University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The role of self-regulation strategies on two- and four-year college students with ADHD

(USC Thesis Other)

The role of self-regulation strategies on two- and four-year college students with ADHD

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
THE ROLE OF SELF-REGULATION STRATEGIES ON
TWO- AND FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE STUDENTS WITH ADHD

by

Jeffrey D. Haig

______________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2012

Copyright 2012 Jeffrey D. Haig
ii
DEDICATION
For my supportive parents, Robert and Sandra Haig;
My siblings, Brian and Steven Haig;
And the rest of my wonderful family.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
To my chairperson, Dr. Patricia Tobey; my dissertation committee members
Dr. Robert Rueda and Dr. Jerry Chih-Yuan Sun; Dr. Youn Joo Oh, Dr. Helena Seli,
Dr. Gokce Gokalp, Dr. Ilda Jimenez y West, Dr. Linda Fischer, Dr. Rocke DeMark,
Dr. Annemarie Perez, and Kevin Collins; my family and friends; and to all who
participated in this study, I give my appreciation and gratitude for your support,
guidance, and time.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgments iii
List of Tables v
Abstract vi
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Chapter 2: Review of the Literature 8
Chapter 3: Research Methodology 37
Chapter 4: Results 49
Chapter 5: Discussion 87
References 96
Appendices 102
Appendix A: University Park Institutional Review Board Form 102
Appendix B: Recruitment Letter 104
Appendix C: Research Study Flier 105
Appendix D: Information/Facts Sheet for Non-Medical Research Form 106
Appendix E: Participant Background Information 108
Appendix F: The Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ) 109
Appendix G: Interview Protocol Form 112
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: Frequency of Gender and Ethnicity of the ADHD Students 39
Table 3.2: Frequency of Gender and Ethnicity of the Non-ADHD Students 40
Table 3.3: College Level, Year in College, Gender, Ethnicity and College 41
GPA of the Students Without ADHD
Table 3.4: Summary the Reliability of the Scale and its Subscales 44
Table 4.1: Means, Standard Deviations, and Pearson Product Correlations 51
for Measured Variables – Intercorrelations with All Participants
Table 4.2: Means, Standard Deviations, and Pearson Product Correlations 54
for Measured Variables – Intercorrelations with ADHD Students
Table 4.3: ANOVA: the Students With ADHD (N=24) and the Students 56
Without ADHD (N=24)
Table 4.4: MANOVA: the Students With ADHD (N=24) and the Students 58
Without ADHD (N=24)
Table 4.5: Emerging Themes, Percentage, and Frequency (N=22) 60
Self-regulatory Strategies used by the Students with ADHD

Table 4.6: Emerging Themes, Percentage, and Frequency (N=20) 68
Self-regulatory Strategies used by the Students without ADHD

Table 4.7: Descriptive Statistics of Students With ADHD at a Two-Year 75
College vs. Four-Year College Level – Self-regulation
Table 4.8: Descriptive Statistics of Students Without ADHD at a Two-Year 76
College vs. Four-Year College Level – Assessing
Table 4.9: Emerging Themes, Percentage, and Frequency (N=17) 77
Students with ADHD at a four-year college level.

Table 4.10: Emerging Themes, Percentage, and Frequency (N=5) 81
Students with ADHD at a two-year college level.

vi
ABSTRACT
This study examined the relationship between self-regulation strategies and
their relationships with college students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD). This area has not been widely examined so this research was conducted in
order to investigate the role of self-regulation strategies on college students with
ADHD. The research design used was a case study approach and mixed
methodologies.
A sample of 48 students were sampled at three different colleges in Southern
California, one being at a four-year large urban college in Los Angeles, another
being at a medium four-year public college in Orange County, CA, and the last being
at a medium size two-year college in Orange County, CA. At each college, there
were 16 students sampled, eight diagnosed with ADHD and eight not diagnosed with
ADHD. Information was gathered using the Self-Regulations Questionnaire (SRQ)
survey. Additionally, an interview was conducted.
A descriptive study utilizing survey and semi-structured interview was used.
The reason for interviews being done was because of the small sample size. The
analysis was on meanings, themes, and general descriptions of experiences. The
narrative approach was used to get the “essence” of each college student’s
experience having been diagnosed with ADHD and how they self-regulated as
students.
The results provided support for the importance of self-regulation strategies
for college students with ADHD. Quantitative results support the position that self-
vii
regulation strategies play a role in helping college students with ADHD. Qualitative
results also support this finding. The results of these and related findings are
discussed in this study.

1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Overview
The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between self-
regulation strategies and their relationship with college students with attention-
deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Solid advances have been made in regard to
research in both the areas of ADHD and self-regulation, yet research examining self-
regulation strategies and how they relate to ADHD are still relatively new (Peterson,
2007; Zimmerman, 2008). This study will identify self-regulation strategies that can
be used to help college students with ADHD, and thus advance research in this area.
Background of the Problem
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is the most common childhood
behavioral disorder, and therefore, it has received considerable attention in research
over the years (Reiff, 2004). ADHD is a disorder that is characterized by inattention,
impulsiveness, and hyperactivity (Alexander-Roberts, 2006, American Psychiatric
Association, 2000). Students with ADHD can have significant impairments in home,
school, and in social functioning (Alexander-Roberts, 2006; Peterson, 2007; Reiff,
2004). Because of the diverse challenges students with ADHD face, considerable
attention has been given to the area of treating students effectively with ADHD.
Much of the research conducted has led to advances in the understanding of
treatment of ADHD with a lot of focus on medical treatment (Alexander-Roberts,
2006). Yet, some research has focused on non-drug treatments that have had success
2
(Bernstein, 2007; Jacobelli & Watson, 2008). With research being conducted on
treating individuals without medication, and having shown progress, this area of
research is important; and therefore, it is continually being further explored.
A great deal of intervention research has been conducted in the area of
ADHD and self-regulation in recent years (Wong, 2004). The goal with this research
is to understand more deeply the relationship between ADHD and self-regulation,
and the solutions that can be implemented to help students become more successful
in school who have ADHD. Self-regulated behaviors include a variety of methods
used by students to manage, monitor, record and assess the behavior or academic
achievement (Reid, Trout, & Schartz, 2005). The goal of the researcher is to find
solutions to enable self-regulated behavior among students who have ADHD so that
they can become more successful in school.
An area that has shown success in treating students with ADHD is self-
regulation (Wong, 2004). Self-regulation is the process where students activate and
sustain behaviors, cognitions, and affects that systematically orient them to reach
goals (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). Research has shown that students with
ADHD have had difficulties with or deficiencies in self-regulation processes
(Barkley, 1997). There have been both academic and social difficulties with students
with ADHD from problems related to self-regulation. These challenges include
maintaining on-task behaviors, following through when given instructions, and
planning and directing goal-directed, future actions (Barkley, 1997). Therefore, the
area of self-regulation has become important when addressing ADHD. If educators
3
can better understand self-regulation and its link with ADHD, then solutions can be
found to help students become more self-regulated, and therefore, more successful in
school.
Statement of the Problem
The problem being explored is that there is not enough research on how self-
regulation strategies can help college students who have ADHD perform better.
There is much research on each independent area of self-regulation and ADHD, but
combining the two and identifying how self-regulation strategies can help students
with ADHD has not been extensively studied (Reid, Trout, & Schwartz, 2005). The
college student population, in particular, has had limited research in this area.
Students with ADHD are underperforming in the educational system.
Retention and graduation rates of students with ADHD are alarming (McGoldrick &
Wolf, 2006). Students with disabilities such as ADHD are more likely to pursue only
a two-year degree instead of a four-year degree. Furthermore, according to the
Department of Education National Center of Education Statistics, they are more
likely to drop out prior to completing a degree. They are also less likely to pursue
post-graduate education than those students who do not have ADHD. A Department
of Education National Center of Education Statistics report finds that only 4% of
students with disabilities comprise graduate and professional student populations
(McGoldrick & Wolf, 2006). This problem is severe and needs to be addressed.
Helping students who have ADHD become more self-regulated learners is an
4
important step to helping students become more successful inside and outside of the
classroom (Reif, 2005).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to examine the role between self-regulation
strategies and ADHD on college students. The following research questions guide
the investigation:
1. What role does self-regulation play in the learning experience of college
students with ADHD compared to college students without ADHD?
2. What role does self-regulation play in the learning experience of college
students with ADHD and without ADHD at a two-year college vs. four-
year college level?
This study will use a mixed methodology approach. A self-regulation survey
will be used in combination with a case study approach with qualitative
methodology. The goal is to understand the experiences of college students with
ADHD and their experience using self-regulation strategies.
Importance of the Study
This research study will bring together a number of constructs and examine
them in a way that has not been extensively studied. These constructs include ADHD
and self-regulation and how self-regulation strategies can help college students with
ADHD become more successful in college. Self-regulation strategies can play an
important role in helping college students with ADHD become more successful in
school, home, and social functions.
5
The implications of identifying self-regulation strategies that are effective for
students with ADHD can be profound. Possible outcomes can include the
elimination or the lessening of drug treatment. Additionally, students will have
another way to manage the challenges they have with ADHD. They will have
another “toolbox” of strategies that will allow them to be more successful.
Because the dropout rate is high for college students with learning disabilities
such as ADHD, and also because students do not go as far in the educational system
with ADHD, providing solutions with self-regulations strategies can be effective. If
educators can help college students with ADHD incorporate self-regulation strategies
in their everyday lives, students will go further in the educational system, and the
dropout rate will decrease.
This is an important area because researchers have begun to find treatments
recently that do not involve medical treatment (Alexander-Roberts, 2006; Jacobelli
& Watson, 2008). Many people including researchers, school administrators, parents,
and students are looking for solutions to ADHD that do not involve medication, or
that combine medication with alternative strategies. Self-regulation strategies have
begun to become a more effective alternative to, and in addition to, medicine for
students with ADHD (Jacobelli & Watson, 2008).
This study will examine college students with ADHD at both the four-year
college level and the two-year college level. The purpose of conducting research at
both college levels is to better understand the difference in self-regulation strategies
with these diverse student populations. The goal is to determine how the student
6
populations differ at both college settings so that more effective solutions can be
used for college students with ADHD at diverse college environments.
In summary, finding non-medical treatments such as self-regulation strategies
to help college students with ADHD can help them become more successful inside
and outside of the classroom.
Limitations and Delimitations
There are some limitations and delimitations to this research. First, a small
group of individuals will be interviewed using only three colleges, the first a large
four-year private urban college in Los Angeles, the second a medium four-year
public college in Orange County, CA, and the third a two-year college in Orange
County, CA. A second limitation is that there will only be a small of group of
students interviewed at each college. There will be eight students with ADHD and
eight students without ADHD randomly selected at each college. Students will be
chosen by responding to an email request and also through snowballing. This small
interview size may not give a full representation of the research being conducted.
Finally, a limited number of questions will be asked giving students the opportunity
to answer in an open-ended format. The limited number of questions may not
provide a strong enough background in thoroughly addressing the research questions
being investigated in this study.
Definitions
The following terms are used throughout this research study (alphabetical
order):
7
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. ADHD is a neurobiological
behavioral disorder characterized by the onset of chronic inattention, impulsivity,
and hyperactivity (Rief, 2005).
Self-Regulation: Proactive processes that students use to become more
academically successful. These processes include goal-setting, selecting and
deploying strategies, and self-monitoring one’s effectiveness (Zimmerman, 2008).
Executive Functioning: The actions of planning, goal-directed behavior,
interference control, effort and flexible organization (Dennis, 1991).
Self-management: Required that an individual focus on his or her behavior
and monitor it accurately (Barry & Messer, 2003).
Self-control: A response or series of responses by an individual that functions
to alter the probability of their subsequent response to an event and thereby change
the likelihood of a later consequence related to that event (Barkley, 1997).
Self-regulated learning: “An active constructive process whereby learners set
goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their
cognition, motivation, and behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the
contextual features in the environment” (Pintrich & Zusho, 2007).
8
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The following literature review will examine Attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD, AD/HD or ADD) as it relates to self-regulation. The first section
will focus on the background of ADHD, its immersion as an important research area
and the evolution of its progress in understanding what it is all about and how to
effectively treat individuals with ADHD. Next, self-regulation will be discussed
giving a foundation and historical analysis as well as how understanding and
solutions in this area has progressed. ADHD and self-regulation as they relate with
one another will then be discussed. This section will examine the relationship
between self-regulation and ADHD and the solutions for how college students can
become more self-regulated, thus leading to higher graduation rates. Finally,
limitations will be discussed leading to why this research area is important.
ADHD
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD, AD/HD or ADD) is a
neurobehavioral development disorder. The U.S. National Institute of Mental Health
states that attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder is a legitimate psychological
condition. The problems that individuals with ADHD have are attention span,
impulse control, and activity level (Barkley, 2000, American Psychiatric
Association, 2000). These problems cause individuals to have trouble controlling
their own behavior and keeping and sustaining future goals. ADHD is a real disorder
and can have strong negative implications on one’s life (Ford, 2007; Taylor, 2007).
9
There are more than four million children and up to four percent of adults in
the United States with ADHD (Petersen, 2007). ADHD is one of the most commonly
studied and diagnosed psychiatric disorders, with 30-50 percent of individuals
diagnosed in childhood continuing to have symptoms into adulthood (Peterson,
2007; Reiff, 2004). Symptoms of ADHD usually begin when a child is seven years
or younger. Many experts state that ADHD causes deficits in executive functions of
the brain (Alexander-Roberts, 2006). The following problems can occur as a result of
impaired executive functions:
 Impaired planning and organization skills;
 Difficulty establishing and executing goals;
 Inability to have control over emotions;
 Inability to alter efficiently from one mental activity to another.
These impairments can have a significant impact on one’s life (Bernstein, 2007;
Ford, 2007; Taylor, 2007, American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Hyperactivity is
one of the key impairments which are often associated with ADHD.
The level of activity between a student with ADHD and one without ADHD
may be similar, but there are key differences in brain motor functioning. For
example, a child’s brain more activity intensifies than the levels of other children
when a high demand is placed on the ADHD child’s attention (Peterson, 2007). One
of the challenges with ADHD is that individuals who have it look normal; there are
no outward signs that there is something wrong with the brain or central nervous
system (Barkley, 2000). Students with ADHD can have a lot of difficulty inside a
10
busy classroom which can lead to erratic behavior. Other impairments children have
with ADHD include impulsivity, temper explosions, and erratic behavior
(Alexander-Roberts, 2006). ADHD can progress to be severe in later life leading to a
range of problems including inattention, anxiety, and criminal activity (Barkley,
Fischer, Smallish, & Fletcher, 2002; Alexander-Roberts, 2006; Peterson, 2007).
The one aspect individuals who have ADHD have in common is a reduced
ability to filter out sights, sounds, and activities that are not related to what they
should be doing (Petersen, 2007). This challenge causes interference in diverse
settings and impedes success. Symptoms of ADHD cause day-to-day problems with
learning behavior, and therefore, make it difficult to make and maintain relationships
and perform many standard everyday tasks (Alexander-Roberts, 2006; Petersen,
2007). For example, students will be working on an assignment and then forget what
the instructions are or they will become distracted easily by something else. Students
will become anxious and not be able to sustain a level of activity for a long period of
time (Bernstein, 2007; Taylor, 2007). This includes paying attention in class,
interacting with others, and having any sustained focus and concentration on
particular topic. In other words, ADHD can play a strong role in detracting students
from succeeding in school and in other areas of their life.
Categories of ADHD
ADHD can be broken down into three major categories according to the book
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV-
TR, 2000): 1. Hyperactive/impulsive-type, 2. Inattentive-type, and 3. Combined-
11
type. To be diagnosed with ADHD, individuals must show a few symptoms and
these symptoms must negatively impact one’s ability to function in at least two
settings; for example, at home or in a school environment. If symptoms continue for
six months or more, then this can alert doctors that there is a problem.
Hyperactive/Impulsive-Type ADHD is the most common form of ADHD
associated with this disorder (Alexander-Roberts, 2006). It is the symptoms of
hyperactivity and impulsiveness that first alerted physicians more than a hundred
years ago that this disorder existed (Petersen, 2007).
Hyperactivity can sometimes be difficult to diagnose because the symptoms
tend to vary from one situation to another (Rief, 2005). For example, a hyperactive
child may behave like other children when engaging in calm tasks or normal play
and show no signs of ADHD; however, if the situation becomes too complex or
tense, the child may begin to move quickly, talk loudly, or may engage in other
hyperactive actions that are characteristic of a child with ADHD (Petersen, 2007).
Over-stimulating environments may trigger impulsiveness also (Rief, 2005). When
there is too much going on in a classroom or at home such as noise, diverse
activities, or other stimuli, a child might become stressed, have a temper tantrum, or
even cry (Barkley, 2000). Students with ADHD need calm environments with little
distraction in order to perform effectively.
Boys and girls exhibit slightly different symptoms (Alexander-Roberts, 2006;
Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005). Boys exhibit more of the hyperactive/impulsive type of
12
behavior whereas girls tend to be a bit tomboyish, gravitating toward boys as friends.
Girls can also engage in excessive socializing and talking (Petersen, 2007).
For Inattentive-Type ADHD, inattention and distractibility are the main
characteristics (Petersen, 2007). This form of ADHD appears to be more common in
girls than in boys. The common symptoms for boys are lack of motivation, laziness,
or poor performance in school (Rief, 2005). Girls sometimes get overlooked because
they appear less assertive or “dreamy.” The three settings where Inattentive-Type
ADHD is apparent are those settings that are over stimulating, those that are boring,
and those that involve many new stimuli (Petersen, 2007).
Students with Inattentive-Type ADHD who are subjected to too much
information tend to “zone out.” They may retreat due to the overload of information
or simply direct their attention on a new task. This might include staring out the
window or spinning a pencil on their desk. These actions prevent the individual from
returning to the task at hand (Petersen, 2007).
Combined-Type ADHD is when an individual exhibits both categories of
ADHD. To be diagnosed with this type of ADHD, at least six symptoms of
hyperactivity/impulsivity along with at least six of inattention must be identified
(Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005).
Individuals who have ADHD often have challenges with “executive
functions”, they cannot organize and plan, keep their emotions in control, utilize
short-term memory, or transition smoothly between tasks (Petersen, 2007). Other
symptoms of ADHD include clumsiness or poor physical health coordination,
13
difficulty with social relationships, and a need for instant gratification. They also
have trouble keeping track of things or being on time.
Individuals who have ADHD early in life will experience it later in life also
(Alexander-Roberts, 2007; Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005). But, with maturity and
especially a treatment plan, some degree of remission can occur. Adults will be less
hyperactive and may only experience general restlessness. Impulsivity usually
declines also as adults build coping skills and life experience. Inattention is still
prevalent in adults (Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005). If ADHD is untreated in adults, it
can have negative outcomes which include drinking, smoking, drugs, and other
criminal activity.
Diagnosing Individuals with ADHD
In diagnosing individuals with ADHD, it is important to note that the
symptoms associated with ADHD are normal human behaviors (Petersen, 2007;
Rief, 2005). Almost everyone has distractions, hyperactivity, or impulsivity to a
certain extent. The distinction is that for most individuals, the symptoms are short-
term which result in brief behaviors of an individual having the characteristics of
ADHD (Alexander-Roberts, 2007; Rief, 2005). For individuals with long-term
behavior associated with ADHD, many professionals must work together to gain a
complete picture of a child’s physical and mental health (Barkley, 2000; Alexander-
Roberts, 2005; Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005). They must be able to effectively assess a
child’s physical and mental health in a variety of settings including at home, at
school, and in social settings. A child’s assessment can begin with medical records
14
and having a pediatrician assess the child. The medical doctor can assess problems
with eating, sleeping, depression, or any other illness (Rief, 2005). A therapist or
psychiatrist can also assess a child’s condition to determine whether or not ADHD
symptoms do exist.
Additionally, parents and teachers can play a large role in assessing a child’s
behavior and raising a red flag when necessary (Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005). Red
flags consist of ADHD behavior patterns or also a parent’s alcohol intake during
pregnancy or family thyroid disease. Teachers can assess students on problem
solving skills, attention, learning disabilities, or depression. In summary, it takes a
team of people to properly assess, diagnose, and treat an individual with ADHD.
Etiology and Theoretical Framework of ADHD
In the past, there were many different explanations which include brain
injuries, poor parenting, or ineffective teaching (Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005). Today,
however, medical experts have a stronger understanding of this disorder and its
onset. Medical experts agree that ADHD is a medical disorder of the brain
(Alexander-Roberts, 2006; Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005). Simply, the human body
produces more than sixty different types of neurotransmitter chemicals, five of which
are directly related to causing ADHD. These include: 1. Dopamine, 2. Serotonin, 3.
Norepinephrine, 4. Epinephrine, and 5. GABA (gamma-amino butyric acid). In each
of these areas, low levels are correlated with the role in ADHD. Additionally,
environmental factors also play a role in causes of ADHD (Barkley, 2000; Petersen,
2007; Rief, 2005). For example, a mother’s drug or alcohol use during pregnancy
15
can cause symptoms of ADHD. This is because a mother shares a blood supply with
the unborn child. These toxic chemicals can cause a fetus’s brain to develop poorly,
and thus cause the onset of ADHD. Aside from a mother’s pregnancy, two types of
chemical toxins have also been linked to ADHD. These are lead and polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) (Petersen, 2007). Lead can be found in house paint and PCBs as
insulation in industrial and commercial buildings. Action has been taken since the
release of these chemicals to prevent their usage. In summary, causes of ADHD can
be both genetic and environmentally induced.
Dr. Russell Barkley (1997) provided a theoretical framework for better
understanding ADHD and its effect on individuals with it. Barkley argues that
ADHD causes behavioral inhibition. It stops an ongoing response and interferes with
control mechanisms (Barkley, 1997). Barkley argues that behavioral inhibition is
lined to the performance of four executive functions. These functions bring motor
control, fluency, and syntax under control of internally represented information.
These four executive functions are: 1. Working memory, 2. Self-regulation of
affect/motivation/arousal, 3. Internalization of speech, and 4. Reconstitution. Each of
these areas is negatively affected by individuals who have ADHD.
Working memory is holding events in the mind and manipulating or acting
on events. Self-regulation of affect/motivation/arousal focuses on emotional control,
self-regulation of drive and motivation, and regulation of goal-directed action.
Internalization of speech is about problem solving and moral reasoning.
Reconstitution is the analysis and synthesis of behavior as well as goal-directed
16
behavioral creativity. The focus of this study will be on self-regulation and its
relationship with ADHD.
Treatment Options for Individuals with ADHD
Medication.
Individuals with ADHD have a variety of treatment options which include
medications, behavior modifications, lifestyle changes, and counseling (Barkley,
2000; Bernstein, 2007; Jacobelli & Watson, 2008; Rief, 2005). ADHD cannot be
cured; however it is treatable. Additionally, patients sometimes outgrow these
disorders as they mature (Petersen, 2007).
Medication has been a key treatment for individuals with ADHD. There is
nothing that works better to bring ADHD under control than medication (Alexander-
Roberts, 2006). This has been, and continues to be, the case; however, individuals
must be diagnosed properly before medication should be used. Many times,
medication is not the answer and other options should be taken. If an individual is
diagnosed effectively and medication is the desired direction, this treatment option
can be very effective (Alexander-Roberts, 2006; Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005).
Medication is used to control levels of inattention and hyperactivity. It has
been shown to improve cognitive attention, factors that regularly impact academic
success (Johnson & Safranek, 2005), There are two basic classes of ADHD
medications: 1. Stimulants and 2. Non-stimulants. These medications help
individuals in a number of ways from enabling them to concentrate better to allowing
17
them to be more productive. Students have seen an increase in academic
performance and more focus in school.
The most common medication used over the years to treat individuals with
ADHD is Ritalin. Ritalin has produced conflicting results when investigating the
effects of this drug on cognition, achievement, and behavior (White, & Rouge,
2003). Research has provided short-term benefits of Ritalin on academic
performance (Pelhan, Carlson, Sams, Vallano, Dixon, & Hoza, 1993). It shows to
improve concentration and attention which is linked to academic performance.
However, Ritalin has received some negative criticism due to individuals who have
either received too much of it or who have been misdiagnosed (Alexander-Roberts,
2006). Additionally, children are sometimes prescribed Ritalin at an early age which
is a concern. Lastly, there is lack of understanding and agreement among parents,
teachers, and health professionals about which intervention is best, whether it be
Ritalin, non-medical alternatives, or both (White, & Rouge, 2003).
Other medication options include dextroamphetamine (Dexedrine) and
amphetamine (Adderall). Many studies have found that these medications enhance
attention, reduce impulsive behavior, and increase academic productivity among the
majority of children treated (White & Rouge, 2003; Chronis & Raggi, 2006). One
study in particular found that students with ADHD had higher scores in both
mathematics and reading with medication (Bruckner et al., 2012). Other studies
show improvements on academic productivity and academic accuracy (Rief, 2005).
18
In summary, there are numerous medication options that have had a positive
outcome on treating individuals with ADHD. Medication has helped individuals
concentrate better, live more productive lives, and has helped children become more
successful in school (Alexander-Roberts, 2006; Rief, 2005). With medication,
studies have found that students can focus better, have increased attention span,
decreased hyperactivity and impulsivity, and thereby have improved academic
performance.
Behavior modification.
Behavior modification is another treatment option for individuals with
ADHD. Behavior modification is a strategy that can be used to alter an individual’s
behavior in a desired way. For example, a teacher can give a student with ADHD a
reward for paying attention in class instead of talking with others. The student’s
behavior will be changed in a positive way as a result of the reward (Miranda,
Presentacion, & Soriano, 2011).
There are many different types of behavior modification strategies which can
involve teachers, counselors, parents, and the students. Behavior modification
strategies have been shown to be effective and help students become more successful
in school. They have helped students increase attention, decrease disruptive
behavior, and focus more on school-related tasks (Chronis & Raggi, 2006; Johnston
& Mash, 2001; Alexandar-Roberts, 1994).
Classroom behavior management strategies have helped students become
more successful in school (Pelham et al, 1998). Teachers use specific behavioral
19
techniques, including praise, effective commands, planned ignoring, and time out.
These techniques help shape a student’s behavior in a desired direction and have
helped student behave better and have more focus.
Some researchers have investigated multiple strategies in the classroom for
students with ADHD (Hoza, et al., 2003). These strategies include the token system,
reinforced self-evaluation, and training in study skills. In general, these interventions
have shown positive results with improved adaptive functioning and more focus,
which have led to higher levels of success in the classroom.
The research with intervention for students with ADHD from different areas
including teachers and administrators has shown positive results (Wolraich, et al.,
2005). These interventions include targeting behavioral techniques to address
organization, study skills, attention, and underachievement. However, the challenge
with these strategies is that they are labor intensive.
In summary, there are numerous options to treat individuals with ADHD. In
many instances, a combination of methods can be used (Rief, 2005). Treating an
individual using medical and non-medical strategies has shown to be effective in
helping manage ADHD. With students, a combination of strategies can help them
become more successful in school (Rief, 2005).
In recent years, an area of concern has been in medication. Using medication
to treat students with ADHD has sparked controversy because of some against this
treatment option (Alexander-Roberts, 2006; Petersen, 2007; Rief, 2005). There are
some researchers as well as administrators and parents who do not think medication
20
is the answer to treat ADHD, especially in milder cases. They are always looking for
alternative strategies to treat students. More recently, research has been conducted to
find non-medical solutions for students with ADHD (Barkley, 2000; Jacobelli &
Watson, 2008).
Self-regulation strategies.
An important treatment option for students with ADHD is using self-
regulation strategies (Jacobelli & Watson, 2008). Self-regulation will be discussed in
the next section, but simply, it is the process by which individuals can activate and
sustain behaviors, leading them to reach desired goals (Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece,
2008). Recent research has found that helping individuals with ADHD develop self-
regulation strategies can help them focus better, which leads them to better managing
their ADHD (Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011). This research area has received
more attention recently, especially because many are looking for alternatives to treat
individuals with ADHD. The focus of this review will be on this new area of
research and it will be thoroughly explored.
Self-Regulation
Self-regulation is the process where students activate and sustain behaviors,
cognitions, and affects that systematically orient them to reach their goals (Schunk,
Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). This is important because if students can become more
self-regulated learners, they can then become more successful in school and in other
areas of their lives. The goal is to determine how students can become masters of
21
their own learning process and thereby become more successful as students
(Zimmerman, 2008).
Research on self-regulation of academic learning and performance began to
emerge over two decades ago (Zimmerman, 2008). The goal was to better
understand how students could become masters of their own learning processes.
Over the years, researchers have begun to understand this area more and they have
found how important self-regulation is in helping students become more successful
in school and life (Zimmerman, 2002; Efklides, 2008).
The research in self-regulation has continued to develop and self-regulation is
considered an important area for psychologists, educators, and others (Zimmerman,
2002). A key challenge in this area of research is that there is no commonly accepted
definition of self-regulated learning competence (Wirth & Leutner, 2008). One
reason for this lack of consensus is because there have been a great number of
models produced over the last 30 years; yet there has been no single integration of
the modes into a single coherent framework or theory (Wirth & Leutner, 2008).
These models differ in the areas of self-regulated learning emphasized. These
include whether self-regulated learning is a prerequisite for the competent self-
regulation of a learning process or whether they describe the process of self-
regulation in relation to an optimal sequence of phases (Wirth & Leutner, 2008).
One model that has received attention is based on a framework for how
learners control learning processes and it involves six dimensions: 1. Motive, 2.
Methods, 3. Time, 4. Physical environment, 5. Social environment, and 6.
22
Performance (Dembo et al., 2006; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994; Zimmerman, 1994;
Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997). Motive refers to reasons for learning, goals, self-
talk, and reward and punishments; methods refer to learning strategies; time refers to
time management and when to study, physical environment refers to identification
and elimination of distractors; social environment refers to help, collaboration, and
communication; and performance refers to evaluation, reflection, and goal revision.
Individuals who manage these dimensions and are successful at applying them show
evidence of being a self-regulated learner.
Areas of Self-Regulatory Skills
Three areas of self-regulatory skills are: 1. planning, 2. monitoring, and 3.
evaluation (Jacobs & Paris, 1987). Planning requires the selection of strategies and
the allocation resources which affect performance. Examples include strategy
sequencing, allocating time selectively, and making predictions before reading.
Monitoring refers to one’s awareness of task performance and comprehension. An
example of this is self-testing while learning. Studies have found a relationship
between metacognitive knowledge and monitoring accuracy (Schraw, 1994; Schraw,
Dunkle, Bendixen & Roedel, 1995) such that individuals who are more aware of
their thoughts can therefore monitor them more effectively towards a desired
outcome. Evaluating refers to estimating the efficiency of one’s learning. Examples
include evaluating one’s goals and performance. Studies support the connection
between metacognition and evaluation (Baker, 1989; Coutinho & Neuman, 2006;
Efklides, 2008). Individuals who are more aware of their thinking evaluate decisions
23
more, and they do this more effectively than those who are not aware of their
thinking.
Self-regulated learning (SRL) is different from measures of mental ability or
academic performance because it refers specifically to the self-directive processes
and self-beliefs that enable learners to transform their mental abilities into an
academic performance skill (Zimmerman, 2008). An example of mental ability
would be verbal aptitude and an example of academic performance outcome would
be writing. SRL refers to a proactive process that students engage in rather than a
reactive process. Students who are self-regulated learners set goals, they select and
deploy strategies, and they self-monitor their effectiveness. The key issue of a self-
regulated learner is whether or not they display characteristics of personal initiative,
perseverance, and adaptive skills (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2007).
Over the years since research has developed in the area of self-regulation,
much has been learned, and this area has evolved a lot (Boekaerts, Pintrich, &
Zeidner, 2000). In the early years, the 1970s and 1980s, research was limited.
Researchers such as Joel Levin, Michael Pressley, and Dale Schunk, and others
focused on the impact of individual self-regulatory processes, such as goal-setting,
strategy use, or self-instruction (Zimmerman, 2008). These studies found that these
strategies produced superior results in learning, even in young children; however,
students did not use the strategies in non-experimental learning contexts very much,
such as when studying at home (Pressley & McCormick, 1995).
24
Early efforts to understand the area of self-regulation were fruitful, yet
incomplete. As research continued, further developments were made which helped
give clarity and understanding to this important area. Some new questions also arose.
These questions included whether or not increases in students’ levels of SRL in
personally managed contexts, such as at home, were linked to improvements in
academic achievement. Another question that was raised was whether or not teachers
could modify their classrooms to foster increases in self-regulated learning. Lastly,
questions concerning the role of students’ motivational feelings and beliefs arose on
how they could begin incorporating self-regulation strategies in their lives
(Zimmerman, 2008). In summary, as new research gave clarity and understanding to
the area of self-regulation, so did new questions and how new discoveries could be
translated into meaningful solutions.
Self-regulation of learning is more than knowledge of skills. It involves the
self-motivation and behavioral skill to implement that knowledge in a desired
direction. Furthermore, self-regulation is not a single personal quality trait that a
student either possesses or not (Zimmerman, 2002). It involves a multitude of skills
which include setting proximal goals for oneself, adopting, monitoring one’s
performance, strategies for attaining goals, managing one’s time effectively, self-
evaluating, and attributing causation to results. The success of a student’s level of
learning is the result of how effectively he/she utilizes these self-regulatory skills
(Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994).
25
Research conducted by Bandura was also important in the development of
self-regulation. Of particular importance was Bandura’s (1969) research on how self-
regulation could be developed from a cognitive social learning perspective. First, the
self-regulation patterns that are desired should be modeled by agents of change such
as parents or teachers (Zimmerman, 1990). Second, there should be incentives which
are linked to performance and a grading system. As a student becomes more
independent and self-regulated, the expert model would gradually withdraw support.
Third, Bandura argued that in addition to the target behavior, individuals should be
taught self-regulatory functions as standard-setting, evaluation, and self-
reinforcement. Lastly, Bandura recommended that attention be given to the reference
group so that the new self-regulated behavior will be sustained (Zimmerman, 1990).
As research continued to develop in this area, Bandura built upon his earlier
discoveries. In the late 1970’s, Bandura developed a formal model of self-regulation
which involved three key components: 1. Performance observation, 2. Judgmental
processes, and 3. Self-reactive responses (Bandura, 1977). Performance observation
involved such factors which included quality, quantity, and rate. For judgmental
processes, this area involved performance attributions, performance standards, and
referential performances. Lastly, for self-reactive, this area included self-evaluative
reactions.
Additionally, Bandura identified differences in two cognitive forms of
motivation related to self-regulation: 1. Cognitive representation of external
contingencies and 2. Self-motivation, involving goal-setting and self-evaluation
26
(Bandura, 1977). An individual’s motivation to succeed will be displayed Bandura
argued and nonspecific and distal goals were not as effective as specific and
proximal goals. A goal of social cognitive approaches to self-regulation is to develop
behavior changes that are compatible with self and external factors (Zimmerman,
1990).
In 1986, a defining moment came when an inclusive definition of SRL was
used to integrate many of its aspects including learning strategies, metacognitive
monitoring, self-concept perceptions, and others (Zimmerman, 2008). As a result of
this outcome, a number of instruments were developed.
Self-Regulation Instruments
One instrument developed was the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory,
an 80-item self-report inventory of students’ strategies for enhancing their study
practices was developed (LASSI; Weinstein, Palmer & Schulte, 1987). This
inventory involves 10 scales that assess self-regulation strategies as well as skill and
will; it is a classification system that corresponds with a motivational, behavioral,
and metacognitive definition of self-regulation. Scales classified as will or
motivation include Motivation, Attitude, and Anxiety. Scales classified as self-
regulation or behavior include Time Management, Study Aids, Self-Testing, and
Test Strategies. Scales classified as skill or metacognition include Concentration,
Selecting Main Ideas, and Information Processing. When students complete this
inventory, they respond to items in each subscale using a 5-point rating scale. These
27
ratings range from not at all typical of me to very much typical of me. This
assessment is used in assessing student’s self-regulation skills (Zimmerman, 2008).
A second important instrument that was developed was the Motivated
Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). This instrument is an 81-item
questionnaire and it is composed of two major sections: 1. Learning Strategies and 2.
Motivation. The Learning Strategies section is broken into two sub-sections which
are a Cognitive-Metacognitive section and a Resource Management section. The
Cognitive-Metacognitive section includes behaviors as managing time and study
environment, effort management, peer learning, and help seeking. The Resource
Management section includes behaviors such as managing time and study
environment, effort management, peer learning, and help seeking (Zimmerman,
2008). The Motivation section has scales that relate to affect, valuing, and
expectancy. The Affect section includes Test Anxiety; the Valuing scales include
Intrinsic-Extrinsic Goal Orientation and Task Value, and the Expectancy scales
include Self-Efficacy and Control of Learning. The rating system is a scale of 1-7
which range from not at all true of me to true of me. The MSLQ is considered to be
an effective measure to assess students’ motivation and learning strategies (Duncan
& McKeachie, 2010).
A third instrument used to assess self-regulated learning is the Self-Regulated
Learning Interview Scale (SRLIS). Students are presented six problem contexts
during a structured interview. They are asked to respond in a way that they would
prepare for a writing or essay test. The answers are open-ended and the answers
28
given are then transcribed and coded into 14-self-regulatory categories. These
categories focus on behavior, metacognition, and motivation. Each of these
categories includes different areas. The behavior category includes environmental
structuring, keeping records and monitoring, reviewing texts, notes and tests, and
seeking assistance from peers, teachers and parents. The metacognitive categories
include goal setting and planning, organizing and transforming, seeking information,
and rehearsing and memorizing. Lastly, the motivation category includes self-
evaluation reactions and self-consequences. Students’ answers are recorded for their
frequency and students are also asked to rate their consistency using a particular
strategy (Zimmerman, 2008).
These three measures of students’ self-regulatory strategies show them to be
strongly correlated with measures of course performance (Zimmerman & Martinez-
Pons, 1990). Additionally, the self-regulation strategies also predict students’
academic grades. In summary, these instruments helped to better assess students’
self-regulatory skills (Zimmerman, 2008). The instruments could measure and
evaluate where students’ strengths and weaknesses were with regard to self-
regulation strategies. With more clear information for educators on students’
backgrounds, a better understanding of solutions could be found to help students
become more successful in school (Zimmerman, 2008).
Although the various models presented over the years of self-regulation
differ, common threads have been found. All models incorporate at least three areas:
1. Goal-setting, 2. Planning, and 3. Monitoring (Wirth & Leutner, 2008). Given these
29
assumptions, self-regulated learning can be defined as “an active constructive
process whereby learners set goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor,
regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and behavior, guided and
constrained by their goals and the contextual features in the environment” (Pintrich
& Zusho, 2007).
ADHD and Self-Regulation
In the past decade, there has been a push to integrate the area of ADHD and
self-regulation (Posner & Rothbart, 1998). When babies are born, they orient
themselves to the environment which appears to act as a distress regulator the 1
st

year of life (Harman, Rothbart, & Posner, 1997). Then, as babies grow, there is a
transition from babies reacting more to outside stimuli to actively controlling their
attention (Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011). In other words, they move from simply
reacting to outside stimuli towards choosing what to focus their attention on. This
supports the position that there is voluntary control of action needed to control and
regulate one’s behavior. Because attention and self-regulation were studied
independent of each other for many years, little was known how these two areas
integrate. But, research findings have begun to give clarity on how attention and self-
regulation integrate (Kaplan & Berman, 2010; Kerns, Eso, & Thomson, 2010; Reid,
Trout, & Schartz, 2005; Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011; Sarkis, Sarkis, Marshall,
& Archer, 2005; Stevens, Quittner, Zuckerman, & Moore, 2002). There have been
new theories about the specific neural mechanisms involved in self-regulation and
30
how they connect to executive attention and control (Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart,
2011).
Two important developments occurred that help educators better understand
the integration of ADHD & self-regulation (Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011). The
first development was in the combination of neuroimaging with electrical or
magnetic recordings from outside the skull. This combination resulted in being able
to see real time circuits computing sensory, semantic, and emotional response (Dale
et al., 2000). This technology has been around for a long time; but it was in the last
decade that progress had been made in better understanding how these areas
integrate. The second big development was the sequencing of the human genome.
This made it possible to study both the functional anatomy of brain networks and to
also examine how genetic differences might lead to individual variations in the
potential to acquire and perform skills (Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011).
More advances were made early on as Ruff and Rothbart (1996) attempted to
integrate the study of attention and self-regulation. They found that through the
developmental years, from infancy to childhood, there is a transition from a
stimulus-driven form of attention to volunteer form of selection. Children were
becoming cognizant of their attentional experiences and thus, they would begin to
direct their attention towards those situations of their choosing (Ruedna, Posner, &
Rothbart, 2011).
One area where attention and self-regulation has been linked is in
temperament or personality research. In this research, individual differences are
31
measured using questionnaires. A key concept that consistently emerges in this
research is effort control. Effort control allows individuals to regulate their behavior
(Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011). Their controlled behavior is in relation to current
and future needs they are able to do this despite immediate rewards. The important
point about this research related to the current study is that individuals can direct
their attention to particular areas, self-regulate, and become more successful.
In addition to this research, Eisenberg and her colleagues found that 4-to 6-
year old boys with good attentional control tend to deal with anger more effectively
than those who do not have good attentional control (Eisenberg, et al,1994). Those
with strong effort control were more likely to use non-hostile verbal methods rather
than overt aggressive methods. The research has continued in this area by others with
similar results, showing that effort control plays an important role in the
development of conscience (Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011).
In summary, the research on effort control is a foundational component for
the development from more reactive to more self-regulated behavior (Rueda, Posner,
& Rothbart, 2011). It sheds light on how an individual’s attention can be directed to
a more desired direction. Looking at the bigger picture from a student success
standpoint, if a student with attentional challenges can more effectively have control
of how they self-regulate, and thus control their attention and use it in more effective
ways, the student can have more success in school, and in life.
To build upon the area of control, selecting information and controlling
thoughts and actions and directing them in desired ways has been a major part of
32
attention in research findings behavior (Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011). When an
individual interacts with the environment, attentional selection has an important role.
Simple behaviors, such as reaching for an object, require selecting the stimulus and
performing the action. Attention has to be directed in the area of selecting the object
and moving forward to reach it. The same attention can be directed internally to
coordinate memories, thoughts, and emotions (Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2011).
Further research was conducted by Reid, Trout, and Schaart (2005) on the
integration of self-regulation and ADHD. They conducted research on children based
on the four common forms of self-regulation: 1. Self-monitoring, 2. Self-monitoring
plus reinforcement, 3. Self-reinforcement, and 4. Self-management. Self-monitoring
consists of observing and recording one’s behavior; self-monitoring plus
reinforcement consists of self-monitoring steps plus reinforcement for desired
behavior; self-reinforcement consists of an individual getting reinforced by targeted
behavior; and self-management consists of an individual monitoring one’s behavior
to an external standard or criteria (Reid, Trout, and Schaart, 2005).
The goal of the research was to instill self-regulated behavior and to
determine if children who have ADHD can use self-regulated skills as an
intervention. They found that self-regulated interventions can produce meaningful
improvements in students for academic productivity, on-task behavior, and reduction
of inappropriate behaviors (Reid, Trout, and Schaart (2005).

33
Executive Functioning, ADHD and Self-Regulation
The area of research conducted to date on ADHD and self-regulation that is
the focus of this review is the area of executive functioning. Executive functioning is
defined by Barkley (1997) as “the self-directed mental activities that occur during
the delay in responding, that serve to modify the eventual response to an event, and
that function to improve the long-term future consequences related to that event.” In
other words, it is the self-directed behavior which will lead an individual to a
particular destination. This area of research is important because concentration and
focus is a key concern for students with ADHD. Executive functioning focuses on
the actions students decide to take which ties directly with their outcomes. If students
can become more focused and direct their attention to a more desired direction, they
can become more successful in the classroom, leading to increased academic
performance.
There are a number of self-regulation strategies students can use, involving
higher levels of executive functioning, which will help them become more
academically successful. This intervention is known as cognitive-behavior
modification (CBM). Numerous studies have shown that CBM can help students
focus more and control their behavior, thus leading to more success in school
(Miranda, Presentacion, & Soriano, 2011; Reid, Trout, & Schartz, 2005).
Some important areas of cognitive-behavior modifications are: 1. Self-control
and 2. Self-regulated learning, and 3. Self-monitoring. Self-control is behaviors
associated with controlling one’s actions (Pintrich & Zusho, 2007). The goal is to
34
direct behavior in a way that will lead to higher levels of academic success. Self-
regulated behavior is continually regulating one’s learning and understanding. Self-
monitoring is a process where an individual observes and records his or her behavior
(Mace, Belfiore, & Hutchinson, 2001). There are two types of self-monitoring which
are self-monitoring of attention (SMA) and self-monitoring of performance (SMP).
SMA is used to encourage an awareness of an individual’s attention to a required
task (Reid, Trout, & Schartz, 2005). SMP interventions usually involve students
performing an academic task and then self-monitoring its completion progress or
accuracy of work.
Another area of behavioral modification is goal-setting and its relationship on
helping students become more self-regulated (Gureasko-Moore, Dupaul, and White,
2011). Goal-setting is considered to be an important step for self-regulated
performance. It has been implemented and validated as an important strategy for
helping students with disabilities (Agran, Wehmeyer & Palmer, 2006). Students who
can set goals are more likely to achieve them, and hence, have more success in
school. Goal-setting is an important area of research that can help students with
ADHD become more successful.
Lastly, a key behavioral modification for students is persistence. Students
who persist on tasks have more success than those who do not (Pintrich & Zusho,
2007; Porath & Bateman, 2006). An important factor of a self-regulated learner is the
ability to put forth effort and persist until the goal is accomplished.

35
ADHD, Self-Regulation & College Students
In order for a student to be successful in college, many skills are needed. The
focus is on developing the whole student and many skills are necessary in order to
accomplish this (Wolf-Wendel & Ruel, 1999). These include developing
competence, managing emotions, and becoming more self-regulated. It is important
that students become active agents in their own development, and become
academically-focused and self-motivated (Wolf-Wendel & Ruel, 1999). This
requires attention and concentration to reach one’s goal.
Students face many challenges in pursuing their college educational goals.
One area of concern is students with ADHD. These students have challenges in
attention and concentration, and therefore, they are less likely to succeed in school.
The research involving younger students with ADHD, elementary to high
school, has found many ways to help them become more successful in school. These
ways involve both medical and non-medical strategies. An important area that has
been successful in treating students with ADHD, which is the focus of this study, is
self-regulation strategies. A lot of research has been conducted on the elementary
and high school population on self-regulation strategies that can help students with
ADHD. However, the college population has not been examined in depth. Students
with ADHD are underperforming in the educational system, and specifically at the
college level. The outcome with regard to retention and graduation is alarming
(McGoldrick & Wolf, 2006). Students with disabilities such as ADHD are more
likely to pursue only a two-year degree instead of a four-year degree. Furthermore,
36
they are more likely to drop out prior to completing a degree. They may also be less
likely to pursue post-graduate education than nondisabled peers.
A Department of Education National Center of Education Statistics report
finds that only 4% of students with disabilities comprise graduate and professional
student populations (McGoldrick & Wolf, 2006). This problem is severe and needs
to be addressed. Helping students who have ADHD become more self-regulated
learners is an important step to helping students become more successful inside and
outside of the classroom (Reif, 2005).
This study will examine four self-regulation strategies and their relationship
with college students with ADHD. The specific areas of self-regulation that will be
assessed are: 1. Goal-setting, 2. Planning, 3. Monitoring, and 4. Perseverance. By
assessing these four areas of self-regulation strategies, a better understanding of the
relationship between self-regulation strategies and ADHD on college student’s life
can be revealed. The goal is to understand the relationship between self-regulation
strategies and ADHD on college students.
37
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between self-
regulation strategies and ADHD on college students. Based on the research, self-
regulation strategies can play a role in helping college students with this disorder.
This chapter presents the methodology used in the study, including the research
questions, research design, population and sample, instrumentation and reliability
and validity information, demographic and background information, the procedure
and data collections, and data analysis.
Research Questions
Based on the findings in Chapter 2, it is apparent that self-regulation does
play a role in helping college students with ADHD. ADHD and self-regulation and
their relationship to academic success have been studied extensively independent of
each other, but not many studies have examined the relationship of self-regulation
strategies on the success of college students with ADHD. The purpose of the study is
to explore this area in more depth.
The following research questions are proposed for the present research
investigation:
1. What role does self-regulation play in the learning experience of college
students with ADHD compared to college students without ADHD?
38
2. What role does self-regulation play in the learning experience of college
students with ADHD and without ADHD at a two-year college vs. four-
year college level?
Research Design
The research question proposed is to get a better understanding of self-
regulation strategies that can help college students with ADHD. The research design
for the current investigation will use a case study approach and will utilize mixed
methodologies. A survey will be used to get a baseline for students and then a semi-
structured interview will be done. The analysis will be on meanings, themes, and
general descriptions of experiences. The narrative approach will be to get the
“essence” of each college student’s experience that has ADHD and how they self-
regulate as students.
The research questions will focus on getting information on four key areas: 1.
Goal-setting, 2. Planning, 3. Monitoring, and 4. Perseverance. Data is gathered from
an interview by college students.
Sample and Population
The sample of students were chosen from three colleges, one being a four-
year large urban college in Los Angeles, another being a medium four-year public
college in Orange County, CA, and the last being a medium size two-year college in
Orange County, CA. The goal was to compare self-regulation performance at
different types of college settings. There were 16 students randomly selected from
each college, eight being diagnosed with ADHD and eight not being diagnosed with
39
ADHD. The student population is ethnically diverse at all three colleges. The
students must be registered with the disabilities office as having ADHD to
participate in the research. Participants were chosen randomly and through
snowballing. Table 3.1 summarizes the frequencies of gender and ethnicity of the
ADHD students.

Table 3.1
Frequency of Gender and Ethnicity of the ADHD Students
Variable Number Percent
Gender
Female n = 18 75%
Male n = 6 25%
Ethnicity
African American n = 1 4.2%
Asian n = 1 4.2%
Caucasian n = 11 45.8%
Hispanic n = 6 25%
Indian n = 1 4.2%
Middle Eastern n = 1 4.2%
Missing n = 4 16.8%
40
The following table summarizes the frequencies of gender and ethnicity of the Non-
ADHD students.

Table 3.2
Frequency of Gender and Ethnicity of the Non-ADHD Students
Variable Number Percent
Gender
Female n = 15 62.5%
Male n = 9 37.5%
Ethnicity
African American n = 1 4.2%
Asian n = 11 45.8%
Caucasian n = 2 8.3%
Hispanic n = 6 25%
Missing n = 3 12.5%
41
Table 3.3
College Level, Year in College, Gender, Ethnicity and College GPA of the Students
Without ADHD
NOADHD
Students
Four or two year
college level Year in College Sex Ethnicity
College
GPA
Participant 1 4 PRI Freshman F Asian 3.1
Participant 2 4 PRI Freshman F Asian 3.8
Participant 3 4 PRI Freshman F Caucasian 3.7
Participant 4 4 PRI Freshman M Hispanic 3.8
Participant 5 4 PRI Freshman M Asian 3.8
Participant 6 4 PRI Freshman F Asian 3.8
Participant 7 4 PRI Sophomore F Asian 3.9
Participant 8 4 PRI Freshman F Asian 3.9
Participant 9 4 PUB Sophomore F
Participant 10 4 PUB Senior F Hispanic 3.1
Participant 11 4 PUB Junior M No Contact No Contact
Participant 12 4 PUB Senior F African American 2.7
Participant 13 4 PUB Junior M Asian 3.2
Participant 14 4 PUB Senior M No Contact No Contact
Participant 15 4 PUB Junior F Asian 3.4
Participant 16 4 PUB Sophomore F Hispanic 3.7
Participant 17 2 CC Sophomore M Asian 3.4
Participant 18 2 CC Sophomore F Caucasian 3.2
Participant 19 2 CC 3rd M Hispanic 2.9
Participant 20 2 CC 4th F No Contact No Contact
Participant 21 2 CC Sophomore M Hispanic 3.7
Participant 22 2 CC 3rd M Hispanic 3.5
Participant 23 2 CC Sophomore F Asian 3.7
Participant 24 2 CC 2nd F Asian 3.9
Note. Four or two year college level (PRI =Private, PUB = Public College, CC = Community
College); Sex (F = Female, M = Male)
42
Instrumentation
The current study investigates ADHD and self-regulation. Mixed
methodology was used. For quantitative data, information was gathered using the
Self-Regulations Questionnaire survey (SRQ). The Self-Regulation Questionnaire
(Brown, Miller, & Lawendowki, 1999) was developed to assess self-regulatory
processes through self-report and is in the public domain and may be freely used,
adapted, reproduced without special permission. An interview was also conducted
with 48 students, 16 from each college. Details of each of the instruments used are
provided below.
Demographic Data
The demographic data was self-reported. All participants completed
demographic and background information survey which included age, sex, ethnicity,
and college GPA (Appendix F). In terms of sex, male was coded as 1 and female, 0.
The ethnicity was coded as African American, 1; Asian, 2; Caucasian, 3; Hispanic, 4;
and Others (Indian and Middle Eastern), 5.
Self-Regulation Instrument (SRQ)
Self-regulation was examined using an instrument of the Self-Regulation
Questionnaire developed by Brown, Miller, and Lawendowski (1999) (Appendix, F).
They developed the items to measure self-regulation behaviors in the seven sub–
processes of the Miller and Brown (1991) model: (1) Receiving relevant information,
(2) Evaluating the information and comparing it to norms, (3) Triggering change, (4)
Searching for options, (5) Formulating a plan, (6) Implementing the plan, and (7)
43
Assessing the plan's effectiveness. The total items of the SRQ consists of 63. A 5-
point Likert scale with the following scale points were used for the current study to
score each item: 1–Strongly disagree, 2–Disagree, 3–Uncertain or Unsure, 4–Agree,
and 5–Strongly Agree. Among the 63 items, 26 were reverse coded with the
following scoring: 1=5, 2=4, 3=3, 4=2, and 5=1. The specific 26 items included 2, 3,
4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 19, 20, 21, 24, 26, 29, 31, 33, 37, 40, 43, 45, 50, 55, 62, and
63. The Cronbach’s alpha of the current scale of the total of 63 was .86. The
reliabilities of the subscales of the current study were also conducted. The Receiving
relevant information subscale consisted of 9 items and the sample items were “Often
I don't notice what I'm doing until someone calls it to my attention” and “I usually
keep track of my progress toward my goals.” The Cronbach’s alpha of the current
subscale was .65. The Evaluating subscale was comprised of eight items and the item
number two was deleted as it was a poor item lowering the scale’s reliability. Its
sample items included “I think a lot about how I'm doing” and “I don't care if I'm
different from most people” and its Cronbach’s alpha was .61. The Triggering
subscale was not included in this study because of its low reliability obtained with
the current sample. Its reliability was not at the acceptable level showing much
smaller than .60 after deleting one of the items in the subscale. The Searching
subscale consisted of 9 items and its sample items were “There is usually more than
one way to accomplish something” and “As soon as I see a problem or challenge, I
start looking for possible solutions.” The Cronbach’s alpha of the current subscale
was .68. The Formulating a plan subscale included 9 items and its sample items were
44
“I have trouble making up my mind about things” and “I have a hard time setting
goals for myself.” Its Cronbach’s alpha was .77. The Implementing subscale
consisted of 9 items and its sample items were “I have a lot of willpower” and “I am
able to resist temptation.” Its Cronbach’s alpha was .65. The Assessing subscale was
comprised of 8 items (e.g. “I set goals for myself and keep track of my progress” and
“When I'm trying to change something, I pay a lot of attention to how I'm doing) and
the item number 63 was deleted as it lowered the subscale’s reliability. Its
Cronbach’s alpha was .66.

Table 3.4
Summary the Reliability of the Scale and its Subscales
Scales/Subscales Reliabilities
Self-regulatory questionnaire .861
Receiving .645
Evaluating .607
Triggering .60
Searching .682
Formulating .765
Implementing .653
Assessing .658
45
Interview Questionnaire
Interviews were conducted with the students with ADHD and the students
without ADHD over four weeks. A total of 48 students were interviewed, 24 ADHD
and 24 Non-ADHD students. For each college, 16 students were interviewed, eight
with ADHD and eight without ADHD. The interviewer advertised with fliers as well
as used snowballing to recruit two types of undergraduate students: 1. Students
diagnosed with ADHD, and 2. Students not diagnosed with ADHD. The interview
consisted of two main sections: 1. Background interview including demographic and
educational information and 2. Interviews on motivation strategies. The specific
interview questions are listed in Appendix F. A few sample questions were “Do you
set goals to help you succeed as a student? Probe: If so, what kinds of goals and have
they worked for you?” and “Do you make specific plans to help you succeed as a
student? Probe: If so, what kinds and do they work for you?”
Procedure and Data Collection
The researcher obtained IRB approval from the required institution and
permissions from the disability office at the community college and four-year
colleges to conduct interviews. The survey and interviews were completed during the
first few weeks of the semester so students could acclimate to the school
environment. Interview protocol was used to ensure reliability and validity
(Creswell, 2009).
The researcher obtained participants from the disabilities office and through
snowballing, and provided them with information on the research project (Appendix
46
D). He presented Information/Facts Sheet for Non-medical Research consent form
(Appendix D), answered any questions that the potential participants addressed to
receive student consent. Students were identified through their responding to an
email from the disabilities office asking for volunteers. Additionally, to recruit more
students, snowball sampling and additional referral steps were used. The researcher
explained the purpose of the study and told the students that participation was both
voluntary and confidential. Once the researcher briefly explained what the research
was all about and obtained student consent, the students were interviewed and asked
a series of 17 questions. Interviews were conducted two to three times, depending on
the subject’s availability, over the course of two to three weeks. The interviews were
conducted for 45 minutes to 1 hour on the participants’ campuses. Students were
given $25 gift certificates for completing the interview. The researcher recorded the
interview and took notes additionally (Creswell, 2009). To measure self-regulatory
behaviors, the researcher also conducted a survey using the Self-Regulation
Questionnaire for 20 minutes.
Data Analysis
The qualitative data analysis involved analyzing and interpreting the data to
find important themes and information on the relationship of self-regulation
strategies with college students’ success in college (Creswell, 2009).
Qualitative Data Analysis Techniques
The following steps recommended by Creswell (2009) were used to ensure
valid and reliable data analysis of the student interviews. All interviews were
47
transcribed for extended analysis and coding using a professional transcribing
service (Patton, 2002). Emerging themes were identified and categorized. Using the
guided categories, the interview results were examined in student’s self-regulatory
behaviors including goal setting, planning, monitoring, and perseverance. The
interviews were also looked into in relation to academic success strategies, learning
student success strategies, expectations for the course, examples of important
learning events and beliefs on their performance in classes. The opening coding
process produced the categories of the self-regulatory strategies that supported the
student success in college. To control for the threats to internal validity, member-
checking of the coding and themes was conducted. The themes were quantified to
examine how many times a particular theme each participant used for their self-
regulatory strategies. The most frequently used three to five themes were selected to
be examined in details. Their percentage and frequency analyses were conducted for
quantification of the themes using the SPSS 19.
Quantitative Data Analysis Techniques
For research question 2 regarding the examination of the students with
ADHD at a two-year college level, only two themes were identified due to the fewer
number of the students who were interviewed. Finally, the most employed themes
were examined in relation to the quantitative results.
For the quantitative data analysis, a preliminary analysis was conducted to
examine means, standard deviations and Pearson product correlations for the
observed variables for all participants and the student group with ADHD. The
48
descriptive statistics including means and standard deviations were conducted for
both the student group with ADHD and the student group without ADHD. To answer
the research questions 1 and 2, ANOVA tests were run to examine the mean
difference between the groups in self-regulation using the quantitative data. The
subscales were also tested to examine mean differences between the groups in
specific self-regulation strategies. The model of ANOVA may be defined as:
 Yij = αi + εij
 Yi is the vector of observations for group i on Self-regulation/ Receiving
/Evaluating/Triggering/Searching/Formulating/Implementing/Assessing
 αi is the effect of group i;
 εij is the experimental error.

Summary
Two research questions will guide this study taking place at three different
college environments including students with and without ADHD. The results will
be presented in the following chapter.
49
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
This chapter presents statistical and qualitative findings to answer the
following research questions:
1. What role does self-regulation play in the learning experience of college
students with ADHD compared to college students without ADHD?
2. What role does self-regulation play in the learning experience of college
students with ADHD and without ADHD at a two-year college vs. four-
year college level?
Preliminary Analysis
Intercorrelations with All Participants
Intercorrelations between all variables were examined using Pearson Product
Correlations for the student group with ADHD and the students without ADHD. The
means, standard deviations, and correlations of demographic variables, achievement
score, self-regulation and its subscales are listed in Table 4.1. The group was
negatively related to Grade Point Average (GPA), r = -.39, p < .05, designating that
the student group without ADHD were more likely to have higher GPAs than those
with ADHD. The group was also related to self-regulation, r = -.29, p < .05,
indicating that the students without ADHD showed higher self-regulatory behaviors
than their counterparts. Ethnicity was negatively correlated to GPA, r = -.38, p < .05.
This means that Hispanic, Indians and Middle Eastern students had lower GPA than
Asian and Caucasian students. Except for the evaluating subscale, the others were
50
highly correlated with the self-regulatory scale: receiving, r = .70, p < .01; searching,
r = .74, p < .01; formatting, r = .87, p < .01; implementing, r = .77, p < .01; and
assessing, r = .75, p < .01. The receiving subscale was significantly correlated with
all subscales except for the evaluating subscale: searching, r = .33, p < .01;
formatting, r = .68, p < .01; implementing, r = .42, p < .01; and assessing, r = .35, p
< .01. The searching subscale was significantly related to formatting, r = .55, p < .01,
implementing, r = .41, p < .01, and assessing, r = .48, p < .01. The formatting
subscale was significantly correlated to implementing, r = .63, p < .01 and assessing,
r = .62, p < .01. The implementing subscale related to assessing r = .65, p < .01. The
self-regulatory behavior, particularly evaluating the information and comparing it to
norms did not relate to receiving relevant information, r = -.24, p > .05; searching for
options, r = .06, p > .05; formulating a plan, r = -.22, p > .05; implementing the
plan, r = -.09, p > .05 ; and assessing the plan's effectiveness, r = -.12, p > .05.
51
Table 4.1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Pearson Product Correlations for Measured
Variables
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Group --- .26 -.14 -.39* .27 .00 -.29*
2. Ethnicity 3.09 .98 --- .13 -.38* .05 -.21 .05
3. Gender --- -.12 .02 -.10 .01
4. GPA 3.33 0.57 --- -.20 .29 .19
5. Class 2.53 1.16 --- .27 -.07
6. College Years .67 .47 --- .16
7. TMSR 3.56 .33 ---
8. Receiving 3.47 .56
9. Evaluating 3.41 .47
10. Searching 3.94 .48
11. Formatting 3.40 .63
12. Implementing 3.47 .59
13. Assessing 3.69 .45
Note. Group (1 = Students with ADHD, 0 = Students without ADHD); Ethnicity (African American =
1, Asian = 2, Caucasian = 3, Hispanic = 4, Others (Indian and Middle Eastern = 5) Sex (1 = Male, 0 =
Female); GPA = Cumulative Grade Point Average; Class = Year in school (1 = Freshman, 2 =
sophomore, 3 = Junior, 4 = Senior); College Years ( Four years college =1, two years college = 0);
TSR = Total mean of self-regulation
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

52
Table 4.1, continued
Variable M SD 8 9 10 11 12 13
1. Group -.28 -.06 -.23 -.26 -.20 -.18
2. Ethnicity 3.09 .98 .10 -.30 -.11 .20 .12 .05
3. Gender -.10 .20 -.05 -.04 .04 .04
4. GPA 3.33 0.57 .18 .07 .12 .12 .15 .13
5. Class 2.53 1.16 -.12 .15 .01 -.17 .00 -.08
6. College Years .67 .47 .09 -.05 .10 .06 .12 .11
7. TMSR 3.56 .33 .70** .02 .74** .87** .77** .75**
8. Receiving 3.47 .56 --- -.24 .33* .68** .42** .35*
9. Evaluating 3.41 .47 --- .06 -.22 -.09 -.12
10. Searching 3.94 .48 --- .55** .41** .48**
11. Formatting 3.40 .63 --- .63** .62**
12. Implementing 3.47 .59 --- .65**
13. Assessing 3.69 .45 ---
53
Intercorrelations with ADHD Students
This section summarizes the intercorrelations between all variables with the
students with ADHD. The means, standard deviations, and correlations of
demographic variables, achievement score, self-regulation and its subscales are listed
in Table 4.2. The self-regulatory scale was significantly related to all subscales
except for the evaluating subscale: receiving, r = .75, p < .01; searching, r = .77, p <
.01; formatting, r = .89, p < .01; implementing, r = .77, p < .01; and assessing, r =
.79, p < .01. The receiving subscale was significantly correlated with the following
subscales: formatting, r = .69, p < .01and implementing, r = .45, p < .01. The
searching subscale was significantly related to formatting, r = .70, p < .01,
implementing, r = .43, p < .01, and assessing, r = .58, p < .01. The formatting
subscale was significantly correlated to implementing, r = .73, p < .01 and assessing,
r = .64, p < .01. The implementing subscale related to assessing r = .71, p < .01.
Evaluating the information and comparing it to norms did not relate to receiving
relevant information, r = -.19, p > .05; searching for options, r = .28, p > .05;
formulating a plan, r = -.36, p > .05; implementing the plan, r = -.37, p > .05 ;and
assessing the plan's effectiveness, r = -.22, p > .05.

54
Table 4.2
Means, Standard Deviations, and Pearson Product Correlations for Measured
Variables
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Ethnicity 3.32 .95 --- -.75 -.36 -.38 -.01 .13 .29
2. Gender --- -.23 -.02 .00 -.14 -.24
3. GPA 3.12 .66 --- .18 .37 .01 .14
4. Class 2.88 1.19 --- .68** .11 -.11
5. College Years .67 .48 --- .32 .13
6. TMSR 3.47 .33 --- .75**
7. Receiving 3.33 .55 ---
8. Evaluating 3.38 .44
9. Searching 3.83 .47
10. Formatting 3.24 .64
11. Implementing 3.33 .55
12. Assessing 3.61 .44
Note. Ethnicity ( African American = 1, Asian = 2, Caucasian = 3, Hispanic = 4, Others (Indian and
Middle Eastern) = 5) Sex (1 = Male, 0 = Female); GPA = Cumulative Grade Point Average; Class =
Year in school (1 = Freshman, 2 = sophomore, 3 = Junior, 4 = Senior); College Years ( Four years
college =1, two years college = 0); TSR = Total mean of self-regulation
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

55
Table 4.2, continued
Variable M SD 8 9 10 11 12
1. Ethnicity 3.32 .95 -.57* -.08 .30 .26 .13
2. Gender .19 -.16 -.21 -.02 -.01
3. GPA 3.12 .66 -.20 -.07 .02 .04 .03
4. Class 2.88 1.19 .59** .26 -.11 -.04 .15
5. College Years .67 .48 .24 .31 .13 .28 .49*
6. TMSR 3.47 .33 -.10 .77** .89** .77** .79**
7. Receiving 3.33 .55 -.19 .40 .69** .45* .39
8. Evaluating 3.38 .44 ---- .28 -.36 -.37 -.22
9. Searching 3.83 .47 --- .70** .43* .58**
10. Formatting 3.24 .64 --- .73** .64**
11. Implementing 3.33 .55 --- .71**
12. Assessing 3.61 .44 ---
56
Research Question 1
Quantitative Results
To examine what role self-regulation played in the learning experience of
college students with ADHD, an ANOVA was performed. The difference in self-
regulation between the students with ADHD and the students without ADHD was
examined. The results of the analysis showed that there was a significant mean
difference in self-regulation between both groups, F (1, 47) = 4.353, p < .05. This
result indicated that the students without ADHD presented a mean of 0.1931 more
than its counterparts with ADHD. The means and standard deviations of both groups
are summarized in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3
ANOVA: the Students With ADHD (N=24) and the Students Without ADHD (N=24)
Students with
ADHD
Students without
ADHD
Dependent
Variables Mean SD Mean SD DF F Sig
Self-
Regulation
3.468 .3326 3.661 .308 47 4.353 p < .05
Note. Independent Variables = groups, students with ADHD and students without ADHD; Dependent
Variables = Self-Regulation; SD = Standard Deviation

57
In addition, sub-analyses were conducted to examine mean differences in
specific self-regulation strategies between these two groups in the following
constructs: receiving, evaluating, searching, formatting, implementing and assessing.
The results of the analysis showed that there was a close to a significant mean
difference in receiving between the two groups, F (1, 47) = 3.828, p = .056. The
means in both groups in receiving follows as students with ADHD, 3.333 and
students without ADHD, 3.639. According to the results of the rest of the analysis,
there were no significant mean differences in the other subscales between the
observed two groups: evaluating, F (1, 47) = .139, p = .711; triggering, F (1, 47) =
.333, p = .566; searching, F (1, 47) = 2.601, p = .144; formatting, F (1, 47) = 3.323,
p = .75; implementing, F (1, 47) = 1.971, p = .167 and assessing, F (1, 47) = 1.499, p
= .227. The students without ADHD presented higher means in all these subscales
than their counterparts. The means and standard deviations of both groups in all
observed subscales are presented in Table 4.4.

58
Table 4.4
MANOVA: the Students With ADHD (N=24) and the Students Without ADHD
(N=24)
Students with
ADHD
Students without
ADHD

Dependent
Variables Mean SD Mean SD DF F Sig
Receiving 3.333 .549 3.63 .533 47 3.828 p = .056
Evaluating 3.380 .441 3.431 .504 47 .139 p =.711
Triggering 3.546 .357 3.607 .365 47 .333 p = .566
Searching 3.829 .474 4.047 .461 47 2.601 p = .144
Formatting 3.241 .640 3.560 .591 47 3.323 p = .750
Implementing 3.329 .555 3.565 .609 47 1.971 p = .167
Assessing 3.616 .443 3.773 .447 47 1.499 p = .227
Note. Independent Variables = groups, students with ADHD and students without ADHD;
Dependent Variables = Self-Regulation; SD = Standard Deviation

59
In the observation of the means of all self-regulation strategies, searching behavior
was found to show the highest mean for both groups.
Qualitative Results
There were 48 participants interviewed at three colleges, 16 at each college.
Eight participants were diagnosed with ADHD and eight participants were not
diagnosed with ADHD. The age range of participants was ~18-22 years old. The
goal was to interview each participant and learn more about the role self regulation
strategies played in their academic success.
Self-regulatory strategies used by the students with ADHD.
This section focuses on discussing the findings for the qualitative data.
According to the outcomes of the interview data analysis, five emerging themes of
self-regulation strategies were identified for the students with ADHD: (1) goal
setting, (2) perseverance, (3) keeping records/notes, (4) monitoring, and (5) planning
and seeking assistance/information from professors. The other identified themes
included organizing, reviewing materials, seeking assistance/information from peers,
evaluation, time management, checking goals, previewing texts/materials, and
seeking help from parents and TA’s. The five major emerging themes, their
percentages, and frequencies are summarized in Table 4.5.

60
Table 4.5
Emerging Themes, Percentage, and Frequency (N=22)
Themes Percentage Frequency
1. Goal-setting 90.9 20
2. Perseverance 90.9 20
3. Keeping records/notes 77.3 17
4. Monitoring 59.1 15
5. Planning 59.1 13
6. Seeking assistance 59.1 13

Goal setting.
Setting long-term and short term goals was the most often used self-
regulatory strategy of college students with ADHD. This was a self-regulation
strategy the participating students used to help them understand classes and
accomplish their tasks. The following student described his learning experience in
relation to goal settings such as completing classes and more importantly to
understand classes. The main goals of some of the other students included passing
classes, getting degrees and getting grades they aimed for. A student from a four year
private college stated that she knew that she could not obtain A’s for all classes, but
she established goals that she could accomplish such as learning and passing the
courses:
61
Well, if I had an academic goal it would be to pass my classes, but more
importantly, to understand. Because I'm pretty sure I'm not going to win
every class. I'm not going to get an A in every class. I try to accept that
without feeling defeated, because I feel like that.

It was also found that the ADHD students set long term goals while they
studied in college and employed their self-regulatory behavior to support their
obtaining a Master’s degree or careers in the future. It was found that they set their
short term goals in a degree that they could achieve rather than putting too high of
expectations in their learning and academic success. Another student from a four
year private college stated that his short term goal was to complete classes and long
term goal was to get a master’s degree. The student pointed out that current goal was
just completing classes, “Goals, the goals that I set is just finishing my classes at a
time.” His long term goal was to study counseling in graduate school because he
wanted to get the degree. “Long-term goals are what my requirements are. I want to
get my masters in counseling.” This student had a long-term goal stronger than a
short term goal that allowed him to become more motivated in school. In addition,
another student from a four year private college set a target grade and his academic
goal seemed to be static, “I just want a C. I just shoot for a C. I do better sometimes,
but that's my goal.” He stated that he did not readjust his grade goal over the course
of taking the class because of the difficulty of school. “It's hard. School's hard.
Generally just passing is my goal. Sometimes I exceed it, but it's not knowingly.”
His short term goal was simply to get a C or above and this is where his motivation
was.
62
Another student stated that her initial goal was to master the concepts
because she liked to learn. Her goal was changed with her perception on the
difficulty of getting better grades or maintaining the current grades as she stated
getting higher grades to be an important goal that she needed to achieve with better
study skills:
Inherently the learning goal is to appreciate the concepts and content. Like I
like reading. I like learning. I like analyzing. I think it should be more to get
the grade, because I feel like that's what I've always been lacking. I think I've
gotten by on the fact that I'm decent with content and teachers like me, so
that's why I get B's. But really to get A's and to keep getting B's at this point
because it gets more difficult, you need to have better study skills.

This student had goals that included going beyond getting a letter grade, but mastery
of content. There were both internal and external motivational factors. The goal
setting self-regulation strategy played an important role influencing the ADHD
students’ learning experience, and students’ outcome and shaped how they currently
performed in the educational system.
Perseverance.
The second most used self-regulatory strategy by ADHD students was
perseverance. Perseverance is a characteristic of self-regulation strategies as it shows
students’ commitment to accomplish tasks and reach their desired goal. A student
indicated that he persevered to complete a task in balance with other activities rather
than focusing on one particular task in response of what made him stay on track and
if he was disciplined:
63
I feel like I do what I have to do when I need to do it. I can slip up one day
and choose to do something else when I should have been studying, but then
I’ll fix that the next day.

Some students commented that they persevered on particular tasks if it was
related to their value. A student was able to get an A in a dance class because it was
a hobby for her so she continued to do it compared to her other classes; she valued
dance more than her other coursework: “Persevered. I would say dance. When I took
the dance class, it was really easy for me, because it was more like a hobby for me
and I basically ended up with an A in that class.”
Another student also pointed out that he spent a lot of time learning in some
classes that he was interested in:
There’s some classes where a week into it, I think “Oh, this is really
interesting. I would like to learn this and I would like to really spend a lot
more time learning this because I’m interested in it.”

Another student pointed out that he persevered in school work because of its
utility value in order to graduate college and get a job: “If I was to give up, it'd
probably be totally to not do college, because I'm like totally over school at this
point, but I know I have to do it to get a job that pays. So I guess.”
A student also persevered in classes up to the point that he could not do
anything more to raise his grades: “Last year, I tried my best to raise my grades in
my classes and somehow it didn't really work out, so I kind of gave up in one of my
classes. So that's an example.”
64
Keeping records/notes.
The third commonly used self-regulatory behavior of the student participants
with ADHD was keeping records and notes. Students were shown to have this self-
regulation behavior which enabled them to be more successful in their classes. A
student described taking note as an active process of learning strategy, particularly
with detailed notes:
Definitely note taking. Outside of class reading textbooks. Outlining is big
for me. Even if I outline… writing things down even if I don’t read over them
later, just the active process of taking really detailed notes works for me.

Another student used a flashcard to write the term that he learned in class and also
made notes at home:
I would also take notes on a flashcard and I would study that. I would write
the term on one side and then write the definition on the other or maybe just a
phrase or two on that. Otherwise, another one would be taking my own notes
at home.

Another student pointed out that she learned from writing it out and taking notes
what was useful to prepare for the test and to recall what she learned in class:
I learn from writing it out. Because then when you go back to the test, I kind
of have a photographic memory. So when I'm writing it, I'm like oh that's
what I wrote. I can kind of see what I wrote or know the letters I formed.

Monitoring.
The fourth self-regulatory strategy that the students with ADHD most often
used was monitoring. This is a self-regulation strategy that helps students stay on
track and evaluate if what they are doing is effective or not. A student checked self-
effectiveness on tasks and made an effort to accomplish them:
65
I’ll go to junior college. I ended up going to junior college, but I was upset
with myself that I didn’t push myself after the fact. So that was a failing time
for me. But it was also a realization, this was not like… “Alright, now that I
messed up here. Now I’m going to make sure I know for the rest of my time
in school.” And that’s what I did.

Another student used a performance based monitoring for grades since she perceived
that grades were important for graduate school:
I think that I used... I don't know. It's just been recently that I care about
grades. So I think I monitor how I'm doing on grades a lot more in grad
school, I think there's a huge emphasis on grades, so it kind of just evolved.

Another student monitored and evaluated how he did on tasks when he had time to
examine his performance and was cognitively less overloaded:
When I have free time. Like over Christmas break this year, it was like the
most free time ever. That’s when I take the time to look at how am I doing,
how am I succeeding, like what are my bigger plans. And look at that and
how I want to do it differently. But I feel like when things are getting really
busy, things are just day-by-day, I have to do what I have to do to get by.

Planning.
The fifth self-regulatory strategy the participating students most commonly
used was planning. This is a self-regulation strategy that enables students to
accomplish their short and long term goals by knowing what they want and then
putting a plan together to make it happen. A student incorporated planning with the
monitoring of his grade. He planned to keep or raise his current grades by evaluating
his performance:
I know for me, I usually try as extra credit assignments come up, I try to do
them, because I'm like okay, if I screw up later, I'm going to have those to
back me up a little bit. So I guess that's a little bit of a plan. I try and keep the
66
scores in my grade, and go now I have to study really hard to get this grade to
keep my grade as it is.

Another student employed a time management strategy to have a better plan by
allocating time to do things:
I feel like I’ve always done what works and it’s always worked for me. I just
do things as they come along. I know how much time things are going to take
for me. I know this will take me two days, so I will do it two days before it is
due.

A student pointed out that planning depended on the work demands of his
courses. If he evaluated that a certain class would be challenging, he planned to
study harder. If he had high confidence with a particular class, he planned to make
less effort. His planning was closely associated with his plan for success in his
classes:
It all depends on what the course is. If you go into a course where it's like oh
god, I've heard this course is going to be hard, then I expect it to be, then I
expect oh I should be studying this much. But when it comes down to it, what
do I normally do? I normally don't study as much as I should. I barely scratch
by in some classes.

Seeking assistance and information from professors.
The other self-regulatory strategy students used most was seeking assistance
and information from professors. Students showed this self-regulation strategy by
getting input when necessary and then moving forward with their goals. According
to the results on other types of seeking assistance and information, the students got
help from peers, parents, TAs, siblings and others. When all different types of
seeking assistance and information were examined, the most highly used self-
67
regulatory strategy by the observed students with ADHD was seeking help from
others. It was found that each student showed different sources to get assistance and
information.
As a success strategy, a student sought assistance and information from a TA
or professor with a variety of issues including lack of understanding of course
content, peer insults, and course failure:
Definitely if you have questions make sure to ask them. They’re not going to
answer themselves. I go to the TA if I need help with anything. They’re
usually more than willing to help. Go to the professor if you have a question
with the professor or you don’t understand something or you have a problem
with the class, and you feel like it’s going off course or they insulted you in
some way, then you have to make sure you communicate that. Because
otherwise you’re never going get information or say what your feelings are.

A student found that seeking concrete feedback from professors was very effective in
having higher performances in classes:
Like in the beginning I was doing poorly on the short answers in my classes
last semester, because I wasn’t used to the caliber of what they wanted here
yet. And then I was like, “Oh. Reality check.” So then I went to the teacher
and was like, “Tell me how you want me to do this, like what exactly do you
want?” And then I changed my whole entire way. I wrote based on what she
wanted and I ended up getting full credit on all of them.

Self-regulatory strategies used by the students without ADHD.
For the students without ADHD, five emerging themes of self-regulation
strategies were identified as: (1) perseverance, (2) goal setting, (3) monitoring, (4)
planning and (5) evaluating. The other identified themes included keeping
records/notes, organizing information, seeking assistance from professors and peers,
time management, checking goals over the course, memorizing, rehearsing,
68
previewing, seeking assistance from parents, modeling professor, and mapping out
activities. Table 4.6 presents the five major emerging themes, their percentages, and
frequencies.

Table 4.6
Emerging Themes, Percentage, and Frequency (N=20)
Themes Percentage Frequency
1. Perseverance 90 18
2. Goal setting 85 17
3. Monitoring 80 16
4. Planning 75 15
5. Evaluating 60 12

Perseverance.
The most frequently used self-regulatory strategy of the student participants
without ADHD was perseverance. When distractions came, the students finished the
things which were already in their plan and then they went with their distractions.
A student indicated that she persevered to complete a task because of the
importance of it as well as its utility value. In this instance, a student accomplished
her goal of persevering to get into college. With her plan for getting into a college in
China, first she recognized the importance of passing the exam. She stopped
69
pursuing the examination only when she accomplished her goal of getting into
another university:
Q. Are you a student who perseveres until you succeed or do you give up?
Can you elaborate on when you persevered and when you failed?

A. I gave up? When I decide to go abroad for university, you know there is
like entrance examination in China that is very important and very hard. At
first, I decided to participate in that examination, but then I got an offer from
USC and then I gave it up. Because it doesn’t matter to me anymore.

A student in this example shows perseverance to get an A in his class by going
beyond what is expected. In addition, his perseverance behavior was associated with
his interest in the topic that the course presented, thus showing a self-regulation
strategy. He set a high expectation for his performance and made a continuous effort
for successful outcomes. Through this process, he was able to get the grade he
wanted and feel a sense of accomplishment:
I have a good example of that I think. When I took a writing class here last
year, I had a really interesting topic that I was really into and I decided I
wasn't going to be happy with my project in that class unless I kind of went
over and beyond what the expectations were. And I ended up making a video
and really dedicating a lot of time to it and I felt like, "Yes, I got the A."
because I put in so much work. But I also, just felt very successful in my
pursuits in what I wanted and what I ended up getting.

The following case also presented that the perseverance behavior was related
to interest. A student in this example decided not to persevere in the class because it
was not interesting to him. He did not like the teacher and perceived the class to be
boring. As a result, he did not want to deal with the class tasks:
I took a neuroscience class last semester actually; this was probably one of
my biggest the only time I've given up in grad school. And we had a midterm
that was 50 percent of our grade and I did not like the teacher or class and it
70
was the most mundane, boring, non-exciting class I've ever been in and we
had a midterm and it was 50 percent of our grade and I just decided I was
going to wing it. And it wasn't that I couldn't have studied, it was that it was a
huge mountain of stuff that I had to study and I started looking through it and
I didn't want to do it. I gave up right then.

Some student participants from China pointed out that one construct of their
motivation to persevere with their academic tasks in their current schools in the
United States was because of family expectations, support and obligations and
appreciation to responses by their parents’ support and understandings. The
following example was from a student who persevered in response to her family
orientation and background. When she felt cognitively overloaded with multiple
tasks that she had to deal with by herself as a foreigner, she wanted to give up her
college aspirations in the United States. She was motivated to pursue her learning at
a college in the states because of the support and encouragement of her family:
Last semester, towards the end of the first semester in college you get
stressed when all the finals come, and living alone in the other country, I
always feel that out of support sometimes, so I really wanted to give up. I told
my parents that how about I try to transfer to a college back in China, and
because I can’t take it anymore. It’s too much work here. You have to
concentrate not only on studying but other relationships with all sorts of
people, looking for housing, all the miscellaneous things. But my parents,
they didn’t say anything bad to me. They just tried to comfort me. And they
said, “Well, whatever you’re going to decide, we’re going to support you
anyways.” So I felt really bad to give up, because my parents they were so
nice to me. They not only support me financially – It’s a lot of money to go
to college – they just always think of me as such a good daughter and they
tell their friends how good I am all the time. And I thought, “I can’t be just so
cowardly and just to give up and go back home,” because I know if stay here
and finish college and maybe work a little after graduation.

71
Goal setting.
The second most commonly employed self-regulatory behavior used by
participants was goal setting. Goal setting is an important step students without
ADHD take to become successful in school. This particular student set goals without
specifying them, but knowing the direction he wanted to move his life in:
Yes, I do. I set goals, not that specific. But I do know I always want to push
myself to be one of the best students in my class. And that’s a really general
goal. So that’s kind of it.

Another student allocated time to accomplish his goals. He was task oriented with
the goal of going to professor’s office hours:
I do like go to professor’s office hours. Probably I will tell myself two times
a month. And if it’s a hard class, at least leave one hour for reading every day
for that class. And I would say these are short-term, really, really short-term.

Another student developed goals based on the courses she was taking. For particular
classes, she had goals of mastery of content because some courses were related to her
future goals. For other courses, not related to her profession, she simply had the goal
of enjoying the class. Her goals were also based on her ability to network:
For primary goals, it also depends on classes. Like for the classes, I’m taking
accounting, yoga, golf and two GE classes. For accounting, I really wish to
know the content, know the concept, build network with professors, because I
want to be an accountant in the future. I know that’s going to be in my future
career-wise, and I take it really, really seriously. And for goals for yoga, I’m
just taking it for fun. I don’t really care. I’m just taking it for fun. I just want
to relax and stretch a little bit. And for golf, it’s useful for business occasions,
and I kind of want to have something to talk when if in the future my boss
asks me to go play with him to play golf, I kind of want to at least be able to
hit the ball. Not be really, really bad. That’s kind of a network thing. I don’t
really care how well I do as an athlete. It really depends on what kind of
course it is.

72
Monitoring.
Monitoring was the third most used self-regulatory behavior by the students
without ADHD. Students used monitoring to evaluate their performance, make
adjustments, and keep on track with their goals. Students tended to monitor their
academic success with their grades. Previously, when he met some challenges,
difficulties, something he didn’t understand, his action was to solve the problem
immediately, or as soon as possible. However, the following student pointed out that
since graduate schools emphasized grades, he cared about and monitored his grades.
This behavior was found to be performance-based monitoring in response to the
external motivational factors such as his perception on the graduate school
expectation:
I think that I used... I don't know. It's just been recently that I care about
grades. So I think I monitor how I'm doing on grades a lot more in grad
school, I think there's a huge emphasis on grades, so it kind of just evolved.

Another student evaluated and monitored areas such as if a class was right for him, if
he should seek more help for the professor and TA, and the level of difficulty:
I would say that if I get two not that good grades in a row, I would think, “Is
this the right class for me or am I working the right way or should I talk to
the professors or TA’s for a little bit?”

Another student monitored his performance, reset his goals, and persevered until he
was successful:
Well, last semester I took a class, and I thought it was going to be really
interesting and not that hard at first. And it turned out there were a lot of
readings, and probably because of background differences or something it
was really hard to keep up. So at first I didn’t really get good grades then as I
expected, then I changed my goals to just to keep up with the class and to do
73
the readings and to see improvement, so as long as I see myself improving in
that class. For example, I was not able to talk much before, but now I’m
definitely 100 percent comfortable just to be in that class and to know the
materials. Then I will think I am successful. I have succeeded at least.

This particular student analyzed his weaknesses and the made adjustments. He
monitored his situation and then addressed the problem so that he could have a
positive outcome:
I will definitely go back to the exam and see what is the problem, like what
type of questions I usually lose points on and I attack those weaknesses?

Lastly, another student monitored his grades and used a benchmark to evaluate his
performance:
JH: So would you say you're aggressive with your monitoring? Some people
are on top of their monitoring. Some people just really don't monitor that
much.

DH: I guess it's just after exams. Every time after grades, after I get my
grades, I see what's going on, am I doing well and bad.

Planning.
Planning was the fourth self-regulatory behavior that the students without
ADHD used most frequently. One student got an understanding of when the exams
were and the best way to prepare for them whether it was by reading his books or
notes, or reviewing quizzes:
It’s like for when is the exam, what is the exam then when you begin to
prepare for it. Sometimes you begin from the books, just reading the books.
Sometimes you begin just reading the notes or have a look at the quizzes.

Another student had a time management system for planning. He allocated his time
appropriately so that he could reach his goals:
74
I have the weekly schedule. I have the booklet with me everyday, so I can
write down my schedule everyday. And typically I try to get up earlier in the
morning, just not to waste a lot of time, because I thinking sleeping is sort of
a waste of time. So, and what else? I also put the time of the board meetings
on my schedule as well, because I’m in a lot of clubs, so it’s kind of
overwhelming if you don’t keep track with them, so I put them on my
schedule. They are typically at night, so that takes a lot of my time at night.
So I tend to study in the afternoon because most of my classes get out early.
So I study and finish my homework in the afternoon. And I try to finish my
homework as soon as I get out of class if possible. Like I just finished my
German homework after I get out of the class in case I forget about it.

Evaluating.
The last theme that the students without ADHD used was evaluating
behavior. The students evaluated their performance as a way to make them become
successful as students. This is a self-regulation skill set enabling students to become
more successful. One student evaluated his performance after an exam and if he did
poorly, he learned from the experience and made improvements next time:
Yeah I think if I get a B, it will alert me to reflect what I'm doing is it a
habitual mistake or am I not receiving the material I should have. So that will
make me think, and I will just reassess my attitudes or something.

Another student evaluated his grades making sure his performance was acceptable.
This is a way for him to evaluate the level of difficulty of classes, “I am mainly on
track, I check on my grades, making sure the percentages are good. It kinda gauges
how hard I tried in class.”
75
Research Question 2
Quantitative Results
To examine what role self-regulation played in the learning experience of
college students with ADHD at a two-year college, four-year public college, and
four-year private college level, an ANOVA was performed. The mean difference in
self-regulation behavior between the students with ADHD and the students without
ADHD at the three different college levels was examined. According to the results of
the analysis, a significant mean difference was not found in self-regulation between
the groups, F (1, 22) = 2.466, p = .131. Table 4.7 summarizes the means and
standard deviations of both groups.

Table 4.7
Descriptive Statistics of Students With ADHD at a Two-Year College vs. Four-Year
College Level – Self-regulation
Students at a two-
year college
Students at four–
year college

Dependent Mean SD Mean SD DF F Sig
Self-
Regulation
3.321 .334 3.541 .318 22 2.466 p = .131
Note. Independent Variables = groups, students at a two-year college and students at four –year
college; Dependent Variables = Self-Regulation; SD = Standard Deviation

76
In addition, according to sub-analysis including scales of receiving,
evaluating, searching, formatting, implementing and assessing, there was a
significant mean difference in assessing between the two groups of the ADHD
students, F (1, 22) = 5.211, p < .05. The ADHD students at the four-year college
level had .403 more mean than its counterparts at the two-year college level. The
results of the rest of the analyses indicated that there were no significant mean
differences in the other subscales.

Table 4.8
Descriptive Statistics of Students With ADHD at a Two-Year College vs. Four-Year
College Level – Assessing
Students at a two-
year college
Students at four–
year college

Dependent Mean SD Mean SD DF F Sig
Assessing 3.348 .322 3.750 .442 22 5.211 p < .05
Note. Independent Variables = groups, students at a two-year college and students at four –year
college; Dependent Variables = Self-Regulation; SD = Standard Deviation

In the examination of the means of all self-regulation strategies, searching
behavior was found to show the highest mean for both groups. The ADHD students
at a two-year college level had the lowest mean in formatting behavior than those at
four-year college level.

77
Qualitative Results
This section revealed the findings of qualitative data using the analysis of
interviews. The results of the analysis present four emerging themes of self-
regulation strategies for the student groups with ADHD at a two-year college vs.
four-year college level.
Students with ADHD at a four-year college level.
The four most frequently used themes were found to be: (1) goal setting, (2)
perseverance, (3) planning and (4) keeping records and notes. Table 4.9 presents the
four major emerging themes, their percentages, and frequencies.

Table 4.9
Emerging Themes, Percentage, and Frequency (N=17)
Themes Percentage Frequency
1. Goal setting 94.1 16
2. Perseverance 82.4 14
3. Planning 70.6 12
4. Keeping records/notes 70.6 12

Goal setting.
Goal setting was the most used self-regulatory behavior by the students with
ADHD. Students used goal setting strategies to help them accomplish their short and
78
long term goals. Students stated that they would both write their goals or also just
keep mental track of them. Goal setting was an important theme for students with
ADHD which helped these students stay focused and accomplish their tasks. The
following student used goal setting to accomplish his goals and he evaluated his
progress as the school year went on. He checked in with his goals and would reset
them if necessary:
Q: What kind of goals do you have?

A: I have great goals. Definitely. So if I’m on the edge. Generally I think I’m
going to do well. But as the semester comes along, I’ll see where I am and I
be like, “Well, okay I think this is a realistic push. I have a B now, I think I
can get a B plus.” I’m going to work really hard on this assignment and I’m
going to figure out what the pieces will be for me to do that.

Another student links her grades to learning concepts, but also she has the need to
earn better grades:
Q: What are your initial learning goals for the course? Is it to get the grade?
Is it to master the content, make friends?

A. Inherently the learning goal is to appreciate the concepts and content. Like
I like reading. I like learning. I like animalizing. I think it should be more to
get the grade, because I feel like that's what I've always been lacking. I think
I've gotten by on the fact that I'm decent with content and teachers like me, so
that's why I get B's. But really to get A's and to keep getting B's at this point
because it gets more difficult, you need to have better study skills.

Perseverance.
Perseverance was the second most used self-regulatory behavior by the
students with ADHD. Many students encountered diverse challenges through their
education journey, and through perseverance they were able to have more successful
79
outcomes. Students had different reasons for persevering including linking more
value to a particular subject, getting high grades, or pleasing their parents. The
following student persevered because he enjoyed the subject matter:
…There’s some classes where a week into it, I think “Oh, this is really
interesting. I would like to learn this and I would like to really spend a lot
more time learning this because I’m interested in it.”

Another student persevered despite years of not achieving his goal of finishing
college. College work is challenging and he perceived that he had been struggling
with schools tasks. He still persevered and motivated to complete college:
Q: Do your parents tell you, don't do what we did, finish the degree?

A: Yes. I was actually the one that told myself right at 17 out of high school,
I'm going to start college. Yet, 10 years later, I'm still here. But it has been a
struggle, I've had a lot of obstacles and ups and downs, but I'm still very...

Q: You persevere...

A: Yeah. I'm very motivated and very driven to be done.

Planning.
The third most used self-regulatory behavior used by the students with
ADHD was planning. Students had different planning strategies that allowed them to
become more successful in school. This would include anything from using a daily
planner to mentally keeping track of goals and objectives. The following student had
a calendar to keep him on track of his goals. His calendar allowed him to set specific
time aside to complete tasks:
Q: Any other specific plans? Maybe in lecture and how you go about
succeeding as a student?
80

A: I feel like I’ve always done what works and it’s always worked for me. I
just do things as they come along. I know how much time things are going to
take me. I know this will take me two days, so I will do it two days before it
is due.

Q: Because some students are kind of just floating on a breeze?

A: I have a calendar. I have my Google Calendar and I’m always looking at
the week ahead and I know what’s due in the next week, so how much my
weekend is going to be homework time and how much is not. Yeah. Setting
aside specific plans. I will block a free time on Thursday and I have this due
Friday so that will be the time I do that. It just kind of comes together. I
always a plan for that week, I have a mental picture of what I’ll be doing each
day ahead of time.

Another student had specific plans for each day balancing work and fun activities:
Q: So what are your specific plans to help you succeed as a student?

A: Well, I try to make it so that. Okay. On Mondays, I go straight from
school to work. And I usually do something in the morning. So by the time I
get out of work at like 10:30 or 11 at night, I don't have it in me to study. So I
think it's okay for me to go out and have a couple of beers Mondays and
Wednesdays when I get home from work. But if I do that then it slows down
my Tuesday and Thursday morning. So I have to set myself up. I have to
know myself basically.

Keeping records and notes.
Keeping records and notes was the fourth most used self-regulatory behavior
by the students with ADHD. Students had different methods of taking notes and
studying for tests, but a common theme was that there was record keeping and note
taking done by students. The following student outlines her note taking and record
keeping strategy:
81
Definitely note taking. Outside of class reading textbooks. Outlining is big
for me. Even if I outline… writing things down even if I don’t read over them
later, just the active process of taking really detailed notes works for me.

Students with ADHD at a two-year college level.
For students with ADHD at a two-year college level, in the analysis of the
qualitative result, only two most frequently used themes were examined due to the
small sample observed: (1) keeping records and notes, and (2) goal setting. Table
4.10 presents the four major emerging themes, their percentages, and frequencies.

Table 4.10
Emerging Themes, Percentage, and Frequency (N=5)
Themes Percentage Frequency
1. Keeping records and notes 100 5
2. Goal setting 80 4

Keeping records and notes.
Keeping records and notes was the first most used self-regulatory behavior by
the students with ADHD at a two-year college. Students had different strategies for
keeping records and note taking. The following student elaborates on his strategy
which includes reviewing:
Usually note taking. I don't usually study to be honest. I usually just take
notes. I need to review the subject if I really know that I can't, then I'll review
it. But just for me, I'll remember what they said. And if I took the notes, then
82
something clicks in my mind, just writing it down. So I don't... I just have a
really good recalling, when I put things together I guess.

Goal setting.
The second most used self-regulatory behavior by students with ADHD was
goal setting. The following student discusses her goals which did not include
academic goals, but general goals:
Q: So do you set general goals?

A: Yeah. I mean like goals trying to save money and stuff like that.

Another student discusses her short-term goals of studying with flashcards for
accomplishing academic tasks:
I have set goals. You know I've made a point to make sure that I use my
flashcards, put the information on that. I've made time to come and do the
tutoring center here and get the extra help that I need.

This student discusses his long-term goals and how it fits into his life:
I did a lot of growing up recently so I probably just maturing, seeing the
benefits of long-term goals rather than just instant gratification.

Discussion
Question 1
In examining question 1 from a quantitative standpoint, the findings revealed
that there was a significant mean difference in self-regulation between both groups.
This result indicated that the students without ADHD presented a mean of .1931
more than those students without ADHD. In addition, in evaluating specific self-
regulation strategies between the groups, the results showed that there was a close to
83
a significant mean difference in receiving between the groups. In the observation of
the means of all self-regulation strategies, searching behavior was found to show the
highest mean for both groups.
In examining question 1 from a qualitative standpoint, the findings revealed
five emerging themes of self-regulation strategies for the students with ADHD which
are: (1) goal setting, (2) perseverance, (3) keeping records/notes, (4) monitoring, and
(5) planning and seeking assistance/information from professors. The other identified
themes included organizing, reviewing materials, seeking assistance/information
from peers, evaluation, time management, checking goals, previewing
texts/materials, and seeking help from parents and TAs.
In reflecting on the findings from both a quantitative and qualitative
standpoint for question 1, they point out that self-regulation strategies can play a role
in helping students with ADHD. Students with ADHD are using self-regulation
strategies to help them achieve their goals. If self-regulation strategies can be used
for students with ADHD, then this can be a great solution to help this population of
students. This area will be discussed further in chapter 5.
The results of these findings help give further understanding and clarity to the
research that has already been done on self-regulation (Zimmerman, 2002; Writh &
Leutner, 2008). There are themes that are consistent with helping students become
more self-regulated in past research that is consistent with the findings in this study.
These themes include goal setting, perseverance, monitoring, and planning.
84
In reviewing the framework involving six dimensions of self-regulation: 1.
Motive, 2. Methods, 3. Time, 4. Physical environment, 5. Social environment, and 6.
Performance (Dembo et al., 2006; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994; Zimmerman, 1994;
Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997), the findings in this study share common themes.
The students in this study were self-regulated based on their motivations; they used
different methods to become self-regulated; time management was a factor in their
success; their physical and social environment played a role; and they had different
levels of performance.
Question 2
In examining question 2 from a quantitative standpoint, the findings revealed
that a significant difference was not found in self-regulation between the groups.
There was a significant mean difference in the sub-analysis scale of assessing
between the two groups of the ADHD students. The ADHD students at the four-year
college level had .403 more mean than its counterparts at the two-year college level.
The results of the rest of the analysis indicated that there was no significant mean
difference in other subscales.
In examining question 2 from a qualitative standpoint, the findings revealed
four emerging themes of self-regulation strategies for the student groups with ADHD
at a two-year vs. four-year college level. These themes were: (1) goal setting, (2)
perseverance, (3) planning, and (4) keeping records/notes. For students with ADHD
at a two-year college level, only two most frequently used themes were examined
due to the small sample observed: (1) keeping records and notes, and (2) goal setting.
85
In reflecting on the findings from both a quantitative and qualitative
standpoint for question 2, self-regulation strategies played a role in helping students
with ADHD succeed in school. Students are using diverse self-regulation strategies
with and without medication to help them achieve their goals. These findings support
the position that self-regulation strategies do help students with ADHD. This area
will be further discussed in chapter 5.
The findings from question 2 reflect common themes found in earlier
research for self-regulation (Zimmerman, 2002; Writh & Leutner, 2008). These
themes include goal setting, perseverance, monitoring, and planning. This new area
of finding helps give clarity and understanding to how self-regulation strategies can
help students with ADHD. The findings are also consistent with the six dimensions
of self-regulation which include: 1. Motive, 2. Methods, 3. Time, 4. Physical
environment, 5. Social environment, and 6. Performance (Dembo et al., 2006;
Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994; Zimmerman, 1994; Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997).
Summary
The findings from both Question 1 and Question 2 support the position that
self-regulation strategies can play a role in helping students with ADHD succeed in
school. Both quantitative and qualitative methodology was used in accordance with
Creswell (2009). Triangulation helped with internal and external validity and
reliability (Lincoln & Gube, 1985). In terms of internal validity, the number of
interview questions, probing, as well as observation helped with credibility. In terms
of external validity, a diverse group of students were used at random and through
86
snowballing, at different colleges, to help with external validity. In terms of internal
validity, accurate records were taken, full reports were written up, and there were
inter-rater checks on coding. Lastly, in terms of external validity, data was gathered
using interviews and observations which can be tracked back to original sources.
Other researchers can reproduce the study and its results.
Triangulation helped give further credibility and support for the research
findings due to strong internal and external validity and reliability. Chapter 5 will
discuss what these findings mean, how they can be used in practice, and how
researchers can build upon this study to give further understanding and awareness to
this important area.
The findings in Questions 1 & 2 also help give clarity and understanding to
the area of self-regulation. Common themes of motive, methods, time, physical
environment, and social environment were found in this study which are consistent
with the findings of self-regulation in earlier research. These findings support the
position that there are common areas of self-regulation that can play a role in helping
students with ADHD become more successful in school.
87
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
This study examined the relationship between self-regulation strategies and
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on college students. The areas of
self-regulation and ADHD have independently been studied; however, how self-
regulation strategies can help college students with ADHD has not been adequately
addressed. This study showed that self-regulation strategies can play an important
role in helping college students with ADHD become more successful in college. This
is an important finding because there has been concern about medical treatment
options, and non-medical treatment options have been desired by many. This chapter
discusses the findings of this study within the context of the research that has already
been conducted.
ADHD & Self-Regulation
This study has expanded upon the area of research of self-regulation and
ADHD. Research began with first understanding what ADHD was and how it could
be treated. It was found that ADHD is a serious neurobehavioral development
disorder that causes many problems in individuals including problems in attention
span, impulse control and activity level (Barkley, 2000; American Psychiatric
Association, 2000). These impairments can have a serious impact on one’s life. The
research in this area has been exhaustive to find solutions for individuals with
ADHD with findings that support the position that medical treatments can be an
effective way to treat individuals with ADHD (Barkley, 2000; Bernstein, 2007).
88
Researchers then found self-regulation to be an important area because it
deals with how individuals activate and sustain behaviors, cognitions, affects
(Schunk, Pintrich, & Meece, 2008). This area of research has received more attention
in the past few years because of important findings in helping individuals become
more successful. Areas of research in self-regulation include goal-setting,
monitoring, persevering, and evaluating. These areas are linked to self-regulatory
skills and shape an individual’s ability to motivate and sustain desired behaviors.
The combined area of research of ADHD and self-regulation is a newer area
of study. It has received more attention in the last decade with important findings
(Kaplan & Berman, 2010; Kerns, Eso, & Thomson, 2010; Reid, Trout, & Schwartz,
2005). Areas of particular research include self-monitoring and self-management
which have produced meaningful improvements in students for academic
productivity, on-task behavior, and reduction of inappropriate behaviors (Reid, Trout
and Schwartz, 2005). Findings support the position that self-regulation strategies can
play a role in treating students with ADHD.
This study has now built upon this area of research being that it is a newer
area of research. The particular focus was on college students at different college
settings. Mixed methodology was used. The quantitative research used the Self-
Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ) to establish a foundational understanding of
students’ self-regulation strategies. Supplemental interviews helped provide a further
depth of understanding on students’ experiences using self-regulations strategies.
89
The study found that self-regulation can be an important treatment option for
college students with ADHD just as Reid, Trout, and Schwartz (2005) found in their
research. This is an important finding because it expands the research in this area and
reveals new non-medical treatment options for students with ADHD.
The findings in this study are consistent with the findings of previous
research on self-regulation. It supports the themes found which include goal setting,
perseverance, monitoring, and planning (Zimmerman, 2002; Wirth & Leutner,
2008). These are important areas of self-regulation that students in this study use to
help them become more successful students. The findings in this study also support
the framework of six dimensions of self-regulation (Dembo et al., 2006: Schunk &
Zimmerman, 1994; Zimmerman, 1994; Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997). These
dimensions include: 1. Motive, 2. Methods, 3. Time, 4. Physical environment, 5.
Social environment, and 6. Performance. Students use self-regulation strategies that
are congruent with the six dimensions which supports the position that self-
regulation strategies play an important role in helping students become more
successful in school. The implications for practice are significant which will be
discussed in the next section.
Implications for Practice
There are a number of implications for practice as a result of this study.
Teachers, counselors, administrators, and others can implement self-regulation
strategies for their students with ADHD in diverse ways to help them become more
successful in college. First, disability centers should become further educated on how
90
self-regulation strategies can help students with ADHD. They should understand the
importance of different areas of self-regulation, including goal-setting, perseverance,
monitoring, and other areas so that they can properly educate ADHD students on
self-regulation strategies. The goal is to have disability centers use self-regulation
strategies with their ADHD students with and without medication. With the milder
cases of students with ADHD, students can even use self-regulation strategies
without medication. Educating staff and administration at disability centers who treat
students with ADHD on new self-regulation strategies can be an effective way to
introduce new treatment options for students with ADHD.
Second, school administrators should be further educated on areas of self-
regulation and how this area can help students with ADHD. In orientation and
continuing education courses for faculty and staff, self-regulation should be
discussed and reviewed so that faculty can incorporate self-regulation methods into
their curriculums and other areas. Instructors should teach self-regulation strategies
along with their curriculums. Also, if staff is educated on the importance of self-
regulation strategies, they can better assist students with ADHD in more effective
ways.
Third, the college tutoring center as well as the library can also be a place
where staff and tutors can be educated on self-regulation strategies. These places
offer workshops, seminars, and other resources that can be helpful for students with
ADHD. These places can supplement other locations on campus where self-
regulation strategies should be taught and encouraged.
91
Lastly, educational material on self-regulation strategies should be distributed
to diverse locations throughout the country. These locations should include
psychologist offices, education centers, tutoring locations, various school
environments, non-profits, and other educational areas. The more information that is
out there about self-regulation strategies that can help students with ADHD, the
better off students with ADHD will be. It is important that self-regulation
information is up-to-date, promoted and encouraged on a regular basis in diverse
ways.
The implications for practice for this area of study are numerous. Because the
results of this study are encouraging for self-regulation strategies for students with
ADHD, this area should be given much attention. There are many areas where
educational professionals should be educated of self-regulation strategies for treating
students with ADHD.
Limitations
There are a number of limitations to this study. First, the sample population
used was small. There were 48 students used, 16 for each of three different college
settings; eight students with ADHD and eight students without ADHD. Due to the
small sample size, students in this study may not be representative of the general
body or other college students. From a quantitative standpoint, a larger group of
student should be used in future studies.
Second, there were only three colleges selected, all in southern California.
The study could reveal more insights if the number of colleges and locations was
92
expanded to include different areas throughout the United States and internationally.
Also, limited college settings were used which included settings at a two-year
college, four-year public college, and four-year private college level. Future studies
can include more colleges with diverse settings.
Third, a limited number of questions were asked giving students the
opportunity to answer in an open-ended format. Future research should expand the
number of questions and dig deeper into probing so that more insights can be
revealed. More questions along with additional probing would give further validity
and credibility to the study along with stronger triangulation.
Lastly, all biographical and quantitative data collected for this study were
self-reported. Responses may not reflect actual GPA, ethnic breakdown, or year in
school. In addition, qualitative data, being also self-reported, may not be accurate.
Information was gathered to the best of the researcher’s knowledge and ability.
Future research can use additional steps to increase reliability of answers given by
participants.
Suggestions for Future Research
The combined area of self-regulation and ADHD is an important area of
research and should be further explored. Each area has been studied in depth,
however, the combined area of self-regulation and ADHD has not been given a lot of
attention. This study has provided important findings in that self-regulation strategies
can play a role in treating students diagnosed with ADHD.
93
Future research can focus on a few areas. First, research can build upon this
study by going into more depth in exploring how self-regulation strategies can
impact students with ADHD. The college population can be further explored
focusing on more colleges and expanding the geography. The focus can be on both
contrasting different college environments and highlighting specific college
environments to determine the relationship between self-regulation strategies and
ADHD on students.
Second, the student population can be increased to give further validity and
reliability to the study. From a quantitative standpoint, 48 participants is a small
number so this sample population can be increased much more. The sample
population should also be increased in its geographic area and college environment.
Third, different areas of self-regulation can be studied. To get further clarity
on self-regulation on college students with ADHD, specific areas of self-regulation
can be studied. Also, more in depth analysis and research can be done on the general
themes. By studying this area more, researchers can gain further understanding and
awareness on how self-regulation strategies can be used to treat students with
ADHD.
Fourth, different education levels, age groups, ethnicities and gender can be
studied. By studying these different variables, researchers can get a better
understanding on how different areas can play a role in self-regulation strategies on
students.
94
Fifth, students with different levels of ADHD can be studied in relation to
self-regulation strategies. This type of research can be an important step in
determining the role of self-regulation strategies on ranges of ADHD. The goal is to
get clarity on the role self-regulation strategies can have on a range of cases
involving different levels of students with ADHD.
Lastly, a survey instrument can be used to gain further understanding on
students with ADHD and how self-regulation strategies can help them. The SRQ can
be used or a new model can be formulated to more directly address this area of
research. By having a survey instrument used, counselors, teachers, researchers can
get a better understanding of the area of self-regulation strategies on students with
ADHD.
Conclusion
This study provides an exploratory study of self-regulation strategies that can
be used for students with ADHD at both the four-year and two-year college level.
Self-regulation strategies appear to play a role in helping students with ADHD
succeed in college at both the four-year and two-year college level. Working towards
self-regulation treatment options for college students with ADHD may be effective
and should be further explored.
Other areas need to be further studied to get more clarity on this important
area of research. These areas include diverse college setting, expanding the sample
population, evaluating self-regulation strategies in relation to different levels of
95
ADHD, and further researching areas such as GPA, ethnicity, gender, and year in
school.
This research area is important to society because it gives students treatment
options other than medication. This area of research helps to open up new areas of
understanding, meaning, and solutions for students with ADHD. The implications
are strong given that many students are diagnosed with ADHD and they are looking
for treatment options. When students have more treatment options and there are new
solutions available, students will be able to have succeed at a higher level in school,
thus leading to a positive impact on them, the school environment, and society.
In summary, this study showed that self-regulation strategies can play an
important role in treating college students with ADHD. Further research is required
to get more clarity and understanding on how self-regulation strategies can be
helpful in treating students with ADHD. This area of research is still in its early
stages. With addressing this area in future studies, important findings can be made in
treating college students with ADHD. These finding can take the place and also
supplement medical treatment options.
96
REFERENCES
Agran, M., Cavin, M., Wehmeyer, M. L., & Palmer, S. (2006). Participation of
students with moderate to severe disabilities in the general curriculum: The
effects of the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction. Research and
Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 230–241.

Alexander-Roberts, C. (2006). The ADHD Parenting Handbook. Practical Advice
for Parents from Parents (Second ed.). Dallas, TX: Taylor Publishing
Company.

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of
mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, D.C: Author.

Baker, L. (1989). Metacognition, comprehension monitoring, and the adult reader.
Educ. Psychol. Rev. 1: 3–38.

Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of Behavior Modification, Holt, Rinehart & Winston,
New York.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey.

Barkley, R. (1997). Behavioral Inhibition, Sustained Attention, and Executive
Functions: Constructing a Unifying Theory of ADHD. The American
Psychological Association, Inc. 1, 65-94.

Barkley, R. (2000) Taking Charge of ADHD. The Complete Authoritative Guide for
Parents. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Barkley, R., Fischer M., Smallish, L., & Fletcher, K. (2002). The persistence of
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder into young adulthood as a function of
reporting source and definition disorder. Abnormal Psychology, 111(2): 279-
89. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Barry, L. & Messer, J. (2005). A practical application of self-management for
students diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of
Positive Behavior Interventions, 5(4): 238-248.

Bernstein, J. (2007). 10 Days to a Less Distracted Child. Philadelphia, PA: Da Capo
Press.

97
Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of self-
regulation. San Diego: Academic Press.

Brown, J. M., Miller, W. R., & Lawendowski, L. A. (1999). The Self-Regulation
Questionnaire. In L. VandeCreek & T. L. Jackson (Eds.), Innovations in
clinical practice: A source book (Vol. 17, pp. 281-289). Sarasota, FL:
Professional Resource Press.

Chronis, A., Jones, H. & Raggi, V. (2006). Evidence-based psychosocial treatments
for children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 486-502.

Coutinho, S. & Neuman, G. (2008). Model of metacognition, achievement goal
orientation, learning style and self-efficacy. Learning Environments
Research, 11(2), 131-151.

Creswell JW. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approach. Third edition. Sage Publications. London.

Dale, A. M. Liu, A.K., Fischi, B.R., Ruckner, R., Beliveau, J. W., Lewine, J.D., &
Halgren, E. (2000). Dynamic statistical parameter mapping: combining fMRI
and MEG for high resolution cortical activity. Neuron, 26, 55-67.

Dembo, R., Wareham, J., & Poythress, N. (2006). The correlates and consequences
of drug involvement among youths entering a juvenile justice diversion
program. Journal of child & Adolescent Substance Abuse, 15(4), 1-36.

Dennis, M. (1991). Frontal lobe function in childhood and adolescence: A heuristic
for assessing attention regulation, executive control, and the intentional states
important for social discourse. Developmental Neuropsychology, 7, 327-358.

Duncan T. G. & McKeachie, W. J. (2005). The making the motivated strategies for
learning questionnaire. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 117-128.

Efklides, A. (2008). Metacognition: defining its facets and levels of functioning in
relation to self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychologist. 13(4),
277-287.

Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Nyman,M., Bernzweig, J.,&Pinulas, A. (1994). The
relations of emotionality and regulation to children’s anger-related reactions.
Child Development, 65, 109–128.

98
Ford, A. (2007). On Their Own. Creating an Independent Future for Your Adult
Child with Learning Disablities and ADHD. New York, NY: Newmarket
Press.

Gureasko-Moore, S., DuPaul, G. J., & White, G. P. (2007). Self-management of
classroom preparedness and homework: Effects of school functioning of
adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. School Psychology
Review, 36, 647–664.

Harman, C., Rothbart, M. K., & Posner, M. I. (1997). Distress and attention
interactions in early infancy. Motivation and Emotion, 21, 27–43.

Jacobelli, F. & Watson, L. (2008). ADD/ADHD Drug Free, Natural Alternatives and
Practical Exercises to Help your Child Focus. New York, NY: Amacom.

Jacobs, J. & Paris, S. (2008). Children’s metacognition about reading: issues in
definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22(3-4),
255-278.

Johnston, C., & Mash, E. J. (2001). Families of children with attention-deficit/
hyperactivity disorder: Review and recommendations for future research.
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 4, 183−207.

Johnson, L. & Safranek, S. (2005). What is the most effective treatment for ADHD
in children? Family Practice, 54, 2.

Kaplan, S., & Berman, M.G. (2010). Directed attention as a common resource for
executive functioning and self-regulation. Perspectives on Psychological
Science 5 (1), 43.

Kerns, K. A., Eso, K., & Thompson, J. (1999). Investigation of a direct intervention
for improving attention in young children with ADHD. Developmental
Neuropsychology, 16, 273-295.

Mace, F. C., Belfiore, P. J., & Hutchinson, J. M. (2001). Operant theory and research
on self regulation. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated
learning and academic achievement (pp. 39-65). Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum.

McGoldrick & Wolf (2006). A parents’ guide: when seizures are not the only
problem – learning and developmental issues, 8-33.

99
Miller, W.R., & Brown, J. M. (1991). Self-regulation as a conceptual basis for the
prevention and treatment of addictive behaviors. In N. Heather, W.R. miller
& J. Greeley (Eds.), Self-control and the addictive behaviors (pp. 3-79).
Sydney: Maxwell Macmillan Publishing Australia.

Miranda, A., Presentacion, M. & Soriano, M. (2002). Effectiveness of a School-
Based Multicomponent Program for the Treatment of Children with ADHD.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 547-563.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pelham, W.E., Carlson, C., Sams, S.E., Vallano, G., Dixon, M.J., & Hoza, B. (1993).
Separate and combined effects of methylphenidate and behavior modification
on boys with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder in classrooms. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 506-515.

Petersen, C. (2007). Does Everyone Have ADHD? A Teen’s Guide to Diagnosis and
Treatment. United States of America: Franklin Watts.

Pintrich, P. & Zusho, A. (2007). Student motivation and self-regulated learning in
the college classroom. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher
Education, 731-810.

Porath, C. & Bateman, T. (2006). Self-regulation: from goal orientation to job
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 185-192.

Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (1998). Attention, self-regulation, and
consciousness. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London,
B, 353, 1915–1927.

Pressley, M., & McCormick, C. (1995). Cognition, teaching, and assessment. New
York: HarperCollins.

Reid, R., Trout, A. L., & Schwartz, M. (2005). Self regulation interventions for
children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Exceptional Children,
71, 361–377.

Rief, S. (2005). How to Reach and Teach Children with ADD/ADHD. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.

100
Rueda, R., Posner, M. & Rothbart, M. (2011). Handbook of Self-regulation (Second
ed.) New York, NY: The Guildford Press.

Ruff, H.A., & Rothbart, M.K. (1996). Attention in early developments: Themes and
variations. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sarkis S.M., Sarkis EH, Marshall D., Archer J. (2005). Self-regulation and inhibition in
comorbid ADHD children: An evaluation of executive functions. Journal of
Attention Disorders. 2005; 8:96–108.

Bruckner, T., Hodgson, A., Mahoney, C., Fulton, B., Levine, P. & Scheffler, R. (2012).
Health care supply and county-level variation in attention-deficit hyperactivity
disorder prescription medications. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety,
21(4), 442-449.

Schraw, G. (1994). The effect of metacognitive knowledge on local and global
monitoring. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(2), 143-154.

Schraw, G., Dunkle, M. E., Bendixen, L. D., & Roedel, T. D. (1995). Does a general
monitoring skill exist? Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 433–444.

Stevens, J., Quittner, A.L., Zuckerman, J., Moore, S. (2002). Behavioral inhibition,
self-regulation of motivation and working memory in children with attention
deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Developmental Neuropsychology, 21,
117-139.

Taylor, B. (2007). ADHD & Me. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.

Weinstein, C.E., Palmer, D.R., & Schulte, A.C. (1987). Learning and Study
Strategies Inventory. Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing.

White, H.L. & Rouge, B. (2003). Ritalin update for counselors, teachers, and parents.
Education, 124(2), 289-296.

Wirth, J. & Leutner, D. (2008). Self-regulated learning as a competence.
Implications of theoretical models for assessment methods. Zeitschrift für
Psychologie/ Journal of Psychology, 216, 102-110.

Wolraich, M.L., Bickman, L., Lambert, E.W., Simmons, T., & Doffing, M.A.
(2005). Intervening to improve communication between parents, teachers,
and primary care providers of children with ADHD at high risk for ADHD.
Journal of Attention Disorders, 1, 354-368.

101
Wong, Bernice. (2004). Learning about learning Disabilities. London, UK: Elsevier
Academic Press.

Zimmerman, B.J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Self-regulatory dimensions of academic
learning and motivation. In G. D. Phye (Ed.) Handbook of academic
learning. Construction of knowledge, pp. 105-125. Academic Press, San
Diego, California.

Zimmerman, B.J., & Schunk, D. H. (2007). Motivation and self-regulated learning.
New York, New York, Taylor & Francis Group.
102
APPENDIX A

University Park Institutional Review Board Form
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
UNIVERSITY PARK INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD
FWA 00007099

Exempt Review

Date: Nov 23, 2011, 09:35am
Principal Investigator: Jeffrey Haig
Faculty Advisor: Patricia Tobey
Co-Investigators:
Project Title: ADD and Self Regulation
USC UPIRB # UP-11-00436
The iStar application and attachments were reviewed by UPIRB staff on 11/23/2011.
The project was APPROVED.
Based on the information provided for review, this study meets the requirements
outlined in 45 CFR 46.101(b)(2) and qualifies for exemption from IRB review. The
study is not subject to further IRB review. IRB exemption of this study was granted
on 11/23/2011.

The following documents were reviewed and approved
Certified Information Sheet, dated 11-23-2011
Certified Recruitment Script, dated 11-23-2011
Minor revisions were made to the application, interview protocol, recruitment and
consent documents by the IRB Administrator (IRBA). The IRBA revised documents
have been uploaded into the relevant iStar sections. Please use the IRBA revised
documents if an amendment is submitted and future revisions are required.

To access IRB-approved documents, click on the “Approved Documents” link
in the study workspace. These are also available under the “Documents” tab.

Researchers are reminded that some site/schools require permission to conduct
research even if the research is exempt from IRB review.

103
Sincerely,
RoseAnn Fleming, CIP

Funding Source(s):N/A - no funding source listed
104
APPENDIX B
RECRUITMENT LETTER
Dear [Name],
My name is Jeff Haig, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of
Education at University of Southern California. I am conducting a research study as
part of my dissertation, focusing on self-regulation strategies. You are invited to
participate in the study. If you agree, you are invited to participate in an online
survey and an interview. The survey is anticipated to take no more than 30 minutes
to complete, the focus group interview is anticipated to last approximately 1 hour
and may be audio-taped. A $25 gift card will be given to you for your participation.

Participation in this study is voluntary. Your identity as a participant will remain
confidential at all times during and after the study. Your relationship with will not
be affected whether or not you participate in this study.

If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me at

Thank you for your participation,

Jeff Haig
University of Southern California
105
APPENDIX C
RESEARCH STUDY FLIER

Research Participants Needed
$25 Amazon Gift Card for 1 hour of Time
Study: USC doctoral student conducting research on motivation strategies that
impact college students’ success.

Qualifications: Two types of undergraduate students needed: 1. Students diagnosed
with ADHD, and 2. Students not diagnosed with ADHD.

Commitment: 45 minutes – 1 hour of time needed for an on-campus interview. The
interview will consist of: 1. Completing a brief survey and 2. Answering questions
on motivation strategies. It’s simple and straightforward.

Payment for Participation: a $25 gift card from Amazon will be given to you for your
participation.

Contact: Please contact Jeff Haig @ haig@usc.edu if you are interested. Thank you!
106
APPENDIX D
Information/Facts Sheet for Non-Medical Research
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

THE ROLE OF SELF-REGULATION STRATEGIES ON 4-COLLEGE
STUDENTS WITH ADHD

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to examine the effectiveness of self-regulation strategies
for college students with ADHD. Thus, this study seeks further expand upon on how
self-regulation strategies can help college students who have ADHD perform better.
The goal is to understand the experiences of college students with ADHD and their
experience using self-regulation strategies.

Your participation is voluntary. Your relationship with your school will not be
affected whether or not you participate in this study. You must be aged 18 or older to
participate.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to participate, you will be asked to complete an online survey and
participate in an interview. The survey is anticipated to take no more than 30 minutes
to complete, the interview is anticipated to last approximately 1 hour and may be
audio-taped. You may decline to be recorded and continue with your participation.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will receive a $25 gift card from Amazon at the end of the interview. You do
not have to answer all of the questions in order to receive the card.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain
confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law.

107
The data will be stored on a password protected computer at the researcher’s
residence and destroyed three years after the study has been completed. Pseudonyms
(false name) will be used.

The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s
Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews
and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no
identifiable information will be used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Principal Investigator: Jeff Haig
949-306-7878
haig@usc.edu

Faculty Advisor: Dr. Patricia Tobey
Email: tobey@usc.edu
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for Research Advancement, Stonier
Hall, Room 224a, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1146, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu
108
APPENDIX E
Participant Background Information
The following two tables depict college level, year in college, gender, ethnicity and
college GAP of the participants.
ADHD
Students
Four or two
year college
level
Year in
College Sex Ethnicity
College
GPA
Participant 1 4 PRI Senior F Caucasian 3.6
Participant 2 4 PRI Junior M Caucasian 2
Participant 3 4 PRI Junior M Hispanic 3.9
Participant 4 4 PRI Senior F Caucasian 3.4
Participant 5 4 PRI Senior F Caucasian 3.8
Participant 6 4 PRI Junior F Hispanic 3.5
Participant 7 4 PRI Sophomore F Caucasian 3.8
Participant 8 4 PRI Junior M Caucasian 3.5
Participant 9 4 PUB Senior F Hispanic 2.4
Participant 10 4 PUB Sophomore F Indian 2.1
Participant 11 4 PUB Senior F Caucasian 2.7
Participant 12 4 PUB Senior F
Participant 13 4 PUB Senior F Asian 3.5
Participant 14 4 PUB Junior F Hispanic 3.1
Participant 15 4 PUB Senior F Caucasian 3.1
Participant 16 4 PUB Senior M Caucasian 2.5
Participant 17 2 CC Freshman F Hispanic 2.5
Participant 18 2 CC Freshman F
Participant 19 2 CC 3rd Year M Caucasian 1.5
Participant 20 2 CC Freshman F Hispanic 3.1
Participant 21 2 CC 4th Year F
Participant 22 2 CC Freshman M Caucasian
Dropped
Out 1st
Semester
Participant 23 2 CC Sophomore F
African
American 3.8
Participant 24 2 CC Freshman F Middle Eastern 2.8
Note. Four or two year college level (PRI =Private, PUB = Public College, CC =
Community College); Sex (F = Female, M = Male)
109
APPENDIX F
THE SELF-REGULATION QUESTIONNAIRE (SRQ)
Please answer the questions below from 1-5.
1 Strongly disagree
2 Disagree
3 Uncertain or Unsure
4 Agree
5 Strongly Agree

Question Answer
(1-5)
1. I usually keep track of my progress toward my goals.
2. My behavior is not that different from other people.
3. Others tell me that I keep on with things too long.
4. I doubt I could change even if I wanted to.
5. I have trouble making up my mind about things.
6. I get easily distracted from my plans.
7. I reward myself for progress toward my goals.
8. I don't notice the effects of my actions until it's too late.
9. My behavior is similar to that of my friends.
10. It's hard for me to see anything helpful about changing my
ways.

11. I am able to accomplish goals I set for myself.
12. I put off making decisions.
13. I have so many plans that it's hard for me to focus on any one of
them.

14. I change the way I do things when I see a problem with how
things are going.

15. It's hard for me to notice when I've “had enough” (alcohol, food,
sweets).

16. I think a lot about what other people think of me.
17. I am willing to consider other ways of doing things.
18. If I wanted to change, I am confident that I could do it.
19. When it comes to deciding about a change, I feel overwhelmed
by the choices.

20. I have trouble following through with things once I've made up
my mind to do something.

21. I don't seem to learn from my mistakes.
110
22. I'm usually careful not to overdo it when working, eating,
drinking.

23. I tend to compare myself with other people.
24. I enjoy a routine, and like things to stay the same.
25. I have sought out advice or information about changing.
26. I can come up with lots of ways to change, but it's hard for me to
decide which one to use.

27. I can stick to a plan that's working well.
28. I usually only have to make a mistake one time in order to learn
from it.

29. I don't learn well from punishment.
30. I have personal standards, and try to live up to them.
31. I am set in my ways.
32. As soon as I see a problem or challenge, I start looking for
possible solutions.

33. I have a hard time setting goals for myself.
34. I have a lot of willpower.
35. When I'm trying to change something, I pay a lot of attention to how
I'm doing.

36. I usually judge what I'm doing by the consequences of my
actions.

37. I don't care if I'm different from most people.
38. As soon as I see things aren't going right I want to do something
about it.

39. There is usually more than one way to accomplish something.
40. I have trouble making plans to help me reach my goals.
41. I am able to resist temptation.
42. I set goals for myself and keep track of my progress.
43. Most of the time I don't pay attention to what I'm doing.
44. I try to be like people around me.
45. I tend to keep doing the same thing, even when it doesn't work.
46. I can usually find several different possibilities when I want to
change something.

47. Once I have a goal, I can usually plan how to reach it.
48. I have rules that I stick by no matter what.
49. If I make a resolution to change something, I pay a lot of
attention to how I'm doing.

50. Often I don't notice what I'm doing until someone calls it to my
attention.

51. I think a lot about how I'm doing.
52. Usually I see the need to change before others do.
53. I'm good at finding different ways to get what I want.
111
54. I usually think before I act.
55. Little problems or distractions throw me off course.
56. I feel bad when I don't meet my goals.
57. I learn from my mistakes.
58. I know how I want to be.
59. It bothers me when things aren't the way I want them.
60. I call in others for help when I need it.
61. Before making a decision, I consider what is likely to happen if I do
one thing or another.

62. I give up quickly.
63. I usually decide to change and hope for the best.

The Self-Regulation Questionnaire (Brown, Miller, & Lawendowki, 1999) was
developed to assess self-regulatory processes through self-report and is in the public
domain and may be freely used, adapted, reproduced without special permission.
112
APPENDIX G
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FORM
Student Interview Protocol
Institution: _____________________________________________________
Interviewee (Title and Name): ______________________________________
Interviewer: _____________________________________________________
Survey Section Used:
_____ A: Interview Background
_____ B: Interview Questions
_____ C: Post-Interviewer Comments and/or Observations
Other Topics Discussed:
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
Documents Obtained: _________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
Assessment Interviews
Introductory Protocol
To facilitate our note-taking, we would like to audio tape our conversations today.
Your participation is voluntary and you may stop at any time if you feel
uncomfortable. Thank you for your agreeing to participate.

We have planned this interview to last no longer than one hour. During this time, we
have several questions that we would like to cover. If time begins to run short, it may
be necessary to interrupt you in order to push ahead and complete this line of
questioning.

113
Introduction
You have been selected to speak with us today because you have been identified as
someone who has a great deal to share about your experience with ADHD. Our
research study as a whole focuses on getting an in depth understanding of your
experience as a student with a documented disability of ADHD, with particular
interest in understanding how students with disabilities are engaged succeeding in
college. This study aims to learn more about your academic experience and
hopefully help researchers learn about practices that can help improve student
learning.

A. Interviewee Background
Age, sex, ethnicity, and college GPA:
Interesting background information on interviewee:
What is your highest degree? ___________________________________________
What is your field of study? ____________________________________________

B. Interview Questions
1. What has your experience been with succeeding as a student?
Probe: Can you give examples of circumstances or situations where you succeeded
or failed?

2. What experiences do you have with academic success strategies?
Probe: Would you say you are confident in your ability to succeed as a student?
Describe your experience or elaborate?

3. Do you set goals to help you succeed as a student?
Probe: If so, what kinds of goals and have they worked for you?

4. Do you make specific plans to help you succeed as a student?
Probe: If so, what kinds and do they work for you?

5. Do you monitor/evaluate your success as a student?
Probe: If so, does this action help you?

114
6. Are you a student who perseveres until you succeed or do you give up easily?
Probe: Can you give examples of circumstances or situations when you persevered
and when you gave up?

7. How would you describe your experience with learning student success strategies?
Probe: Can you elaborate specific strategies you use to help you succeed as a
student?

8. What has your instructor done to address your learning needs as a student with a
documented disability?
Probe: Can you give me an example of what was helpful about it?

9. How do you believe you will perform in your courses?

10. What were your expectations for the course? (Specifically with regard to your
own beliefs about your ability to successfully complete the course).

11. What were your initial learning goals for your course (s)?
Probe: How has this changed after taking the course(s)?

12. Describe examples of important learning events during the course that may have
influenced your level of motivation and performance.

13. What did you expect your final grade for the class to be?
Probe: Describe whether you were able to meet your own expectations for the course
or your experiences in being able to meet your expectations.

14. How would your needs in the course be better supported?
Probe: How could your Professor/Instructor have better met your learning needs?

C. Post Interview Comments and/or Observations:

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study examined the relationship between self-regulation strategies and their relationships with college students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This area has not been widely examined so this research was conducted in order to investigate the role of self-regulation strategies on college students with ADHD. The research design used was a case study approach and mixed methodologies. ❧ A sample of 48 students were sampled at three different colleges in Southern California, one being at a four-year large urban college in Los Angeles, another being at a medium four-year public college in Orange County, CA, and the last being at a medium size two-year college in Orange County, CA. At each college, there were 16 students sampled, eight diagnosed with ADHD and eight not diagnosed with ADHD. Information was gathered using the Self-Regulations Questionnaire (SRQ) survey. Additionally, an interview was conducted. ❧ A descriptive study utilizing survey and semi-structured interview was used. The reason for interviews being done was because of the small sample size. The analysis was on meanings, themes, and general descriptions of experiences. The narrative approach was used to get the “essence” of each college student’s experience having been diagnosed with ADHD and how they self-regulated as students. ❧ The results provided support for the importance of self-regulation strategies for college students with ADHD. Quantitative results support the position that self-regulation strategies play a role in helping college students with ADHD. Qualitative results also support this finding. The results of these and related findings are discussed in this study.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Navigating and accessing higher education: the experiences of community college students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

PDF

Understanding the psycho-social and cultural factors that influence the experience of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in Chinese American college students: a systems approach

PDF

Social skills and self-esteem of college students with ADHD

PDF

ADHD identity: a conceptual developmental model

PDF

Postsecondary faculty attitudes, beliefs, practices, and knowledge regarding students with ADHD: a comparative analysis of two-year and four-year institutions

PDF

Factors influencing the academic persistence of college students with ADHD

PDF

The impact of the mindful method Youth Empowerment Seminar (YES!) on students' self-efficacy, self-regulation, and academic performance for becoming college- and career-ready

PDF

Perceptions of college students with ADHD and their learning strategies

PDF

The relationship of students' self-regulation and self-efficacy in an online learning environment

PDF

The executive and academic functioning of stimulant-medicated and non-stimulant medicated adult college students with ADHD: a neuropsychological perspective

PDF

Learning tactic use among middle school students with and without ADHD in an online environment

PDF

An exploratory study on flipped learning and the use of self-regulation amongst undergraduate engineering students

PDF

The effect of reading self-efficacy, expectancy-value, and metacognitive self-regulation on the achievement and persistence of community college students enrolled in basic skills reading courses

PDF

Innovative strategies to accommodate postsecondary students with learning disabilities

PDF

Factors influencing nursing students' motivation to succeed

PDF

Motivational, parental, and cultural influences on achievement and persistence in basic skills mathematics at the community college

PDF

Analysis of innovative teaching strategies for students with learning disabilities

PDF

Effective strategies used by general education teachers to address the learning needs of students with selective mutism

PDF

Approaches to encouraging and supporting self-regulated learning in the college classroom

PDF

A study of the pedagogical strategies used in support of students with learning disabilities and attitudes held by engineering faculty

Asset Metadata

Creator Haig, Jeffrey D. (author)

Core Title The role of self-regulation strategies on two- and four-year college students with ADHD

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 09/18/2012

Defense Date 08/17/2012

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag ADHD,attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,self-regulation

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia Elaine (committee chair), Rueda, Robert (committee member), Sun, Jerry, C. (committee member)

Creator Email jhaig7@yahoo.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-96836

Unique identifier UC11290271

Identifier usctheses-c3-96836 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-HaigJeffre-1202.pdf

Dmrecord 96836

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Haig, Jeffrey D.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA