The Intersection Between Self-Regulated Learning and Inquiry

Transformative Educational Leadership Journal | ISSUE Spring 2026

See how using inquiry to shape disciplined, transformative work into their own practice shifts staff’s sense of professional identity and their ideas about what is possible in Katrina Lowe’s article about the intersection between self-regulated learning and the Spiral.

By Katrina Lowe

---

Getting Curious

Four years ago, I was invited to take part in a Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) inquiry strand with the Network of Inquiry and Indigenous Education (NOIIE). I remember feeling curious and genuinely drawn to the idea of SRL, even though my understanding of it was still forming. I knew about Self-Regulated Learning, but I hadn’t yet really explored what it looked like in classrooms or how it showed up in leadership decisions. This inquiry also happened to coincide with my first year as an elementary school principal—a year of significant transition as I began leading a school in Whistler while living in Squamish. At a time when it would have been easy to look for quick answers, the Spiral of Inquiry gave me both a structure and a stance. It pushed me to slow down, to scan more carefully, and to pay closer attention to what was actually happening for learners.

Scanning

As I began scanning, I realized that although I was familiar with related frameworks—such as Universal Design for Learning, problem- and project-based learning, and deeper learning—I hadn’t really turned the mirror on my own understanding of SRL. The inquiry challenged me to move past surface-level familiarity and toward a more grounded, practice-based understanding of what it actually means for learners to regulate their thinking, emotions, and actions in complex learning environments. Being part of this NOIIE inquiry helped me see Self-Regulated Learning not as a stand-alone concept, but as something deeply connected to effective teaching, learning, and leadership.

As this understanding grew, I started to notice a pattern in conversations with educators. Self-Regulated Learning was often being used interchangeably with self-regulation. While self-regulation is certainly part of SRL, it is only one piece of a much bigger picture that includes goal setting, strategy use, monitoring progress, and reflection. Because working within the Spiral of Inquiry had become such a natural way of thinking for me through years of involvement with NOIIE, I wanted this same stance to feel natural for my staff as well. Early scanning, however, made it clear that many educators were unfamiliar not only with SRL, but also with the Spiral of Inquiry itself.

Focusing

In response to this noticing, we made a deliberate decision to use our shared time—particularly staff meetings—as spaces for real inquiry. We learned together about the stages of the Spiral, scanned our school context using multiple sources of evidence, and used tools like consequence tables to help us focus on areas of greatest leverage. As we turned the mirror on ourselves, we began developing hunches about how our own practices might be shaping the learning behaviours we were seeing in students.

Through this process, the staff arrived at a shared focus on critical thinking. Students were generally high-achieving, engaged, and eager to meet expectations, yet many struggled to independently figure out what to do next in their learning. At the time, strengthening critical thinking felt like the most responsive and practical place to start. We believed that if we could intentionally develop this competency, students would be better positioned to think for themselves and take greater ownership of their learning.

This work also began to shift how we understood collaboration. As Nina Jakobsen, Vice Principal at Ecole Garibaldi Highlands Elementary, reflects:

“Once you have a framework it’s not about one person wanting to move on to the next step, it’s collaborative and you move with the spiral sitting shoulder to shoulder with everyone you are working with. There is room for everyone to come to the spiral in their own way because it is a broad framework.”

Her reflection captures an important shift in our staff culture—from individual efforts to a more collective, responsive approach to inquiry, where educators could enter the work in ways that honoured their context and readiness.

Developing a Hunch

As we acted on this focus, something important began to surface. While students were thinking more deeply when asked, they were still relying on adults to initiate that thinking. They could think critically on demand, but they weren’t yet doing it independently. This noticing sent us back into scanning and hunch development. We began asking ourselves some hard questions: If students are capable of this thinking, why aren’t they initiating it on their own? What might we be doing—without realizing it—that keeps them dependent on us?

We started to see that critical thinking doesn’t exist on its own. It sits within a broader set of learning behaviours that includes goal setting, monitoring progress, adjusting strategies, and reflecting on learning. What we were seeing wasn’t a lack of ability—it was a lack of agency, for both students and educators. While students benefited from us slowing down, making fewer assumptions, and explicitly teaching dispositions like perseverance and stamina, we began to realize that the deeper leverage point wasn’t only in student-facing strategies. The bigger question became whether we, as educators, had a shared framework for our own learning that would allow us to sustain meaningful change.

Taking Action

As we continued scanning and examining our own role in the learning environment, it became clear that teachers were working incredibly hard and were open to trying new approaches, but often without a clear process to guide their learning over time. Two years into this inquiry, I moved to a new school—a larger school with a similar student profile and a staff who were, once again, largely unfamiliar with the Spiral of Inquiry. When I asked staff what they were interested in learning more about, their answer was immediate: Self-Regulated Learning.

Working alongside Kimberly Sinclair, we designed professional learning opportunities to build shared understanding—first clarifying what Self-Regulated Learning actually is and how it aligns with social-emotional learning, and then exploring practical SRL strategies teachers could try in their classrooms. Teams were later released to collaborate more deeply around SRL in practice. Once again, a familiar pattern emerged: teachers were engaged and reflective, but their learning was difficult to sustain without a shared framework.

This led to a significant shift. Rather than treating Self-Regulated Learning as something we wanted students to develop, we began to treat it as an adult learning imperative. All educators participated in inquiry groups that were intentionally and consistently supported throughout the year. The Spiral of Inquiry became the framework through which teachers learned to regulate their own professional growth.

As this work deepened, it became clear that engaging in inquiry was not simply about improving practice—it was about shaping identity. As Jennifer Mansour, Intermediate Classroom Teacher at Ecole Garibaldi Highlands Elementary, reflects:

“I consider myself a reflective practitioner and, especially since completing my Master’s, I have come to view this skill as an essential part of our work as educators. I’ve known about the Spirals for many years and have been curious, but, as is often the case with teachers, we get so caught up in the daily tasks that the bigger picture things often fall to the wayside. Having the opportunity to work through the Spirals framework alongside my colleagues over the past two years as part of our school-wide professional learning has shown me how to integrate the framework, so that it becomes how we practice, rather than simply ‘another thing to do’. As I grow more comfortable using the framework, I see myself integrating the steps more naturally as my day-to-day; from scanning, to developing a hunch, to taking action, each step of the process is becoming the default way that I evaluate what is happening in my classroom for my learners. More than that, it is shaping who I am as an educator; I see myself as an active participant in the contexts I co-create with the students I teach—and that is simultaneously simple and so incredibly empowering.”

Her reflection captures the broader shift we were experiencing as a staff: the movement from viewing inquiry as a process we do to understanding it as a stance that shapes how we think, act, and respond as educators.

Checking: Are We Making Enough of a Difference?

By explicitly teaching and using the inquiry process, educators experienced Self-Regulated Learning firsthand. Goal setting, monitoring impact, adjusting strategies, and reflecting on evidence became lived practices rather than abstract ideas. Over time, this deepened engagement with inquiry helped anchor our understanding of SRL—starting with adult learning and then extending into the learning environments we design for students.

What ultimately emerged through this work was a clear understanding that inquiry and Self-Regulated Learning are not separate or parallel processes, but deeply intertwined. The Spiral of Inquiry offers a disciplined framework and stance for adult learning, while Self-Regulated Learning names the behaviours we hope to cultivate in students.

This understanding is also deeply relational. As Heather Androsoff, District Inquiry Coordinator for the Sea to Sky School District, explains:

“From a Métis perspective, inquiry is a relational process—one that honours connection to self, others, the land, and learning spirit. When self-regulated learning is lived and shared, the school community thrives in a culture of resilience, balance, and well-being.”

This perspective reinforces the idea that inquiry is not simply a technical process, but one grounded in relationships, identity, and a shared commitment to well-being.

When educators engage authentically in inquiry, they are not only improving their practice—they are modelling curiosity, reflection, responsiveness, and a willingness to adjust based on evidence.