Understanding the psychological aspects of learning has become crucial in the current educational environment. Multiple research studies indicate that the emphasis on learning has shifted from a teacher-centered to a student-centered approach. To maintain the concept of curriculum, the success or failure of a pupil in the late 19th century was determined by individual differences among students. On the other hand, progressive educational academics emerged around the turn of the 20th century and argued that the curriculum should be modified to accommodate individual differences. This is substantial evidence that students are accountable for their academic success and performance. In today's fast-paced and ever-changing world, the integrity of education has become a major concern. The increasing demand for lifelong learning has increased the need for learners to take responsibility for their learning journey and become self-directed, adaptable, and independent in their acquisition of new knowledge and skills

Self-Regulated Learning and Its Importance in Academics

Self-regulated learning comes into action as a crucial skill for children to thrive in the educational landscape of the twenty-first century. Self redulated learning, which consists of cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational processes that enable learners to govern their learning actively, is essential for determining students' academic achievement (Pintrich, 2000; Zimmerman, 2002). In the last 25 years, self redulated learning has emerged as a significant framework for examining, assessing, and enhancing students' academic achievement (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2008). Combining the concepts of self-regulation and social cognitive learning theory, B.J. Zimmerman attempted to develop a novel regulatory paradigm. Self redulated learning is a dynamic and constructive process in which students set goals and then monitor, regulate, and administer their cognitive, motivational, and behavioral processes, under the guidance and influence of their goals and contextual conditions (Pintrich, 2000). Self redulated learning is a cyclical and iterative process in which the learner uses the cycle to engage in self-reflection, correct mistakes, and prepare for the achievement of goals. It is essential to tailor instruction to each student's needs and learning duties. Also, self-regulated learning could serve as an alternative to the conventional education system (Zimmerman, 1989).

Goal Orientation as a Motivating Factor for Academic Learning

In today's educational environment, the pursuit of academic achievement and the demand for effective learning strategies have become increasingly crucial. Students are expected to actively pursue and be motivated to achieve their academic goals. In this context, goal orientation is revealed as a significant psychological concept that considerably influences how students’ approach, pursue, and achieve their academic goals. The complex interplay of cognitive processes, affective states, and behavioral tendencies that influence students' attitudes, motivations, and academic success strategies is referred to as goal orientation. Understanding the complexity of goal orientation is necessary for optimizing students' learning strategies and fostering a supportive academic environment. Goal orientation is an integrated pattern of thought that leads to various ways of accessing, engaging with, and responding to achievement situations (Ames, 1992, p.261). It has been discovered that there are multiple types of academic and non-academic goal orientation among students (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). The terms "performance-oriented" and "mastery-oriented" were used to describe the two sorts. Students with a performance goal orientation concentrate more on their performance outcomes. In addition, they have a premonition of their failure and the consequences of their poor performance, especially the judgment of others; their happiness derives from the approval of others and external benefits. Students with a mastery orientation are the ones that learn and perform in order to advance their own competence. They aim to master the task and concentrate on ways to develop themselves, such as acquiring new skills and learning from their own and others' experiences, as well as seeking feedback, consulting with others, and asking for aid from others. They are less concerned with their success or failure and more concerned with what they have gained from this educational experience. These people have a strong sense of self-efficacy and a greater commitment to specific goals.

According to goal orientation theory, students adopt a more holistic approach to their learning and strategies for acquiring competence. Goal orientations can also impact how an individual approach a particular endeavor (Elliot, 2005; Maehr & Zusho, 2009). Students can either cultivate a "performance approach orientation," "performance avoidance orientation," or a "mastery orientation" (Ames, 1992). In educational studies, goal orientation has progressively replaced frameworks as a motivating factor. Multiple conceptual studies suggest that the quality of assignment engagement is related to goal orientation strategies. Different parameters such as familial environment, classroom cohesion, school structure, etc., influence students' goal orientation (Ames, 1992) because they are actively engaged in class. In the contemporary educational environment, the vast majority of institutions are promoting or creating conditions for students to adopt a mastery orientation so that they can become independent learners (Meece, 2001).

The Relationship Between Goal Orientation and Self-Regulated Learning

Among the several variables that influence Self-regulated learning in Western educational contexts, goal orientation has received the most attention. Self-regulated learning and achievement goal orientation are two significant constructs in the field of educational psychology that have received substantial attention in recent times. Extensive empirical research has consistently demonstrated a strong and meaningful relationship between Self-regulated learning and achievement goal orientation, highlighting their interconnectedness and influence on students' academic achievements. The correlation between self-regulated learning and mastery goal orientation is a significant factor in this particular association. Mastery goal orientation reflects a desire to develop competence, gain a deep understanding of the subject matter, and engage in learning for the sake of learning itself (Midgley et al., 2016). Conversely, research has also demonstrated a negative relationship between self-regulated learning and performance-avoidance goal orientation. Performance-avoidance goal orientation refers to the inclination to engage in academic activities primarily to avoid negative evaluation or failure (Elliot et al., 2015). It indicates that individuals who possess effective self-regulatory skills are less likely to be motivated by fear of failure or negative evaluation and instead are more focused on the process of learning and personal growth.

Overall, the empirical evidence consistently reinforces the notion that self-regulated learning and achievement goal orientation are intricately linked. Higher levels of self-regulation are associated with a greater inclination towards mastery goals and a reduced focus on performance-avoidance goals. Furthermore, research has indicated that the orientation towards achievement goals serves as a mediator in the correlation between self-regulated learning and academic achievements. Understanding the interplay between self-regulated learning and achievement goal orientation provides valuable insights for educators and policymakers in developing effective instructional strategies and interventions to enhance students' self-regulatory skills, goal orientations, and academic success.

Empirical studies have also indeed examined gender differences in self-regulated learning and have found varying results regarding the self-regulatory behaviors of male and female students. While it is important to note that individual differences exist within genders, some studies have reported higher levels of Self-regulated learning among female students compared to their male counterparts (Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990). These findings suggest that, on average, female students may engage in more self-regulatory behaviors such as goal setting, planning, monitoring, and self-reflection. In conclusion, while studies on gender differences in self-regulated learning have yielded varying results, it is important to acknowledge that individual variations exist within genders, and additional research is needed to further explore the complexities of this issue.

Curriculum and its influence on Adolescent’s Learning self-regulated learning and Goal orientation:  Indian context

This relationship has been the subject of relatively fewer studies in non-Western contexts, particularly India, considering India's distinct cultural, social, and educational environment makes it an intriguing location for studying the relationship between student goal orientation and Self-regulated learning. The Indian cultural emphasis on collectivism and communal values is likely to influence how students approach their academic work and pursuit of objectives. India's educational landscape is also diverse, with regional variations in teaching methods, curricula, and student diversity, which will help the research community to comprehend the relationship between goal orientation and Self-regulated learning   in the Indian context, particularly in secondary school settings. Secondary school students have received little attention in the vast majority of prior research on goal orientation and Self-regulated learning, which has primarily focused on higher education contexts. Nonetheless, the transition from elementary to secondary school is a pivotal period in a student's academic career, as it involves the introduction of new expectations and demands. During this transition, students must develop strong self-control in order to manage the increased academic demands and responsibilities. Considering all the factors, examining how goal orientation influences Self-regulated learning among secondary school students may therefore shed light on students' learning behaviors during this pivotal period of their academic careers and provide significant insights into the developmental aspects of Self-regulated learning.

Kerala is renowned within the Indian context for its exceptional literacy rate and forward-thinking education policies (Mitra, 1999), such as the constant effort to enhance the quality of education, revision of the curriculum, incorporation of techno-pedagogy, and teacher training, etc. (George, Zachariah, &), thereby making it an ideal location for studying goal orientation and self-regulated learning among secondary school students. This study investigates the effect of goal orientation on self-regulated learning among secondary school students in the Indian state of Kerala in order to fill a gap in the literature. The study also will investigate how different types of school curricula (i.e., government and private schools) affect students' goal orientation and self-directed learning. Examining goal orientation and self-regulated learning across different types of schools can yield significant insights into the impact of school curricula on students' learning behaviors and outcomes.

The impact of curriculum on self-regulated learning and goal orientation is a significant research domain within the field of educational psychology. The development and execution of educational curriculum have the potential to influence the capacity for self-regulation and goal orientations of students (Pintrich, 2004). The incorporation of explicit instruction on self-regulatory strategies within the curriculum can potentially impact self-regulated learning. Studies have demonstrated that the incorporation of explicit instruction and assistance for self-regulation within the curriculum can enhance the likelihood of students proficiently acquiring and utilizing self-regulatory skills (Dignath & Büttner, 2008).

The correlation between the curriculum and the goal orientations of students holds the potential to impact their involvement in self-regulated learning. The alignment of curriculum with mastery goal orientations, which prioritize the development of competence and mastery of subject matter, has been found to positively impact students' engagement in adaptive self-regulatory behaviors (Niemivirta, 2012). However, a curriculum that emphasizes performance-approach or performance-avoidance objectives, which center on attaining exceptional grades or avoiding failure correspondingly, could impede the cultivation of self-regulatory proficiencies and result in superficial learning tactics (Middleton & Midgley, 1997). Likewise, the structure and organization of the curriculum can also have an effect on the self-regulated learning and goal orientations of students. An organized and systematic curriculum that offers unambiguous learning goals, logical advancement of subject matter, and chances for decision-making and independence can facilitate the self-regulation of learners (Patrick, Kaplan, & Ryan, 2011).

This study was conducted on private and government schools, which follow distinct curricula, assessment techniques, and pedagogical approaches. An examination of the goal orientation and self-regulated learning of students from private and government schools can shed light on the influence of school curricula and teaching methodologies on academic performance, study routines, and motivation. Literature suggests that school curricula and instructional approaches influence students' goal orientation and self-regulated learning (Schunk, 2001; Bembenutty, 2011). The examination system and evaluation criteria in private schools are often designed to prepare students for competitive exams and high academic performance, which may result in a more performance-oriented goal-setting approach (Singh & Srivastava, 2021). On the other hand, government schools, which often focus on holistic education and conceptual learning, may encourage mastery-oriented learning strategies (Alam, A., & Mohanty, A,2024).

Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a comparative analysis of the goal orientation and self-regulated learning of private and government school students to comprehend the similarities and differences between their learning patterns and accomplishments.

Current study

Despite growing recognition of the role of self-regulated learning (Self redulated learning) in academic success, limited empirical evidence exists on how goal orientation influences self redulated learning among Indian adolescents, particularly within the educational context of Kerala. Goal orientation, defined as the reasons or purposes behind students’ engagement in academic tasks, significantly shapes their learning behaviors and outcomes (Pintrich, 2000; Dweck & Leggett, 1988). While numerous studies in Western contexts have emphasized the link between goal orientation and self-regulatory strategies (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011), the intersection of these constructs remains underexplored in Indian settings, where cultural, institutional, and curricular factors may mediate these dynamics (Rao et al., 2013). This study aims to explore the influence of goal orientation on adolescents’ self-regulated learning in Kerala, India. Specifically, it examines the motivational impact of different goal orientations (e.g., mastery vs. performance goals) on self redulated learning, the role of institutional support in fostering self redulated learning, and the dominant patterns of goal orientation among adolescents. Such insights are essential for educators, policymakers, and curriculum developers, as they can inform the creation of contextually relevant teaching strategies, student support mechanisms, and curriculum reforms.

To guide this investigation, the study addresses the following research questions:

RQ1: How does goal orientation influence self-regulated learning as a motivational element in adolescents?

RQ2: How do government and private educational institutions provide opportunities for adolescents in encouraging self-regulated learning?

RQ3: Which is the predominant goal orientation among adolescents in Kerala, India?

By filling this critical gap in the literature, the study contributes to a culturally grounded understanding of self-regulated learning and offers pragmatic implications for promoting self-regulation through educational policy and practice in the Indian context.

The primary objectives of the study are to assess the goal orientation and self-regulated learning among adolescents of government and private educational institutions, to identify the gender difference in goal orientation and self-regulated learning, and to assess the influence of goal orientation on self-regulated learning among adolescents. Based on these the following hypothesis are framed

H1: Government school adolescents would be higher in their self-regulated learning over Private management school adolescents.

H2: There will be a significant difference with regard to gender on self-regulated learning among   adolescents.

H3: There will be a significant relationship between goal orientation and self-regulated learning among adolescents

H4: There would be a significant influence of goal orientation on self-regulated learning among adolescents.

This study employed a correlational research design to investigate the association between goal orientation and self-regulated learning among adolescents in Kerala. Utilizing a cross-sectional approach, data were gathered at a single point in time through standardized self-report questionnaires. Since participants were asked to recall and reflect on their learning behaviors and motivations, the study included a retrospective component. Being quantitative in nature, the research focused on exploring how different types of goal orientation are linked to varying levels of self-regulated learning.

Participants: The sample for this study consisted of 159 secondary school students, aged between 13 and 15 years, studying in Grades 9 and 10 across government and private schools in Kerala. Only students who could read and write in English were included in the study to ensure comprehension of the self-report questionnaires. The sample was limited to students currently enrolled in Grades 9 and 10, as these grades are critical periods for academic motivation and self-regulated learning development. Students from other grade levels and those attending private schools that did not permit research participation were excluded.

A survey method was adopted for data collection. A multistage random sampling technique was employed to ensure representativeness. In the first stage, government and private secondary schools were identified from various regions in Kerala. In the second stage, students were randomly selected from these schools. This sampling approach ensured diversity in terms of school type and student background, making the sample appropriate for studying the relationship between goal orientation and self-regulated learning among adolescents.

Data Collection and Analysis: The researcher used multistage random sampling to select six government and six private schools from the selected district. Official permission was obtained from the school authorities before initiating data collection. The researcher personally visited each school, explained the study, and built rapport with students. Ethical procedures were followed, including informed consent and assurance of confidentiality. Participants filled out a socio-demographic sheet, the Academic Self-Regulated Learning Questionnaire, and the Goal Orientation Scale. After data collection, students were debriefed and thanked. Data were analyzed using SPSS, applying both descriptive and inferential statistics, including linear regression to examine the predictive role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. The researcher’s training in psychological research ensured ethical and competent conduct throughout the study.

The Scale:  The Academic Self-Regulated Learning Scale, developed by Carlo Magno (2009), consists of 45 items that measure seven key self-regulatory strategies used by students: goal setting (α = 0.76), memory strategy (α = 0.73), self-evaluation (α = 0.78), seeking assistance (α = 0.72), environmental structuring (α = 0.70), responsibility (α = 0.90), and organizing (α = 0.75). Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The overall scale has a high internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.84. Construct validity was established through functional correlation, and predictive validity was supported by a strong relationship with students’ academic performance, particularly their Grade Point Average (GPA).

Goal orientation scale developed by Zweig and Webster (2004) was used to assess students’ goal orientation across three dimensions: Learning Orientation, Performance Approach Orientation, and Performance Avoidance Orientation. It includes 21 items rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The reliability of the tool was established through test-retest method with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.73 to 0.84 across the three dimensions, and internal consistency values (Cronbach’s alpha) ranging from 0.77 to 0.85. Convergent validity was confirmed through significant correlations with VandeWalle’s Work Domain Goal Orientation Scale (ranging from 0.79 to 0.87)

Table 1: Participants demographics

The demographic information of the participants according to the group to which they belong (Type of school), their gender, the type of family to which they belong, and the class in which they are enrolled. The selection of participants was based on two major categories: students enrolled in government schools in Kerala and students enrolled in private or unaided schools. There are 84 government school students and 75 private (Unaided) school students, which corresponds to percentages of 52.8% and 47.2% for each group. Students were picked from three distinct classes in which they are enrolled, with 50 8th graders, 57 9th graders, and 52 10th graders representing 31.4%, 35.8%, and 32.2% of the total, respectively. There were two distinct types of families discovered among the students. The frequency of nuclear families (where children live exclusively with their parents and siblings) is 117, while the frequency of joint families (where children live with grandparents and other relatives in addition to their parents and siblings) is 73.5% and 26.5%, respectively. Males have a frequency of 80, while females have a frequency of 79, which corresponds to percentages of 50.3% and 49.7%, respectively. (Table 1)

Table: 2- Mean standard deviation and t-value of academic self-regulated learning among Government school students and Private school students.

This study reports the descriptive statistics of academic self-regulation among students from the Government schools and the Private management schools. Specifically, the mean, standard deviation, and t-value of academic self-regulation are presented. The results of the statistical analysis indicate that the hypothesis stating that Government school students exhibit higher levels of academic self-regulated learning compared to Private management school students is supported. Specifically, the obtained t-value of 6.70, with a significance level of 0.05 and a two-tailed test, suggests that the observed difference between the two groups is statistically significant. Therefore, it can be concluded that Government school students possess superior academic self-regulated learning abilities compared to their counterparts in the Private management school students. (Table 2)

Table: 3- Mean standard deviation and t-value of academic self-regulated learning among male and female students

This study presents the descriptive statistics of academic self-regulation among male and female students. The initial hypothesis posited that female students would exhibit greater levels of self-regulated learning compared to male students. However, the results of the independent samples t-test revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between male and female self-regulated learners, as evidenced by a t-value of 1.73 and a two-tailed significance level of 0.84. Consequently, the provided hypothesis is rejected. On the other hand, in terms of self-evaluation, the t-value of 2.84 and a two-tailed significance level of 0.005 indicate that female students achieved significantly higher scores compared to male students. (Table 3)

Table 4- Correlation between academic self-regulated learning and goal orientation

This research investigation aims to explore the correlation between academic self-regulated learning and goal orientation. The present study proposed a significant association between goal orientation and academic self-regulated learning. The findings indicate significant positive associations between academic self-regulated learning and various forms of goal orientation; thus, the hypothesis is retained. Specifically, a positive relationship is observed between academic self-regulated learning and performance approach goal orientation (r = .267, p < .05, one-tailed). Conversely, a negative association is found between self-regulated learning and performance avoidance goal orientation (r = -0.369, p < .05, one-tailed).

Furthermore, a positive link is established between learning-oriented goal orientation and academic self-regulated learning (r = 0.613, p < .05, one-tailed). (Table 4)

Table 5: The total contribution of independent variable on dependent variable

The findings of the study provide evidence for the hypothesized relationship between goal orientation and self-regulated learning. The results indicate that goal orientation significantly affects self-regulated learning and its various dimensions. The predictability index of self-regulated learning is 0.642, indicating that the independent variables, namely performance approach, performance avoidance, and learning orientation, account for 41.3% of the variance in self-regulated learning. The obtained f-value of 36.29 with 3/155 degrees of freedom is significant at the 0.05 level, suggesting that the model is effective in predicting the impact of the independent variable on the dependent variable. The beta value for the independent variable performance avoidance is 0.497, indicating a relative contribution of 0.180 to the criterion variable (self-regulated learning). Similarly, the beta coefficient for the dependent variable learning orientation is 1.68, demonstrating a relative contribution of 0.215 to self-regulated learning. The significance of the obtained-values for performance avoidance (2.76) and learning orientation (7.83) at the 0.05 level suggests that these variables have a substantial influence on self-regulated learning among secondary school pupils. On the other hand, performance approach goal orientation does not show a significant influence on self-regulated learning.

Further analysis reveals that performance avoidance and learning orientation significantly impact all seven aspects of self-regulated learning, including Memory strategy and accountability. Learning orientation has a considerable influence on variables such as organising, environmental structuring, and goal setting. Additionally, performance approach and learning orientation have a substantial effect on self-evaluation. Notably, the beta coefficient of learning orientation indicates that this predictor variable has a greater influence on all domains of self-regulated learning compared to other independent variables. (Table 5)

This study sought to investigate how goal orientation affected self-regulated learning among Adolacents.  The researcher created four hypotheses, the first of which implied that Government school students would show higher degrees of self-regulated learning than Private Management school students.  The findings of the study confirmed this research by showing that Government school students really showed better self-regulated learning skills than Private Management school students.  One of the research participants offered insightful analysis to help one grasp the underlying causes of this difference: "Our curriculum is rather rigid, and we have a lot of required work that I don't enjoy doing."  The research also revealed that 70% of Private Management school students felt they had a more demanding workload than those pursuing other curriculum.  The findings align with the article "What Pushes Parents Towards Private Management Schools" by Mr. T. Arulanandam, which highlights that these schools often focus heavily on national admission tests. Driven by concerns for their children's future, many Indian parents prioritize Private Management schools despite higher fees. This creates a high-pressure academic environment, affecting students' well-being. The results reflect the contrasting experiences of students in Government and Private schools, emphasizing how curriculum design and academic pressure impact self-regulated learning.

Both curriculum and teachers play a key role in shaping self-regulated learners. Zimmerman (2002) emphasized that students have unique ways of learning, and standardized methods may hinder their ability to recognize and develop their potential. Supporting this, the study "Predicting Undergraduate Academic Achievement" (Torenbeek, Jansen, & Suhre, 2013) found that rigid curricula with tightly scheduled classes and activities reduce class attendance and limit time for self-study. This highlights how structured academic environments can negatively impact students' intrinsic motivation and self-discipline. Overall, the findings reveal how curriculum design and teaching practices directly influence students' self-regulated learning.

Not adopting such a strategy runs the danger of sustaining an educational system evocative of Paulo Freire's seminal book "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" (1986).  In this approach, teachers just put knowledge into the heads of their pupils, who are then supposed to accurately regurgitate it under questioning.  Participants' comments especially their claim that they are aware of particular areas that will show up on next tests, thereby guiding their study emphasis provide a relevant observation supporting this idea.

Further research is needed to understand why students in Private Management schools often outperform those in Government schools, particularly in memory-based learning. Government schools follow their own curriculum that encourages in-depth learning by including questions beyond the standard syllabus, prompting students to use supplementary study materials (Sindhu & Bindhu, 2017). These schools have adopted a more facilitative teaching style, offering hands-on learning and opportunities for independent exploration. While some students reported being empowered through projects and assignments, others highlighted inconsistent teacher responses and limited use of digital tools like smart classrooms. This suggests that despite progressive reforms, elements of the traditional "banking model" of education may still be present, potentially limiting the impact of democratic, student-centered teaching practices.

The second hypothesis claims that self-regulated learning and goal orientation are significantly related.  Empirical data backs up this theory by showing a notable positive link between self-regulated learning and goal orientation.  Many studies back up these results.  For example, Christopher et al. (1998) claim that goal orientation is a motivating element that enables self-regulated learning, hence improving a student's task value and self-efficacy (Wolters, C. A., Shirley, L. Y., & Pintrich, P. R. 1996).  Learners start the self-regulated learning process by setting goals, which may be performance- or mastery-oriented.  While a somewhat weaker link is seen with performance approach orientation, the results show a robust connection between self-regulated learning and learning orientation as well as performance avoidance.  Pintrich et al. (2022) offer a different viewpoint on these results, stressing the paradoxical character of the data.  Their study shows that pupils with a mastery goal orientation tend to give learning and knowledge top priority, suggesting a greater degree of cognitive involvement, metacognitive processes, and critical thinking.  Conversely, the existence of performance avoidance goal orientation implies that students may show avoidance behaviors motivated by fear of judgment or a belief that their performance will be unfavorably viewed, therefore seeking to preserve their self-esteem (Bouffard, T., Boisvert, J., Vezeau, C., & Larouche, C. 1995).  From this point of view, people who purposefully avoid chores do so to protect their self-worth (Sujan, H., Weitz, B. A., & Kumar, N. (1994).  Ames (1992), Ames and Archer (1988), Corr and Gray (1996), Dweck and Leggett (1988), Nicholls (1984), and others have called the seen behavior "maladaptive behavior."  This paradox results from the fact that the same set of people can show both great drive and a concurrent inclination to withdraw.  The dynamics of the school climate, instructional methods, and even family expectations can affect this phenomena.  The answers given by the participants help to confirm this even further.  One participant, for instance, said that while they like studying social science on their own, constant pressure makes them anxious and unable to learn.  Studying, said another participant, was not for personal pleasure but rather out of dread of punishment from professors and parents if they failed an exam.  Some attendees also voiced their reluctance to participate in creative activities or pose questions in class for fear of peer mockery or teasing.  These instances show how people may still have doubts while being internally driven to learn or finish chores alone since they fear negative social repercussions.

The third hypothesis looked at how self-regulated learning was affected by goal orientation.  The results show that learning orientation has far more impact on self-regulated learning than performance avoidance orientation, and that performance approach orientation has the least effect.  Self-regulated learning includes many goal-directed actions include student initiative, self-modification, and tenacity (Zimmerman, 1989).  These activities include paying attention to teaching, organizing and consolidating information, practicing knowledge for recall, and keeping positive views about one's learning potential and capacity to forecast success (Schunk, 1989).  Strong learning orientation pupils are therefore naturally motivated and will modify their tactics to meet their objectives.  Conversely, students with a performance avoidance orientation tend to avoid challenges out of fear of getting unfavorable comments or feeling humiliation, which limits their involvement in self-regulated learning.  Past studies have often found a notable link between learning orientation and performance approach.  The results of the current study, however, show that performance avoidance has a greater impact on self-regulated learning than performance approach.  Students in high-pressure settings always measuring their academic success against that of their peers may contribute to this result.  Students who are put in a system where they are required to fit to predetermined academic criteria may lose their autonomy since they should ideally be empowered to control their own learning process (Ridley, McCombs, & Taylor, 1994).  Moreover, certain pupils show inner drive and work to manage their learning processes.  This attitude is driven by the fear of failure, which is described as one's emotional and motivational tendency to avoid circumstances that could cause academic failure (Atkinson, 1957; Covington, 2000; Elliot & Thrash, 2004; Martin, 2010; McClelland et al., 1953; Sagar & Stoel, 2009).  It reflects a purposeful avoidance of difficulties or problems that might lead to subpar performance.  Performance avoidance is greatly influenced by environmental elements.  Students' goal-setting reveals their view of the academic environment and curriculum.  Students are more likely to take care of their own education and give a learning-oriented approach top priority when the academic environment is flexible and accommodating (Choi, B. 2021).  On the other hand, in a strict academic environment, students may feel limited in their ability to express their preferences and skills, which could cause them to slowly acquire a fear of failure.  Therefore, in order to keep a feeling of belonging, people might want to fit society's standards and steer clear of difficult circumstances.

The results of the study suggest that there are no notable gender variations in self-regulated learning, hence suggesting that both boys and girls show same involvement in self-regulated learning.  Consistent with the study, female students scored somewhat better than male students in self-evaluation, organization, and help-seeking strategies (Virtanen, P., & Nevgi, A. 2010).  These findings imply that women could be a little more inclined to use these particular self-regulated learning strategies than their male counterparts.  The self-evaluation scores of female students in this study nearly matched those of male students, suggesting a similar degree of self-assessment in their self-regulated learning.  Furthermore, current studies show significant differences in teaching methods and learning focuses among several academic fields (Neumann, Parry, and Becher, 2002; Smeby, 1996).  Unlike the results of the current study, earlier studies have suggested that self-reflection and self-evaluation might not be required for gaining a thorough knowledge of theories or topics (Neumann et al., 2002).  Though their performance is on par with men's, women have been found to have poorer views of their academic ability in mathematics and science.  Previous studies have suggested, contrary to the results of the current one, that self-reflection and self-evaluation might not be required for gaining a thorough knowledge of theories or topics (Neumann et al., 2002).  Though they perform equally as well as males, women have been found to have poorer views of their academic ability in mathematics and science, according to studies (Eccles, 1983; Meece & Eccles, 1993).  A study looking at the correlation between self-regulated learning techniques among higher education students revealed that gender no longer significantly affects self redulated learnıng (Nevgi, A. 2002).  This result supports the findings of the present study and strengthens the idea that self-regulated learning is not significantly influenced by gender.

The findings suggest that both learning orientation and performance avoidance orientation significantly influence self-regulated learning. Internal motivation enhances self-regulation, while rigid academic environments contribute to avoidance-oriented goals that hinder it. A positive link was found between goal orientation and self-regulated learning, with goal-directed students more likely to regulate their learning effectively. No significant gender differences were observed. Factors such as curriculum, teaching style, school climate, peer influence, and academic pressure were found to shape students’ self-regulation and goal orientation. Overall, a flexible and supportive academic environment fosters learning-oriented goals and promotes self-regulated learning, while rigid systems may lead to avoidance behavior and reduced self-regulation.

Conflict of interest

The authors confirm that there are no conflicts of interest to disclose with respect to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or reporting of the research contained in this publication. The work has been reviewed by all authors and they unanimously consent to its submission to journal of social science education

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our sincere appreciation to every participant who willingly dedicated their time and expertise to this research endeavor. Your participation has been extraordinarily beneficial in furthering our comprehension in this domain.

Additionally, we wish to convey our profound gratitude to the department head for their invaluable guidance and support during the course of this investigation. Their assistance and provision of resources were crucial factors in the study's triumphant conclusion.

Funding

This work was not supported by any funding agency.

1. Alam, A., & Mohanty, A. (2024). Framework of Self-Regulated Cognitive Engagement (FSRCE) for sustainable pedagogy: a model that integrates self redulated learning and cognitive engagement for holistic development of students. Cogent Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2363157
2. Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of educational psychology, 80(3), 260. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.80.3.260
3. Anderman, E. M., & Wolters, C. A. (2006). Goals, Values, and Affect: Influences on Student Motivation. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-07986-017
4. Baldwin, C. A., & Coleman, C. L. (2000). Achievement Goal Orientation: Instructional Practices and Teacher Perceptions of Gifted and/or Academically Talented Students.
5. Boekaerts, M., Zeidner, M., & Pintrich, P. R. (Eds.). (1999). Handbook of self-regulation. Elsevier
6. Borkowski, J. G., & Thorpe, P. K. (1994). Self-regulation and motivation: A life-span perspective on underachievement. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780203763353-3/self-regulation-motivation-john-borkowski -pamela-thorpe
7. Cassidy, S. (2011). Self-regulated learning in higher education: Identifying key component processes. Studies in Higher Education, 36(8), 989-1000. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.503269
8. Chan, K. W., & Chan, S. M. (2005). Perceived parenting styles and goal orientations: A study of teacher education students in Hong Kong. Research in Education, 74(1), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.7227/RIE.74.2
9. Choi, B. (2021). I’m Afraid of not succeeding in learning: Introducing an instrument to measure higher education students’ fear of failure in learning. Studies in Higher Education, 46(11), 2107-2121. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 03075079.2020.1712691
10. Cobb Jr, R. (2003). The relationship between self-regulated learning behaviors and academic performance in web-based courses (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech). http://hdl.handle.net/10919/26469
11. Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American psychologist, 12(11), 671. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0043943
12. Dahl, T. I., Bals, M., &Turi, A. L. (2005). Are students' beliefs about knowledge and learning associated with their reported use of learning strategies?. British journal of educational psychology, 75(2), 257-273. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905X25049
13. Deemer, S. A. (2004). Using achievement goal theory to translate psychological principles into practice in the secondary classroom. American Secondary Education, 32(3), 4. https://eric.ed.gov/?redir=http%3a%2f%2fwww3.ashland.edu%2fase
14. Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 101-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9029-x
15. Eccles, J., Wigfield, A., Harold, R. D., & Blumenfeld, P. (1993). Age and gender differences in children's self‐and task perceptions during elementary school. Child development, 64(3), 830-847. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb02946.x
16. Eum, K., & Rice, K. G. (2011). Test anxiety, perfectionism, goal orientation, and academic performance. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 24(2), 167-178 https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2010.488723
17. Garrido-Vargas, M. (2012). Relationship of self-regulated learning and academic achievement among English language learners.
18. Harackiewicz, J. M., & Sansone, C. (2000). Rewarding competence: The importance of goals in the study of intrinsic motivation. In Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (pp. 79-103). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012619070-0/50026-X
19. Honicke, T., Broadbent, J., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2020). Learner self-efficacy, goal orientation, and academic achievement: exploring mediating and moderating relationships. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(4), 689-703. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1685941
20. Housand, A., & Reis, S. M. (2008). Self-regulated learning in reading: Gifted pedagogy and instructional settings. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20(1), 108-136. https://doi.org/10.4219/jaa-2008-865
21. Kadhiravan, S. (2012). Goal Orientation and Cognitive Styles of Higher Secondary Students. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 38(1), 179-187.
22. Kerala state higher education council annual report 1996
23. Magno, C. (2010). Assessing academic self-regulated learning among Filipino college students: The factor structure and item fit. The international journal of educational and psychological assessment, 5. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-16536-004
24. Matuga, J. M. (2009). Self-regulation, goal orientation, and academic achievement of secondary students in online university courses. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 4-11. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.12.3.4
25. McWhaw, K., &Abrami, P. C. (2001). Student goal orientation and interest: Effects on students' use of self-regulated learning strategies. Contemporary educational psychology, 26(3), 311-329. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2000.1054
26. Meece, J. L. (2001). Child and Adolescent Development for Educators with Free Making the Grade. McGraw-Hill Humanities, Social Sciences & World Languages.
27. Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(4), 710-718. https://www.proquest.com/indexingvolumeissuelinkhandler/60941/Journal+of+Educational+Psychology/01997Y12Y01$23Dec+1997$3b++Vol.+89+$284$29/89/4
28. Nabavi, R. T. (2012). Bandura’s social learning theory & social cognitive learning theory. Theory of Developmental Psychology, 1-24.
29. Neumann, R., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: A conceptual analysis. Studies in higher education, 27(4), 405-417. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507022000011525
30. Niemivirta, M. (2012). Motivation and performance. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), APA Educational Psychology Handbook (Vol. 2, pp. 141-160). American Psychological Association.
31. O'Neill, J. (2004). Teachers learn to set goals with students. The Learning Professional, 25(3), 32.https://www.proquest.com/indexingvolumeissuelinkhandler/47961/Journal+of+Staff+Development/02004 Y07Y01$23Summer+2004$3b++Vol.+25+$283$29/25/3
32. Patrick, H., Kaplan, A., & Ryan, A. M. (2011). Positive classroom motivational environments: Convergence between mastery goal structure and classroom social climate. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 367-382. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0023311
33. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). Academic Press.
34. Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0006-x
35. Pintrich, P. R., &Zusho, A. (2002). The development of academic self-regulation: The role of cognitive and motivational factors. In Development of achievement motivation (pp. 249-284). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/ B978-012750053-9/50012-7
36. Rajabi, S. (2012). Towards self-regulated learning in school curriculum. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 344-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.661
37. Schunk, D. H. (2001). Self-regulation through goal setting. Educational Psychologist, 36(3), 171-181.
38. Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., Tasa, K., & Latham, B. W. (2004). Goal setting and goal orientation: An integration of two different yet related literatures. Academy of management journal, 47(2), 227-239. https://doi.org/10.5465/ 20159574
39. Sharma, Sheryl, Geoff Dick, Wynne Chin, and Lesley Land. "Self-regulation and e-learning." (2007).
40. Shih, S. S. (2005). Taiwanese sixth graders’ achievement goals and their motivation, strategy use, and grades: An examination of the multiple goal perspective. The Elementary School Journal, 106(1), 39-58. https://doi.org/10.1086/496906
41. Sins, P. H., Van Joolingen, W. R., Savelsbergh, E. R., & van Hout-Wolters, B. (2008). Motivation and performance within a collaborative computer-based modeling task: Relations between students’ achievement goal orientation, self-efficacy, cognitive processing, and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(1), 58-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.12.004
42. Songsriwittaya, A., Koul, R., &Kongsuwan, S. (2010). Achievement goal orientation and differences in self‐reported copying behaviour across academic programmes. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34(3), 419-430. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2010.484058
43. Tilak, J. B. (2001). Higher education and development in Kerala. Centre for Socio-Economic & Environmental Studies.
44. Virtanen, P., & Nevgi, A. (2010). Disciplinary and gender differences among higher education students in self‐regulated learning strategies. Educational psychology, 30(3), 323-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443411003606391
45. Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of educational psychology, 89(3), 411. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.411
46. Wolters, C. A. (1998). Self-regulated learning and college students' regulation of motivation. Journal of educational psychology, 90(2), 224. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.224
47. Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing Achievement Goal Theory: Using Goal Structures and Goal Orientations to Predict Students' Motivation, Cognition, and Achievement. Journal of educational psychology, 96(2), 236. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.236
48. Wolters, C. A., Shirley, L. Y., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students' motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and individual differences, 8(3), 211-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1041-6080(96)90015-1
49. Zweig, D., & Webster, J. (2004). Validation of a Multidimensional Measure of Goal Orientation. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportment, 36(3), 232. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/ 10.1037/h0087233