a result of increased time spent in

therapeutic counseling with students, greater trust and stronger relationships were fostered. Students

demonstrated an increase in positive statements made about their teacher or the class as a whole, in

addition to a decrease in negative self-statements.

Table 2 summarizes the results of a summative student evaluation of the self-control strategies

instruction that they had received. 100% of students stated that they found the instruction to be useful

to them. However, most students demonstrated strong uncertainty about how to employ methods of

self-control or even about what self-control meant. Most students either stated that they believed their

teacher uses strategies of self-control or used them sometimes and is working on it. All students either

noted that they were making progress towards their goal for self-control or were working on it.

Daily journaling and reflection performed by the teacher revealed a growing self-awareness of

self-control and preventative measures to be taken to avoid engaging in conflicts with students, with

statements such “I must be careful not to fall into the conflict cycle of aggression with my students this

year”, or “I'm doing my best to see through the acting out, and right now I'm mainly focusing on

ignoring behavior.”

Based on measures of teacher observation, self-assessment, journaling, and student evaluation

responses, some strategies were demonstrated to be more effective then others. The strategies noted as

most easily understood were “stop and think” and “moving away from the source of conflict.” As a


reactive strategy in the midst of intense emotion (such as anger or frustration)—for both teachers and

students—the “move away” was the most effective. In addition, time for reflection and discussion

following an emotionally charged event proved therapeutic for both teacher and students.


Table 1

Teacher Observation of Self-Control Strategy Instruction Results in Self and Student

Teacher Student

• Increased use of classroom

vocabulary/discussions and targeted

instruction involving self-control strategies

• Increased self-awareness of potential

triggers to loss of self-control

• Increased time engaged in therapeutic

conferencing with upset students

• Increased intentional use of self-control

• Increased trust and stronger relationships

with students built

• Decrease in time spent engaged in conflict

cycles with students or in yelling

• Increased use of classroom

vocabulary/discussions involving self-

control strategies

• Increased awareness of the actions taken

by other students to defuse potential

conflicts

• Increased time requested to conference

with the teacher after a crisis incident

• Increased positive statements about the

teacher and/or the class

• Decreased negative self-statements


Table 2

Results of Student Self-Control Strategies Evaluations


Discussion

The results suggest that even a relatively tentative focus on self-control can have impact in

building self-awareness in both the teacher and student, as well as in fostering more positive

relationships and attitudes between the teacher and students. However, the bulk of the problem

statement question was not fully addressed by the findings. Specific strategies of self-control were

found to be more effective than others, but the process of determining the best methods of explicitly

modeling and instructing these strategies has yet to be determined.

The process of goal-setting, self-reflection, and self-evaluation on the utilization of self-control

proved to be significant for the teacher, if not for the students. The teacher discovered that self-

awareness built through the process of targeted reflection served as a preventative measure against

engagement in conflicts with aggressive students. Also, reactive self-control measures were found to

be promoted in emotionally charged situations due to heightened teacher awareness of triggers and the

necessity for modeling of self-control.

Limitations

The sample size of students fell from 9 to 8, as one of the students presenting the most

challenging and aggressive behaviors transferred schools in the middle of the research. Therefore, the

opportunities for utilizing teacher strategies of self-control perhaps declined.

The students connected quite well to the concept of getting angry and the necessity for self-

control, and many shared stories of moments when their anger had resulted in unwanted and painful

consequences. However, students demonstrated difficulty connecting this understanding to the actual

implementation of most strategies of self-control. This limitation can be attributed to several factors:

• Short time frame for instruction in the strategies


• This was the first time the teacher had put together and implemented curriculum on self-

control

• Some strategies were found to be either too abstract or to contain too many steps for

actual use in emotionally charged situations without more intensive and extended role

modeling, training, and practice

As noted above, during the process of research the teacher discovered that a curriculum based

on self-control had to be created, with lesson plans devoted to targeted strategies. Because these were

the first time the lessons had been utilized, some strategies were not as well modeled and understood as

they could be. Furthermore, opportunity for further practice and role-play would need to be established

for effective implementation of the strategies.

Future Research

Future research can better address the development of effective curriculum for instruction in

strategies of self-control. Also, behavior modification programs that were not explored in this

literature review but that have already been developed to address these issues can be investigated.

During the course of this research, for example, other programs were discovered that are related in

focus, such as Aggression Replacement Training by Goldstein, Glick, and Gibbs (1998), Therapeutic

Crisis Intervention (a program developed by Cornell University, based on the Life Space Crisis

Intervention model discussed earlier), the Stop and Think Social Skills program by Knoff (2001), and

other programs that were unexplored in the literature review. Some of these programs demonstrate

well-developed frameworks for teaching strategies of self-control such as those outlined in this

research.


Implications

Even this nominal exploration of self-control produced results that demonstrated a significant

change in teacher self-awareness. This suggests that the issue of self-control and the ability to

professionally cope with charged emotional situations should be an important part of teacher training

and induction programs, most especially for teachers who will be placed in classrooms with children

who present challenging behaviors.

This research also suggests that schools could benefit from having professional support

structures in place to address student deficits in self-control and teacher self-reflection and preventive

measures after crisis situations take place in the classroom. A Pupil Personnel Team can work to de-

escalate students in crisis and support teachers of challenging students. A school-wide framework such

as Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and referral tracking systems such as the

School-Wide Information System (SWIS) or an Online Occurrence Reporting System (OORS) can

work to establish a school culture that promotes positive behavior and monitors behaviors for needed

intervention.

Professional development that addresses developing educator skills in handling challenging

student behaviors can also benefit teachers having difficulty coping. During the process of research,

the researcher was trained and certified in Therapeutic Crisis Intervention, and the skill-sets obtained

were subsequently used to in tandem with the self-control research.

The importance of self-control in educational contexts is currently being researched by Walter

Mischel and Angela Duckworth with schoolchildren in Philadelphia, Seattle, and New York City. In

conjunction with the KIPP program, Mischel and Duckworth are examining how to best develop

cognitive training for self-control skills in the classroom (Lehrer, 2009). This research can do much to

further elucidate not only the importance of self-control, but effective strategies in developing and

maintaining this necessary skill in children with self-control deficits.


References

Ashkanasy, N. M., & Tse, B. (2000). Transformational leadership as management of emotion: A

conceptual review. In C. E. J. Hartel, & W. J. Zerbe (Eds.), Emotions in the workplace: Theory,

research and practice (pp. 221 – 235). Westport, CT7 Quorom Books.

Barbuto, J.E., & Burbach, M.E. (2006). The Emotional Intelligence of Transformational Leaders: A

Field Study of Elected Officials. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146(1), 51-64.

Baumeister, R. F., Gailliot, M., DeWall, N., & Oaten, M. (2006). Self-regulation and personality: How

interventions increase regulatory success, and how depletion moderates the effects of traits on

behavior (PDF format). Retrieved from University of Kentucky website:

http://www.uky.edu/~njdewa2/baumeisteretaljpers06.pdf

Beauregard, M. (2007). Mind does really matter: Evidence from neuroimaging studies of emotional

self-regulation, psychotherapy, and placebo effect . Progress in Neurobiology, 81, 218-236.

Bechtoldt, M.N., De Dreu, C.K., Nijstad, B.A., & Zapf, D. (2010). Self-concept clarity and the

management of social conflict. The Journal of Personality, 78(2), 539-574.

Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and

intervention. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 199-231.

Buckner, J.C., Mezzacappa, E., & Beardslee, W.R. (2009). Self-regulation and its relations to adaptive

functioning in low income youths. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 79(1), 19-30.

Butler, A.C., Chapman, J.E., Forman, E.M., & Beck, A.T. (2006). The empirical status of cognitive-

behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses. Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 17-31.

Butler, D.L. (2003). Self-regulation and collaborative learning in teachers’ professional development.

Paper presented at the 2003 annual meetings of the European Association for Research in

Learning and instruction (EARLI), Padua, Italy.

Dawson, C.A. (2003). A study on the effectiveness of life space crisis intervention for students


identified with emotional disturbances. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 11(4), 223-230.

De Kemp, R.A., Vermulst, A., Finkenauer, C., Scholte, R.H., Overbeek, G., Rommes, E. W., . . .

Engels, R. (2009). Self control and early adolescent antisocial behavior: A longitudinal analysis.

Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(4), 497-517.

Efron, D., & Bradley, B. (2007). Emotionally focused therapy (EFT) and emotionally focused family

therapy (EFFT): A challenge/opportunity for systemic and post-systemic therapists. Journal of

Systemic Therapies, 26(4), 1-4.

Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., &. Sulik, M. J. (2009). How the study of regulation can inform the study of

coping. In E. A. Skinner & M. J. Zimmer-Gembeck (Eds.), Coping and the development of

regulation. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 124, 75–86.

Forthun, L.F., McCombie, J.W., & Payne, C. (2009). LSCI in a school setting: Final results.

Reclaiming Children and Youth, 18(1), 51-57.

Gardner, W.L., Avolio, B.J., Luthans, F., May, D.R., & Walumbwa, F. (2005) “Can you see the real

me?” A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership

Quarterly, 16, 343-372.

Gerhardt, M. (2007). Teaching self-management: The design and implementation of self-management

tutorials. Journal of Education for Business, 83(1), 11-18. DOI: 10.3200/JOEB.83.1.11-18

Goldstein, A.P., Glick, B., & Gibbs, J.C. (1998). Aggression Replacement Training (Revised ed.)

Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Graziano, P.A., Reavis, R.D., Keane, S.P., & Calkins, S.D. (2007). The role of emotion regulation in

children's early academic success. Journal of School Psychology 45, 3-19.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-

112.

Hofmann, W., Friese, M., & Strack F. (2009). Impulse and self-control from a dual-systems perspective


(PDF format). Retrieved from Dr. Willhemm Hofmann's University of Würzburg website:

http://wilhelmhofmann.info/wordpress/wp-

content/publications/Hofmann_Friese_Strack_2009_PPS.pdf

Jackson, C., Nissenson, K., & Cloitre, M. chapter 12 (2009). Cognitive-behavioral therapy. In Courtois,

C.A., Ford, J.D., & van der Kolk, B.A., Treating complex tramautic stress disorders: An

evidence-based guide, p. 243-263 (1st edition). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Johnson, S.M., Hunsley, J., Greenberg, L., & Schindler, D. (2006). Emotionally focused couples

therapy: Status and challenges. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 6(1), 67-79.

Judge, T.A., & Piccolo, R.F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test

of their relative validity. The Journal of Applied Psychology 89(5), 755-768.

Kark, R., & Van Dijik, D. (2007). Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: The role of the self-

regulatory focus in leadership processes. The Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 500-528.

Knoff, H.M. (2001). The stop & think social skills program: Teacher's manual grades 6-8. Longmont,

CO: Sopris West.

Lehrer, J. (2009, May 19). Don't!: The secret of self-control. The New Yorker. Retrieved from

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/18/090518fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=1

Long, N.J., Wood, M.M., & Fecser, F.A. (2001). Life space crisis intervention: Talking with students in

conflict (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Mansfield, P.M., Pinto, M.B., Parente, D.H., & Wortman, T.I. (2009). College students and academic

performance: A case of taking control. NASPA Journal, 46(3), 502-518.

Martin, R.C., & Dahlen, E.R. (2008). Cognitive emotion regulation in the prediction of depression,

anxiety, stress, and anger. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 1249-1260.

Mitchell, S., Woloshyn, V.E., & Elliott, A.E. (2003). Promoting cooperative learning in the classroom:

Comparing explicit and implicit training techniques (PDF format). Retrieved from Brock

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/18/090518fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=1


Education Journal website: http://www3.ed.brocku.ca/ojs/index.php/brocked/article/view/177

Montalvo, F.T.,& Torres, M.C. (2004). Self-regulated learning: Current and future directions.

Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 2(1), 1-34.

Muraven, M. & Baumeister, R.F. (2000). Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-

control resemble a muscle? Psychological Bulletin, 126(2), 247-259

Nicoli, D.J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A

model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2),

199-218.

OPP, ltd. (2009). Self-awareness in leadership development: is it where you start from or where you’re

going? (PDF format). Retrieved from

http://mbti.at/public/media/pdfs/opp_leadership_white_paper.pdf

Polat, S., & Ulusoy-Oztan, Y. (2009). Relationship between emotional intelligence of primary school

4th and 5th grade students and their teachers (PDF document). Retrieved from ERIC database:

http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED506430

Richardson, B.G., & Shupe, M.J. (2006). The importance of teacher self-awareness in working with

students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Teaching Exceptional Children 36(2), 8-13.

Ross, T. (2008). Current issues in self-regulation research and their significance for therapeutic

intervention in offender groups. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy,

4(1), 68-81.

Schunk. D.H. (2005). Commentary on self-regulation in school contexts. Learning and Instruction, 15,

173-177

Sodian, B., & Frith, U. (2008). Metacognition, theory of mind, and self-control: The relevance of high-

level cognitive processes in development, neuroscience, and education. Mind, Brain, and

Education, 2(3), 111-113.


Stoeger, H., & Ziegler, A. (2008). Evaluation of a classroom based training to improve self-regulation

in time management tasks during homework activities with fourth graders. Metacognition

Learning, 3, 207-230. DOI 10.1007/s11409-008-9027-z

Sun, R., Slusarz, P., & Terry, C. (2005). The interaction of the explicit and the implicit in skill learning:

A dual-process approach. Psychological Review, 112(1), 159-192.

Sutton, R.E., Mudrey-Camino, R., & Knight, C.C. (2009). Teachers' emotion regulation and classroom

management. Theory Into Practice, 48, 130-137. DOI: 10.1080/00405840902776418

Tangney, J.P., Baumeister, R.F., & Boone, A.L. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less

pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72, 271–322.

Tekleab, A.G., Sims, Jr, H.P., Yun, S., Teshuk, P.E., Cox, J. (2008). Are we on the same page? Effects

of self-awareness of empowering and transformational leadership. Journal of Leadership &

Organizational Studies, 14(3), 185-201.

Tice, D.M & Bratslavsky, E. (2000). Giving in to feel good: The place of emotion regulation in the

context of general self-control. Psychological Inquiry, 11(3), 149-159.

Van Eekelen, I.M., Boshuizen, H.P., & Vermunt, J.D. (2005). Self-regulation in higher education

teacher learning. Higher Education, 50, 447-471.

Van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., de Cremerc, D., & Hogg, M.A. (2005). Leadership, self,

and identity: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 825-856.

Wadey, R., & Hanton, S. (2008). Basic psychological skills usage and competitive anxiety responses:

Perceived underlying mechanisms. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79(3), 363-373.

Documents

Self Control Research