Teaching for autonomy: Grade 3 teachers’ strategies for self-directed learning in literacy

Abstract

Poor literacy performance in South Africa is often attributed to limited meaningful teaching and learning in the Foundation Phase, where Grade 3 learners are expected to achieve proficiency in reading and writing. Many learners with low literacy levels also demonstrate underdeveloped metacognitive monitoring and limited exposure to learning strategies, factors that may collectively hinder self-directed learning. This study examined how Grade 3 teachers’ teaching strategies promote self-directed learning in literacy. Using a qualitative approach within an interpretivist paradigm, the research adopted a basic qualitative design to explore the teaching practices of 15 purposively selected Grade 3 literacy teachers across five public primary schools. Data were generated through open-ended, semi-structured interviews, capturing teachers’ views of their own and their learners’ self-directed learning skills, and teaching strategies for fostering SDL. Findings indicate that while some teachers demonstrated confidence in encouraging learners to become more independent learners, others reported knowledge gaps and contextual challenges limiting effective guidance and nurturing of self-directed learning in Literacy.

Introduction

Literacy is defined as the ability to recognise, comprehend, generate, and transmit 21st-century text-mediated quality information in an ever-changing world (UNESCO, 2018). Bracefield and Woodgate (2020) aver that literacy can be understood as a strategy for creating, understanding, and communicating texts and information effectively. Literacy therefore extends beyond basic reading and writing skills and requires higher-order cognitive processes such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and meaning-making (Hanser, 2025). These skills are fundamental for learners to engage with texts, ideas, and information and to express themselves effectively in contemporary society.

The development of literacy relies on the integration of oral, visual, and written abilities. Fellows and Oakley (2019) emphasise that learners must first hear and articulate words before they can read and write them, highlighting the importance of strong listening and speaking skills in early literacy development. Although multiple forms of literacy exist—such as scientific, critical, computer, and information literacy (Robinson, 2020)—this study focuses on oral, visual, and written literacy as core components of foundational literacy development in Grade 3.

In South Africa, the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) for the Foundation Phase provides guidelines for the teaching of Home Language (HL) and First Additional Language (FAL), with a strong focus on listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills (Department of Basic Education, 2023). Learners are introduced to listening and speaking skills from Grade 1, with increasing emphasis on reading and writing in Grades 2 and 3 to prepare them for using language as a medium of instruction from Grade 4 onwards (Cromarty and Balfour, 2019). Grade 3 is therefore a critical phase for literacy development, requiring explicit instruction in language use, structure, and meaning-making strategies (Cilliers and Bloch, 2018).

Strong foundational literacy skills are essential for learners’ cognitive and communicative development. When learners are able to read, comprehend, speak, and write effectively, they are better positioned to think critically, solve problems, and engage meaningfully with learning content. These competencies are closely linked to self-directed learning (SDL), as literacy skills enable learners to plan, monitor, and evaluate their learning—skills that are essential in the 21st century (Hanser, 2025).

Knowles (1975:18) defines SDL as a process in which learners take initiative in diagnosing their learning needs, setting goals, identifying resources, selecting strategies, and evaluating outcomes, with or without the assistance of others. His critique of teacher-directed learning highlights the risk of learners becoming passive recipients of knowledge rather than active participants in their learning. Building on this foundation, Jagals (2018) and other scholars such as Garrison (1997); Hiemstra and Brockett (2012); and Dahal and Bhat (2023) emphasise that SDL involves learners taking responsibility for organising, monitoring, and assessing their learning. Mentz and Bailey (2020) and Grow (1991) further argue that SDL integrates critical thinking, analytical skills, and interpersonal and intrapersonal competencies.

The importance of SDL has intensified in a rapidly changing educational and technological landscape (Breed and Bailey, 2018). While SDL enhances learners’ academic outcomes and lifelong learning capacities, learners require deliberate guidance, modelling, and support from teachers to develop these skills (Dahal and Bhat, 2023). This places increased responsibility on teachers to possess both theoretical and pedagogical knowledge of SDL and to model self-directed learning behaviours themselves (Vester et al., 2024).

However, evidence suggests that many South African teachers lack the pedagogical content knowledge required to foster SDL effectively within the CAPS curriculum (Mentz and Bailey, 2020). As a result, teaching practices often remain teacher-centred, limiting opportunities for learners to develop autonomy and metacognitive skills—particularly in contexts marked by poor literacy performance (Guglielmino, 2020; Cronje, 2023).

Problem statement

The CAPS curriculum aims to develop learners who can identify and solve problems, make informed decisions, organise their activities, and evaluate information critically—outcomes that align closely with SDL principles (Department of Basic Education, 2023; Bunt and Grosser, 2020). Despite these intentions, scholars argue that the curriculum does not adequately promote deep cognitive engagement or learner autonomy (Cronje, 2015; Breed, 2016). Frequent curriculum reforms have further contributed to teacher fatigue and have not resulted in improved literacy outcomes (Janks, 2014; Du Plessis and Letshwene, 2020).

These challenges are compounded by South Africa’s persistently low literacy performance, as reflected in national and international assessments such as PIRLS 2021 (Department of Basic Education, 2023). Given the importance of the Foundation Phase for developing literacy skills and SDL-related metacognitive strategies (James et al., 2019; Grava and Pole, 2021), the limited integration of SDL in Grade 3 literacy teaching is concerning. By the end of Grade 3, learners are expected to read fluently, write coherently, and engage critically with texts (Spaull and Pretorius, 2019), yet many struggle due to insufficient support in learning strategies (Mahdavi, 2014).

Against this backdrop, this study investigates teachers’ awareness of their own and their learners’ SDL skills, as well as the teaching strategies they employ to foster SDL in Grade 3 literacy. By focusing on early literacy contexts, the study seeks to contribute to both theoretical understandings of SDL in the Foundation Phase and practical insights for strengthening literacy instruction in South African classrooms.

Research aim and questions

The following research questions guide the study:

• To what extent are teachers aware of their own self-directed learning (SDL) skills and those of their learners?

• What teaching strategies, if any, do teachers use to implement SDL skills in Grade 3 literacy?

In the next section, and literature reviewed and theoretical framework for the study will be discussed.

Literature review and theoretical framework

Alwadeen and Piller (2022) investigated factors affecting learners’ SDL readiness in American primary schools through observations and semi-structured interviews with Grade 3 learners and their teacher. Their findings indicated that classroom and school environments play a significant role in promoting SDL, with access to materials, independent workspaces, and well-stocked libraries being crucial for enhancing SDL readiness. The study also highlighted the important role of instructional, diagnostic, and evaluation factors, as well as the critical role that parents and families play in fostering SDL, suggesting that community and private-sector support is essential for learners’ independence in learning.

Similarly, Howell (2016) used semi-structured interviews to explore the experiences of Grade 3 Literacy teachers working with English language learners in mainstream classrooms in the Southeastern United States. The study found that limited professional development, insufficient school support, and inadequate parental involvement were key barriers to improving literacy skills and narrowing achievement gaps.

Wagner (2011) examined the SDL readiness of primary school teachers in the United States and found that teachers who were self-directed in their learning were more likely to engage in professional development beyond the school context and integrate these experiences into their teaching. These teachers demonstrated autonomy, long-term commitment to learning, and a willingness to seek mentors and experts, using personal interests such as music, photography, and technology to model and cultivate SDL skills in their learners (Hanser, 2025).

The aforementioned research has explored environmental, instructional, and teacher-readiness factors influencing SDL (Howell, 2016; Wagner, 2011; Alwadeen and Piller, 2022), limited attention has been given to teachers’ awareness of their own SDL skills and those of their learners, particularly in the Foundation Phase.

In a study by Ehlers (2022), teachers from high-quintile schools reported strong beliefs in their pedagogical content knowledge for fostering SDL in learners. Most participants expressed confidence in guiding learners through strategies such as self-monitoring, independent and group work, time management, and the use of feedback. Several teachers indicated that their SDL skills developed over time through personal experience and emphasised the importance of creating classroom environments conducive to SDL, making learners aware of success expectations, teaching goal-setting strategies, and providing motivation and guidance (Ehlers, 2022).

However, these teachers also reported challenges, including low motivation, rigid planning skills, and resistance to constructivist approaches, often due to limited exposure to such methods and reliance on traditional teaching strategies (Ehlers, 2022). Similar findings were reported by Dagal and Bayindir (2016), who linked low levels of SDL to difficulties in sustaining motivation and reluctance to adopt new instructional methods. This is concerning, as motivation is a defining characteristic of SDL and essential for fostering creativity and enthusiasm in teaching and learning (Hanser, 2025).

Makokotlela (2022) similarly identified knowledge gaps that hinder teachers’ ability to support learners’ SDL development, with some teachers reporting that they had never encountered the concept of SDL, highlighting limited training and professional development. Collectively, these studies suggest that while many teachers can model SDL, others continue to struggle with its implementation (Hanser, 2025).

Even among motivated teachers, contextual constraints such as low learner motivation, limited resources, overcrowded classrooms, and insufficient parental and school management support persist (Ehlers, 2022; Ragvan, 2022). The lack of targeted workshops and professional development further limits teachers’ capacity to adopt effective SDL strategies (Makokotlela, 2022; Ragvan, 2022).

Most SDL research in South Africa focuses on the Intermediate and Senior Phases, leaving a significant gap in understanding how SDL is perceived and fostered in early literacy contexts such as Grade 3 (Hanser, 2025). This study addresses this gap by exploring South African Grade 3 teachers’ awareness of their own and their learners’ SDL skills and the strategies they use to develop SDL in literacy within the CAPS curriculum, providing context-specific insights for early literacy teaching.

This study applies Grow’s (1991) Staged Self-Directed Learning Model, to investigate the interplay between teachers’ SDL skills, their instructional strategies, and the development of learners’ SDL in Grade 3 literacy.

Grow’s staged self-directed learning model

Grow’s (1991) model provides a structured approach, consisting of four stages of teacher management and four corresponding stages of SDL development for learners. It is well-suited for addressing literacy challenges in the South African public-school context, because it enables teachers to align their strategies with learners’ varying levels of readiness for SDL and to scaffold them progressively.

According to Grow (1991), teachers must assess learners’ levels of autonomy and then adjust the curriculum or teaching accordingly, breaking it down into manageable steps to suit learners’ readiness for SDL. Each stage of developing self-directedness must be carefully balanced by the teacher in the classroom to align with learners’ SDL readiness (Grow, 1991). These techniques also emphasise the importance of cultivating positive expectations, as they help motivate learners to believe in their ability to achieve their full potential. Teachers’ expectations for learner success and the demonstration of SDL skills are crucial because these determine the extent to which learners will develop these skills (Dahal and Bhat, 2023).

Grow’s (1991) proposes a staged self-directed learning model, detailing the learner’s development at each stage and the corresponding teaching approach.

Stage 1-the dependent learner: dependent learners depend on teacher-directed instruction, making this approach particularly suited to struggling Grade 3 literacy learners who require explicit guidance, such as learners learning in a second or third language. Dependent learners benefit from structured tasks with clear goals and firm deadlines, which foster a sense of responsibility and progress (Grow, 1991). At this stage, the teacher plays a nurturing role by offering structure, guidance, encouragement, and motivation while setting clear expectations (Manfre, 2022).

Stage 2-the interested learner: learners in this stage are not self-directed in their learning yet, but their eagerness to learn makes it easier for teachers to scaffold them to become self-directed learners (Grow, 1991). Teachers at this stage foster enthusiasm and motivation in the learning environment by providing clear learning goals, explaining concepts, actively listening to learners’ responses, and maintaining a dynamic process of questioning and answering to monitor learners’ understanding (Anshu et al., 2022).

Stage 3-the involved learner: these learners are more skilled and knowledgeable in goal setting and time management, can gradually take on greater autonomy and tackle more challenging assignments under the guidance of a teacher acting as a facilitator (Grow, 1991). The enjoy collaborating with the teacher, but they require a confidence boost, making recognition of their capabilities and personalities essential for their growth (Skae et al. 2020).

Stage 4-the self-directed learner: the self-directed learner demonstrates a high level of autonomy and are capable of setting and achieving personal goals with little to no assistance from the teacher even though they still benefit from guidance and mentorship to support their ongoing development (Grow, 1991). Teachers at this stage should foster openness to change, collaboration, and task engagement while maintaining enough distance to allow learners to work independently (Anshu et al., 2022).

The next section discusses teaching strategies that can be aligned with the four stages of Grow’s (1991) model to promote SDL in listening, speaking, reading, and writing.

Teaching strategies for listening and speaking

Okoro and Chukwudi (2011) propose that learners should be taught to organise their thoughts using graphic organisers, such as mind maps, to visualise concepts and establish connections between ideas. Learners should also be guided to focus on key elements of a topic, story, or concept—such as titles, key vocabulary, headings, or images—and to engage in reflective questioning to activate prior knowledge and build context (Iftikar, 2014). Questions such as “Where have I seen this before?”, “What do I want to learn or speak about?”, and “What strategies can I recall and use?” support deeper engagement with learning tasks (Beach et al., 2020).

Kelley and Clausen-Grace (2013) recommend the use of cue cards before and after listening activities to help learners maintain focus and monitor their performance. Reflective self-questioning—such as “Am I staying on topic?”, “Am I managing my time effectively?”, and “Am I engaging the audience?”—supports the development of listening and speaking skills. Displaying these prompts in the classroom enables learners to reference them during activities. These strategies are particularly beneficial for learners in the first and second stages of Grow’s (1991) model, as they scaffold self-monitoring, time management, reflection, and critical thinking.

Albahareth (2023) further suggest summarising teacher-read texts and sequencing story events using pictures to strengthen comprehension. Such strategies support learners in organising ideas coherently and developing skills required for autonomous learning. In addition, learners can be taught to evaluate claims and arguments, assess reasoning, and identify bias or rhetorical strategies (Kelley and Clausen-Grace, 2013). These practices foster critical thinking and comprehension skills aligned with stages 3 and 4 of Grow’s (1991) model while strengthening listening and speaking abilities.

Teaching strategies in the foundation phase reading

Before reading, teachers can introduce learners to cognitive and metacognitive strategies such as predicting, making connections, questioning, visualising, clarifying, and summarising (Djudin, 2017; Kelley and Clausen-Grace, 2013). These strategies encourage learners to reflect on their thinking processes and actively engage with texts (Djudin, 2017). For example, teachers may model prediction by discussing titles, headings, and visual elements and prompting learners to make inferences based on these features (Kelley and Clausen-Grace, 2013). During guided reading, word recognition, decoding, and word-building strategies support learners in managing unfamiliar vocabulary (Hugo, 2021).

During reading, learners should be taught to monitor their understanding by pausing to address misunderstandings or clarify meaning (Albahareth, 2023; Kelley and Clausen-Grace, 2013). Strategies such as questioning, visualising, predicting, analysing text structure, and summarising key ideas support comprehension and meaning making (Djudin, 2017). Text-based discussions and reflective questioning further enhance reading comprehension and critical engagement during guided reading sessions (Hugo, 2021; Albahareth, 2023).

After reading, teachers should support learners in setting goals for improving their strategy use and reflecting on errors through self-correction (Kelley and Clausen-Grace, 2013). Tools such as checklists or tally sheets can assist learners in monitoring progress during planning and evaluation. As learners gain confidence in these routines, responsibility can gradually shift from the teacher to the learner, with teachers and peers acting as facilitators or reading buddies (Kelley and Clausen-Grace, 2013).

Teaching strategies in the foundation phase writing

Before writing, learners can be taught planning strategies similar to those used in listening and speaking, including the use of graphic organisers to visualise ideas and establish connections (Okoro and Chukwudi, 2011). Reflective questioning—such as “What do I want to write about?” and “Which strategies can I use?”—supports task understanding and idea development (Iftikar, 2014; Beach et al., 2020). Tools such as mind maps, flow charts, rubrics, and notebooks assist learners in organising ideas and structuring written texts across different genres (Kelley and Clausen-Grace, 2013).

During writing, learners can be encouraged to engage in self-instruction by talking themselves through tasks. Speaking aloud helps clarify ideas, deepen engagement with literacy concepts, and identify gaps in understanding (Iftikar, 2014; Beach et al., 2020). Self-questioning and breaking tasks into manageable steps further support focus, monitoring, and evaluation. These practices foster SDL-related skills such as persistence, motivation, and task engagement.

Teaching learners to summarise and synthesise literacy content promotes critical thinking and deeper engagement with texts (Albahareth, 2023; Okoro and Chukwudi, 2011). However, these higher-order skills may be challenging for learners in earlier stages of Grow’s (1991) model, particularly dependent learners (Albahareth, 2023).

Many of the strategies discussed—such as mind mapping, self-questioning, self-monitoring, and evaluation—are referenced in the CAPS (2011) curriculum within group-guided reading, shared reading, and writing activities. However, these strategies are not systematically linked to the development of SDL. As a result, teachers may need to take initiative in further exploring and adapting SDL-focused strategies to suit learners’ levels of readiness. Aligning teaching strategies with learners’ SDL stages is essential for supporting progression toward greater autonomy and self-directed learning (Hanser, 2025).

The next discussion focuses on studies examining teachers’ awareness and perceptions of their own SDL skills. We agree that the successful implementation of Grow’s (1991) model and the teaching strategies recommended in the literature depend on teachers’ awareness of learners’ readiness for SDL, and their pedagogical abilities to develop SDL skills (Iftikar, 2014; Teng and Zhang, 2021).

The research design and methodology followed in the study will be discussed next.

Research design and methodology

Research design

This study adopted an interpretivist research paradigm within a qualitative research approach, using a basic qualitative interpretive design. These methodological choices were appropriate for several reasons.

Firstly, the interpretivist paradigm values participants’ subjective views and interpretations of their lived experiences within specific contexts, lives, or phenomena (Maree, 2016). In this case, the focus was on teachers’ perspectives and daily teaching practices of SDL in Grade 3 Literacy. This paradigm enabled the exploration of their awareness of their own SDL skills, their learners’ SDL skills, and the teaching strategies they employ to develop and nurture these skills in Foundation Phase learners.

Secondly, the qualitative approach allowed for an in-depth investigation into the meaning and value teacher participants attribute to SDL in the context of Grade 3 Literacy (Creswell, 2014). Data were collected by the first author through semi-structured, face-to-face interviews and analysed inductively, aligning with the principles of qualitative inquiry.

Finally, the basic qualitative interpretive design was particularly suited to capturing the meanings participants assign to their experiences (Merriam, 2016) and to exploring their real-world practices within the natural contexts of their diverse school environments. This design facilitated a nuanced understanding of the participants lived realities and classroom strategies.

Sample

Participants were selected through purposive sampling (Maree, 2016), a method well-suited to the study’s objectives as it enabled the selection of teachers actively teaching Literacy and possessing substantial knowledge of Grade 3 Literacy content and curriculum practices. Merriam (2016) emphasises that collecting accurate, relevant, and meaningful data requires clear selection criteria that align with the research aims.

The inclusion criteria specified that participants had to be qualified teachers who teach Literacy in the Foundation Phase, specifically in Grade 3, and who have a minimum of 3 years’ teaching experience. Participants were required to teach at schools in the Frances Baard education district where English or Afrikaans is the medium of instruction. The inclusion criteria for schools were that they had to be a primary, public school in the Francis Baard Education District. The selected schools must offer English and Afrikaans as the medium of instruction.

These selection criteria were applied because the study focused specifically on Grade 3 Literacy teaching. Teachers with at least 3 years of experience were more likely to have developed sufficient classroom knowledge and practical insight to reflect meaningfully on their experiences of nurturing self-directed learning skills. Inexperienced teachers may not yet have accumulated the depth of teaching experience required to provide rich and relevant data. In addition, the researcher is proficient only in English and Afrikaans and therefore conducted the interviews in these languages to ensure accurate communication and interpretation of participants’ responses (Hanser, 2025).

Teachers who did not meet these criteria were excluded from the research. A total of 15 Grade 3 Literacy teachers participated in the study, drawn from five primary schools, with three teachers from each school. The sample included teachers from quintile 3 and quintile 5 schools, as well as one private school (one quintile 3 school, four quintile 5 schools, and one private school). All participants were female. Eleven taught Grade 3 Literacy in English as the language of learning and teaching, while four taught in Afrikaans (Hanser, 2025). The sample size was considered adequate for a basic qualitative interpretive study, as it allowed for in-depth exploration of participants’ experiences while enabling the identification of recurring patterns across diverse school contexts (Merriam, 2016).

The average participant age was 39 years, with an average of 14 years of teaching experience, indicating that most were experienced in teaching Grade 3 Literacy. Furthermore, most participants held a B.Ed. degree in the Foundation Phase (Hanser, 2025).

Data collection

In basic qualitative research, data are collected in the form of words to explore the phenomenon under investigation (Merriam, 2016). For this study, single semi-structured interviews were conducted to facilitate open-ended, active conversations with participants and to gather rich, detailed responses relevant to the research questions. The semi-structured interview guide, informed by the research questions and relevant SDL literature, ensured consistency across interviews while allowing flexibility for probing and clarification. The interviews were conducted in the teachers’ primary languages, English or Afrikaans. Interviews conducted in Afrikaans were subsequently translated into English for analysis. Each face-to-face interview lasted approximately 45 min, giving participants time and space to explain their perceptions in depth. Each interview was recorded with the participants’ permission.

Data analysis

Both thematic analysis and content analysis were used to analyse the qualitative data. Content analysis enabled the examination of interview data from multiple perspectives and the identification of key concepts, while thematic analysis was used to identify patterns and recurring ideas within participants’ accounts (Maree, 2016).

An inductive data analysis process was followed. First, the interview recordings were transcribed verbatim by the first author and checked against the audio recordings to ensure accuracy. Second, the transcripts were read repeatedly to gain a comprehensive understanding of the data and to identify initial ideas. Third, the data were segmented and coded, with similar codes grouped into categories. Fourth, categories were organised into potential themes, which were reviewed and refined as analysis progressed. Finally, overarching themes were defined and aligned with the theoretical frameworks and literature of the study to capture the main ideas relevant to the research (Maree, 2016).

To ensure trustworthiness, several strategies of Maree (2016) were applied:

• Member checks were conducted, allowing participants to verify the accuracy of the data and correct factual errors.

• Transferability was promoted through thick, descriptive accounts of the study context and the inclusion of verbatim participant quotations in the findings.

• Detailed descriptions of the research design, methodology, data collection, and data analysis procedures were provided for transparency.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance was obtained from the university under whose auspices the research was conducted. Permission to conduct the study was granted by the Northern Cape Provincial Department of Education and the participating school principals.

An independent person at each school facilitated the recruitment process and obtained informed consent from participants. All ethical protocols were observed, including confidentiality of participant information, voluntary participation with the right to withdraw without consequence, and protection from harm or exploitation (Levy, 2014).

Discussion of findings

To provide a more nuanced and contextualised understanding of the findings, we integrated the results and the discussion of the findings. Two themes and various sub-themes that were inductively created based on teachers’ perceptions of SDL and their use of teaching and learning strategies to develop learners’ SDL in Grade 3 Literacy are discussed below.

Theme: 1: self-awareness and comprehension of SDL skills

This theme and the three sub-themes encapsulate the participants’ self-awareness and comprehension of their own and their Grade 3 Literacy learners.

Sub-theme 1.1: familiarity with the concept of self-directed learning

To explore participants’ theoretical and pedagogical content knowledge, they were asked about their familiarity with the concept of SDL. Their familiarity with the concept varied. Only two participants (S5P1 and S6P1) were familiar with SDL. S5P1 responded: “Yes, self-directed learning is when learners learn or go through the learning experience by themselves and discover more about the content and the learning on their own.”

Some of the participants showed a vague familiarity with SDL and could recall that the concept was introduced to them through their studies at university (S1P3, S3P2, S3P1; S5P3). S1P3 expressed: “I’ve heard of it but in terms of the thing itself I can’t say for sure if it’s the same as self-regulated learning… It was at university; I was studying in Stellenbosch and that’s how I heard about it. I also learned about it through research I did for the class and such”.

The responses also revealed that most participants (S1P1, S1P3, S1P4, S2P1, S4P1, S4P2, S6P2, S6P3) were introduced to the concept of SDL for the first time during the interviews. For example, S6P3 noted: “No, I haven’t heard of the concept before. I’m hearing it for the first time from you”. This finding is supported by Makokotlela (2022), who also found that many teachers are unfamiliar with the concept of SDL. However, later in the interviews, it became clear that participants grasped some basic principles of SDL, even though they were unable to explain them theoretically.

The findings in this sub-theme are further aligned with those of Ehlers (2022), Karatas and Arpaci (2021), Stolk et al. (2010), and Marra et al. (2022), who report that many teachers lack the theoretical or pedagogical content knowledge necessary to implement the development of SDL skills. Participants’ unfamiliarity with the concept of SDL could also suggest that, although the development of SDL skills is implied in CAPS, the concept itself is neither explicitly explained nor described in the curriculum, preventing teachers from becoming properly acquainted with the term.

Sub-theme 1.2: awareness of own self-directed learning skills

After participants were provided with an explanation of what SDL entails, they were asked whether they would describe themselves as self-directed learners or teachers. This question aimed to explore their perceptions of SDL skills. Responses revealed that most participants (S1P1, S1P2, S1P3, S1P4, S2P1, S2P2, S3P1, S4P1, S5P1, S5P2, S5P3, S6P1, S6P2, S6P3) perceive themselves as self-directed and possessing SDL skills, primarily because being self-directed is required in their profession as teachers (Ehlers, 2022).

The following verbatim quote represents how participants highlighted their SDL skills: “I would say I am. In some cases, I would say I have to be self-directed, because I can’t teach learners anything if I don’t learn myself; so, I first have to explore and learn it before I teach. I plan ahead, I set goals, I organise my time – so I would say that I am a self-directed learner. I am also in a lot of committees, so I have to be able to manage my time and check whether I reach my goals or not.” (S1P1).

Another participant, S3P1, perceive SDL as a requirement to adapt to ongoing change in education as well as for her professional competence and personal growth: “I think I am, yes, because I think as time goes by when you are in the teaching profession you have to become a self-directed learner if you want to constantly empower yourself, as there’s always things changing and if you won’t stick with the times then you will lag behind”. However, this perspective of SDL seems more reactive to curriculum and professional changes rather than proactive for professional and personal growth.

Three participants, S6P3, S1P4, and S2P2, acknowledged that while they possess several SDL skills even though they struggle with certain aspects of SDL, such as planning, goal setting, time management, and motivation. As S6P3 explained: “I’m not always motivated to set time management goals, and I tend to procrastinate; however, I love learning”. These findings, supported by Ehlers (2022) and Dagal and Bayindir (2016), indicate that many participants have fragmented SDL competence – excelling in some SDL skills while other SDL skills are underdeveloped and could limit the participants’ overall SDL capacities.

Sub-theme 1.3: identification of SDL skills in learners

Participants were asked if they could identify any SDL skills in their learners. Based on their descriptions, it is evident that participants are aware of their learners’ autonomy and their abilities to take responsibility for their learning (Mentz and Bailey, 2020; Grow 1991), contextual hinderances for SDL development (Schwab, 2018; Cronje, 2023) as well as other SDL skills demonstrated in Grade 3 Literacy (James et al., 2019; Teng and Zhang, 2021). Participant S1P2, for example, noted that she has only one self-directed learner in her class, while the majority of her students are highly dependent on her. She attributed this to the lack of academic support from parents. She explained: “The others are more dependent on me because the children here come from weaker circumstances and the parents themselves may not be able to do all that the child can do. So, it hinders the process for a child to be able to go on and learn at home”.

S3P1 described the SDL skills of her learners in this way: “I’m really in a fortunate situation. I taught in Grade 2, so I moved up with them to Grade 3. That has allowed me to see improvement and stronger individuals. They are more mature and can do more for themselves, and that is important to me because I aim to teach my learners to be independent, not just in their workspace but in life in general”. Based on S3P1’s response, it can be inferred that this participant aligns with Stage 2 of Grow’s (1991) model, which describes the teacher as the motivator and guide. Additionally, it appears that most of her learners in the Grade 3 Literacy class are at the second stage, the “interested learner.” This view of S3P1 is aligned with Garrison (1997); Jagals (2018); and Grow (1991), who stress that SDL is an ongoing process that requires teachers’ guidance and scaffolding in the early stages of a learning process.

The descriptions provided by participants S1P3, S1P4, S2P2, S4P1, S5P1, S5P2, S5P3, S6P1, S6P2, and S6P3 suggest that most learners in their classes exhibit SDL characteristics of the “involved learner” stage, as outlined in Grow’s (1991) model. For instance, S4P1 noted: “They take the guidelines you give them, grasp the instructions or expectations, and run with the task on their own. They are also able to guide other learners”. S6P3 reported: “When they struggle with something, they make it a point to come to me for guidance and to find out more about the lesson or concept. They handle challenges with enthusiasm”.

Most participants were able to identify one or two learners in their classes who demonstrate the traits of Stage 4 of Grow’s (1991) model. Here is how S1P1 described two learners with SDL skills in her class: “They want to take the lead and help in the lessons, and they want to take up the responsibility of helping themselves and their peers while they read. They normally end sooner and want to do extra tasks. If I may add, they are the ones who usually can read, or they know the basics of reading, they are not shy, they have the courage to step up and to take the initiative towards bettering their learning”.

S3P1 clarified: “You get the mature learner who can take responsibility and you can also see the learner that does the extra bit at home because with listening and speaking and comprehension they can handle assessments and general reading in the class and also when doing shared reading the type of questions they ask you shows that they are self-directed and think ahead and out of the box… as they ask the most fascinating questions. I also think that it is very important that if you don’t know the answers, you go find out and make it a point to get back to them”.

S1P4 elaborated: “Such kids are so observant that they will take the initiative to correct any spelling mistakes I made when writing on the board or words they or I left out. Some give more information on the concept that I teach, they even observe facts that I didn’t even care to think of and guide the lesson towards a different angle”.

This sub-theme revealed that participants’ views of SDL as an ongoing process through which their learners must go before they become autonomous learners. Their perceptions are aligned with the views of Grow (1991); Jagals (2018); Garrison (1997); and Knowles (1975), who acknowledge that learners progress gradually through different stages of self-directedness, depending on the guidance and support provided by teachers. They have a clear awareness of their learners’ readiness for autonomous learning, the SDL skills learners possess, and the contextual barriers that hinder SDL development. It can be concluded that they perceive most learners to be classified as stage 1 (dependent learner) and stage 2 (interested learner) according to Grow’s (1991) model. Although interested and eager to be involved in learning or interested, participants perceive a large number of learners displaying traits of involved learners (Grow, 1991), and only a few already exhibiting fully developed SDL skills.

In the following section, the findings of theme 2 will be discussed.

Theme: 2: teaching strategies to develop self-directed learning skills in Grade 3 literacy

This theme entails the participants’ perceptions of how they develop SDL skills in Grade 3 reading, writing and listening and speaking skills. The three sub-themes of theme 2 will be discussed next.

Sub-theme 2.1: development of self-directed learning skills in Grade 3 reading

Participants shared a range of teaching strategies they use to motivate learners and foster a love for reading. They perceive that learners’ SDL skills can be developed by providing access to a variety of reading resources, genres, and activities that enhance motivation and engagement.

Based on several responses (S1P1, S1P2, S1P3, S1P4, S2P1, S2P2, S3P1, S4P1, S5P1), most participants emphasised the importance of selecting or creating reading themes and resources that spark learners’ interest and include texts learners can relate to and read independently. This finding aligns with the CAPS document (Department of Basic Education, 2023), which emphasises exposure to a range of books, stories, rhymes, poems, and informational texts to support literacy development. S1P1 explained: “I still implement the themes suggested in CAPS, but I also choose a broader theme that they can relate to, to get them excited and motivated… most of the learners relate to watching Mickey Mouse.”

Participants S2P1 and S1P4 also highlighted the importance of incorporating a variety of genres and enjoyable reading activities to enhance motivation. This is supported by PrimTEd (2020), which views literacy acquisition as an ongoing, cyclical process involving engagement with diverse texts. These perceptions suggest that motivation plays a key role in fostering a love for reading and a sense of purpose. S2P1 explained: “I encourage them to be a member of any of the local libraries… take out different types of books… and retell the story… I’ve even received feedback from past learners… about the impact their library visitation and reading had on them.”

Participants S2P2, S1P1, S5P1, and S6P1 explained that they scaffold reading by breaking lessons and time frames into smaller segments to support goal setting and time management. These strategies align with Grow’s (1991) model, which emphasises scaffolding learners according to their level of autonomy. S1P1 shared: “I let them count the words… see how long it will take to read a certain section… and build it up from there… with the aim to teach them how to manage time.”

Several participants described teaching learners how to organise information by identifying key story elements. S6P2 explained: “We use tables to group… sight words, new vocabulary… and mind-maps to identify important information such as the characters… main events, plots.”

Participants were also asked how they teach learners to reflect on and evaluate their reading. S6P2 explained: “We go through moments in the lesson to determine what drew our attention… ‘Where did I lose focus?’… ‘What could I have done better?’”

Most participants (S1P1, S3P1, S5P1, S2P1, S4P1, S1P4) indicated that learners read at different levels and often struggle with reading, requiring differentiated instruction. S3P1 elaborated: “We do group reading as not everyone is on the same level… with the weaker readers you will sit with on the mat more intently… use vocabulary words, flash cards, and sound cards.”

Similarly, S1P1 noted the importance of repetition and visual support: “Sometimes I repeat certain skills a lot… I let them draw pictures about the text… and make use of colour to highlight key aspects.”

Overall, participants perceived motivating learners through a variety of reading materials that align with learners’ interests and reading levels as central to developing SDL skills in reading. This sub-theme reveals that participants are mindful of learners’ levels of autonomy and intentionally break reading tasks into manageable segments according to developmental stage. These practices are supported by Grow (1991) and Albahareth (2023). As S5P2 explained:

“They read text at their level… I allow them to ask questions in between… to give them more of an idea of where the story is heading.”

Sub-theme 2.2: development of self-directed learning in Grade 3 writing

Participants were asked to share how they motivate learners to develop a love for writing, aiming to explore their perceptions of the value of SDL for Grade 3 learners’ writing. Participants S5P3 and S5P2 explained that fostering a positive outlook towards writing involves highlighting to learners the importance and purpose of writing as a means of communication, along with the advantages and skills that develop through the process. S5P2 reported: “I teach them the importance of communication and what happens or may happen if there is a communication breakdown. I also teach them the different ways in which we can communicate through writing.”

Additional participants (S6P3, S2P1, S4P1) shared that fostering learners’ creativity and curiosity by displaying pictures, flashcards, and other engaging resources helps spark their love for writing. Participants believe that motivating learners through exposure to a variety of interesting and captivating materials contributes to the development of their SDL skills. For example, S2P1 explained how learners are encouraged to draw pictures before writing and later verbalise and write about creative images, revise their work using correct grammar, and engage in peer reading to improve clarity.

Participants were also asked to explain how they teach learners to set goals before writing and manage their time during the writing process. Most teachers shared that they guide learners in using mind maps or diagrams to outline their ideas or topics. These tools help learners determine what they will write about, how much to write, how long the task will take, and what they aim to achieve by the end of the writing piece. S5P3 mentioned: “We plan the writing lesson on mind maps and diagrams so that they can see where we need to work toward and determine how much time they may need to reach the end goal.”

One participant, S1P4, confessed that she has not paid much attention to teaching learners how to set goals before writing or manage their time during the writing process. S1P4 said: “I don’t really talk to the learners much about time management, I just tell them to be done at a certain time.” This response suggests that the participant does not recognise the role of goal setting in developing learners’ SDL. In contrast, S1P1 explained strategies used to support learners who struggle with time management, including timing learners during writing tasks and encouraging them to break their writing into smaller units such as phrases or sentences.

This sub-theme revealed that most participants work to create interest, excitement, and clear expectations at the beginning of their lessons and are enthusiastic about using various resources and graphic organisers to support writing development. However, variation exists in how participants teach learners to set goals, manage time, and break writing tasks into manageable segments, which influences learners’ ability to develop SDL skills. Some participants further reported teaching learners to plan around criteria and practice autonomously at home, encouraging reflection on goals, timeframes, and task requirements (S5P3).

Sub-theme 2.3: development of self-directed learning skills in grade 3 listening and speaking

When asked how they foster a love for speaking, most participants indicated that their learners are already eager to speak and display a level of confidence that teachers can build on to strengthen speaking skills. S3P1 explained that regular oral activities support speaking development: “We do a lot of oral and also a lot of rhymes and singing, reading a moral story, and counting aloud helps a lot with the speaking part. Correcting them as they speak also helps, for example, every time they say ‘Me and brother’ I will correct them and say ‘My brother and I’… and later in the day they will talk like that. So, you have to constantly correct them, not in a bad manner.”

Participant S6P2 revealed that when learners struggle with confidence, alternative presentation options are provided to support participation: “I allow them to choose different ways that they would like to present to me, either whole class, in front of small groups, or among peers.”

Participants S1P1, S6P3, and S6P1 indicated that learners are guided through task requirements, skills, and expectations before oral presentations. Learners are then encouraged to practise independently at home while incorporating their own ideas. This aligns with Dahal and Bhat’s (2023) assertion that self-directed learners take responsibility for completing tasks and independently apply mastered skills. S5P3 explained: “I teach them to plan around the criteria and take it apart. They remember to ask important questions like, ‘What is the goal?’ ‘How much time till the due date?’ ‘What can I add to make it interesting?’ and so forth. I also teach them to remember and practice simple speaking skills like voice tone, posture, gestures… and then send the learners home with the criteria to go work through and practice at home.”

Participants S5P1, S5P2, and S5P3 described challenges in teaching listening strategies, particularly due to learners’ poor listening skills. To address this, participants encourage learners to use various resources to improve focus and note-taking during listening and speaking activities. Participant S5P3 elaborated: “They can decide to use cue cards, picture projecting the key points of the oral, flash cards with key words, and I encourage them to pay attention to what they are saying while speaking.”

Overall, participant responses indicate that teachers interact daily with learners at different stages of SDL and adapt their roles accordingly. Most learners appear to function at Stage 2 (interested, motivated, but guided), some are transitioning to Stage 3, and a few still display Stage 1 behaviours, particularly in listening tasks. Participants largely assume the roles of motivators, facilitators, and guides in line with Grow’s (1991) model by providing explicit guidance, modelling language use, and structuring opportunities for independent practice. The strategies participants reported using are supported by Okoro and Chukwudi (2011), Iftikar (2014), and Kelley and Clausen-Grace (2013).

Conclusion

This study is amongst the first to investigate which teachers are aware of their own SDL skills and those of their learners, as well as the teaching strategies they employ to foster SDL in Grade 3 Literacy. The findings revealed both strengths and areas for improvement in developing SDL skills at this level. Most participants demonstrated a partial understanding of SDL, possessing practical knowledge but limited theoretical grounding. This lack of pedagogical content knowledge constrains their ability to purposefully develop SDL skills in literacy. While participants generally perceive themselves as self-directed—primarily due to fulfilling professional responsibilities—some appear to have developed SDL competencies reactively in response to curriculum changes and professional demands rather than intentionally through personal and professional growth.

Many participants reported having fragmented SDL skills, suggesting variation in their capacity to foster SDL in literacy. This variation may affect Grade 3 learners, many of whom are perceived as dependent and in greatest need of support. Despite these limitations, participants are aware of their learners’ readiness for SDL, recognise the central role of motivation in literacy development, and adapt their teaching roles to guide and scaffold the gradual development of SDL skills.

Across reading, writing, listening, and speaking, participants employ teaching strategies aimed at generating interest in literacy and scaffolding learners toward autonomy. These strategies include goal setting, planning, fostering task engagement, motivation, metacognitive monitoring, reflection, and evaluation of progress. However, inconsistent application of SDL practices may leave some learners under-supported or insufficiently challenged, potentially slowing their progression to more autonomous stages of SDL.

Recommendations

To address the gaps and opportunities uncovered by this study, the following practical recommendations are made to further strengthen the nurturing of SDL skills in Grade 3 Literacy.

It is recommended that policy stakeholders and curriculum designers provide clear outcomes and guidelines in CAPS that support teachers with explicit pedagogy, instruction, and guidelines on how to implement SDL skills in the Literacy classroom.

It is recommended that the Department of Basic Education provide novice and experienced teachers with professional development courses to foster their theoretical and pedagogical content knowledge to support the development of SDL skills in literacy.

Schools should provide professional development courses where reflective practices, goal setting, and time management skills of teachers are developed to empower teachers to develop more consistent SDL skills, which in turn can model self-directed behaviour for learners.

Teachers and school management teams should consider school-based activities to explore ways to strengthen parental involvement and teacher-parent collaboration to provide support to learners from disadvantaged backgrounds, such as take-home resources, workshops, or community learning initiatives, to lessen contextual hindrances to SDL development in literacy.

The findings suggest that teachers play a crucial role in nurturing self-directed learning (SDL) and metacognitive strategies in Grade 3 Literacy. To translate these insights into practice, the following strategies are recommended:

Explicit teaching of SDL skills: teachers can model goal setting, planning, and reflection during reading, writing, listening, and speaking activities. For example, participants described guiding learners to plan around criteria, ask reflective questions, and evaluate their own work (S5P3), using checklists and mind maps to monitor progress.

Stage-based scaffolding: using Grow’s (1991) model, teachers can adapt support to learners’ SDL readiness. Dependent learners benefit from structured guidance and step-by-step instructions (S1P4), while interested and involved learners respond to increased autonomy, practice opportunities, and peer feedback (S3P1, S6P3).

Metacognitive strategy integration: teachers should explicitly teach prediction, summarising, visualisation, and self-questioning. Participants reported guiding learners to think aloud, reflect on reading or writing tasks, and monitor their own progress (S2P1, S6P2), reinforcing critical thinking and independent learning.

Diverse and engaging resources: exposure to a variety of texts, genres, and multimedia fosters motivation. Teachers described using flashcards, pictures, and relatable reading materials to capture learners’ interest and promote comprehension (S1P1, S2P1).

Peer and home-based practice: structured peer discussions and home-based practice enable learners to apply strategies independently. Participants encouraged learners to practise at home and share their reflections, supporting ownership of learning (S5P3).

Teacher professional development: ongoing training in SDL and metacognitive strategies will equip teachers to implement these practices effectively, model independent learning, and adapt instruction to learners’ SDL stages.

Implementing these strategies can enhance learners’ literacy skills while fostering independence, critical thinking, and lifelong learning, directly addressing gaps identified in Grade 3 classrooms.

Future research

Future research should involve larger studies to examine Grade 3 Literacy teachers’ self-directed learning abilities, pedagogical content knowledge, and their practical application in the classroom. Research that offers a deeper analysis of systemic constraints—such as language policies, class size, or resource inequality in South African public schools—that directly impact SDL development is needed. Additionally, future research could explore the long-term effects of professional development courses for teachers’ SDL strategy training on the literacy development of Foundation Phase learners.

Limitations

A limitation to consider in the findings of this research is that the study was restricted to.

Foundation Phase Grade 3 Literacy teachers in the Northern Cape, Frances Baard district. While the Northern Cape is the largest province in South Africa and encompasses a significant number of schools, only six schools and 15 participants were involved in this study. As a result, the findings cannot be generalised to represent the entire province or education district.

References

• 1

  AlbaharethA. (2023). “Metacognitive strategies with deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) individuals and ways to assess them,” in Metacognition in learning: new perspectives. ed. MuratT. (Hamburg: BoD Books on Demand GmbH).

  • Google Scholar

• 2

  AlwadeenN. B.PillerB. (2022). Enhancing self-directed readiness at elementary level: a study from American schools. J. Curric. Teach.11, 24–38. doi: 10.5430/jct.v11n4p24

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  AnshuGuptaP.SignhT. (2022). The concept of self-directed learning: implications for practice in the undergraduate curriculum. Indian Pediatr.59, 331–338. doi: 10.1007/s13312-022-2501-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  BeachP. T.AndersonR. C.JacovidisJ. N.ChadwickK. L. (2020). Making the abstract explicit: the role of metacognition in teaching and learning, metacognitive education. Theory Pract.41, 219–225.

  • Google Scholar

• 5

  BracefieldC.WoodgateF. (2020). Early literacy and the teacher’s role. He Kupu6, 14–19.

  • Google Scholar

• 6

  BreedB. (2016). Applying the element of cooperative learning: reported influence on self-directed learning and view of cooperative learning. J. Commun.7, 1–12. doi: 10.1080/0976691X.2016.11884878

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  BreedB.BaileyR. (2018). The influence of a metacognitive approach to cooperative pair problem-solving on self-direction in learning. J. Transdiscip. Res. Southern Afr.14, 1–11. doi: 10.4102/td.v14i1.516

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  BuntB. J.GrosserM. (2020). “Puzzle video games and the benefits for critical thinking: developing skills and dispositions towards self-directed learning,” in Self-directed learning research and its impact on educational practice. eds. MentzE.BaileyR., vol. 3 (Cape Town: AOSIS).

  • Google Scholar

• 9

  CilliersL.BlochC. (2018). A reading project to improve literacy in the foundation phase: a case study in the Eastern Cape. Read. Writ.9:a167. doi: 10.4102/rw.v9i1.167

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  CreswellJ. W. (2014). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. California: Sage.

  • Google Scholar

• 11

  CromartyW. R.BalfourR. T. (2019). Language learning and teaching in South African primary schools. Lang. Teach.52, 296–317. doi: 10.1017/S0261444819000181

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  CronjeA. (2015) Epistemological border-crossing between western science and indigenous knowledge and its implications for teacher professional development. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg

  • Google Scholar

• 13

  CronjeM. (2023). Is the reading crisis in South Africa sustained on purpose?Qeios. doi: 10.32388/JZZYWQ

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  DagalA. B.BayindirD. (2016). The investigation of relationship between the level of metacognitive awareness, self-directed learning readiness and academic achievement of preschool teacher candidates. Univ. J. Educ. Res.4, 2533–2540. doi: 10.13189/ujer.2016.041106

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  DahalA.BhatN. (2023). Self-directed learning, its implementation and challenges: a review. Neptal J. Health Sci.3, 102–115. doi: 10.3126/njhs.v3i1.63277

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  Department of Basic Education (2023). PIRLS 2021: South African preliminary highlights report. Department of Basic Education: Pretoria.

  • Google Scholar

• 17

  DjudinT. (2017). Using metacognitive strategies to improve reading comprehension and solve a word problem. J. Educ. Teach. Learn.2, 124–129. doi: 10.26737/jetl.v2i1.151

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  Du PlessisE. C.LetshweneM. J. (2020). A reflection on identified challenges facing South African teachers. Indep. J. Teach. Learn.15, 69–91. doi: 10.17159/cv8gfx71

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  EhlersL. L. (2022). Perceptions of selected primary school teachers in Mpumalanga on self-directed learning development. Potchefstroom: North-West University.

  • Google Scholar

• 20

  FellowsJ.OakleyG. (2019). Language, literacy and early childhood development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Google Scholar

• 21

  GarrisonD. R. (1997). Self-directed learning: toward a comprehensive model. Edult Educ. Q.48, 18–33. doi: 10.1177/.74171369704800103

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22

  GuglielminoL. M. (2020). Foreword. In: Self-directed learning research and its impact on educational practice. eds. E. Mentz, and R. Bailey. (NWU Self-Directed Learning Series. Vol. 3). AOSIS, Cape Town. pp. xxxvii-xxxviii. doi: 10.4102/aosis.2020.BK2060

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  GravaJ.PoleV. (2021). The promotion of self-directed learning in pre-school: reflection on teachers' professional practice. Cypriot J. Educ. Sci.16, 2336–2352. doi: 10.18844/cjes.v16i5.6351

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  GrowG. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed: a stage approach. Adult Educ. Q.41, 125–149. doi: 10.1177/0001848191041003001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  HanserH. (2025). Nurturing metacognitive strategies in the Grade 3 literacy classroom to enhance self-directed learning. Potchefstroom: North-West University.

  • Google Scholar

• 26

  HiemstraR.BrockettR.G. (2012). “Reframing the meaning of self-directed learning: an update model.” In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Adult Education Research Conference, Saratoga. New York, NYSprings

  • Google Scholar

• 27

  HowellC. J. (2016). The experiences of Grade 3 literacy teachers teaching english language learners. Minneapolis, MN: Walden University.

  • Google Scholar

• 28

  HugoA. (2021). A snapshot of the use of reading methods in primary schools in three provinces of South Africa. J. Lang. Learn.37, 24–44. doi: 10.5785/37-1-967

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  IftikarS. (2014). The importance of metacognitive strategies to enhance reading comprehension skills of learners: a self-direct directed learning approach. J. Engl. Lang. Lit.2, 191–195. doi: 10.17722/jell.v2i3.83

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  JagalsD. (2018). “Metacognitive sentience for impact-making research in curriculum studies: mathematics education as case in point,” in Raising the impact of education research in Africa. ed. WolhuterC. C. (AOSIS: Cape Town).

  • Google Scholar

• 31

  JamesA. A.BeniS.StearsM. (2019). Teaching science in the foundation phase: where are the gaps and how are they accounted for?S. Afr. J. Child. Educ.9:a759. doi: 10.4102/sajce.v9i1.759

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  JanksH. (2014). Globalisation, diversity, and education: a South African perspective. Educ. Forum78, 8–25. doi: 10.1080/00131725.2014.850981

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  KaratasA.ArpaciI. (2021). The role of self-directed learning, metacognition, and 21st century skills predicting the readiness for online learning. Contemp. Educ. Technol.13:ep300. doi: 10.30935/cedtech/10786

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  KelleyM. J.Clausen-GraceN. (2013). The metacognitive teaching framework in your classroom. 2nd Edn. Newark: International Reading Association.

  • Google Scholar

• 35

  KnowlesM. (1975). Self-directed learning: a guide for learners and teachers. Chicago, IL: Association Press.

  • Google Scholar

• 36

  LevyP. (2014). Introduction. The Oxford handbook of qualitative research. New York, NY: Oxford.

  • Google Scholar

• 37

  MahdaviM. (2014). An overview: metacognition in education. Int. J. Multidiscip. Current Res.2, 529–535. Available online at: https://ijmcr.com/index.php/ijmcr/article/view/02.03.05

  • Google Scholar

• 38

  MakokotlelaM. V. (2022). Self-directed learning in primary schools in Limpopo province. S. Afr. Comput. J.34, 107–119. doi: 10.18489/sacj.v34i2.1099

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  ManfreJ. (2022). Making the transition from dependent to independent learning. Nicasio, CA: Edutopia.

  • Google Scholar

• 40

  MareeK. (2016). First steps in research. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.

  • Google Scholar

• 41

  MarraR. M.HackerD. J.PlumbC. (2022). Metacognition and the development of self-directed learning in a problem-based engineering curriculum. J. Eng. Educ.111, 137–161. doi: 10.1002/jee.20437

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  MentzE.BaileyR. (2020). Self-directed learning and its impact on educational practice. Durbanville: AOSIS Publishers.

  • Google Scholar

• 43

  MerriamS. B. (2016). Qualitavtive research: a guide to design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Google Scholar

• 44

  OkoroC. O.ChukwudiE. K. (2011). Metacognitive strategies: a viable tool for self-directed learning. J. Educ. Soc. Res.1, 71–76. Available online at: https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/jesr/article/view/11747

  • Google Scholar

• 45

  RagvanV. (2022). The development of self-regulated learning by selected secondary school teachers in KwaZulu-Natal, North-West University. Potchefstroom: North-West University.

  • Google Scholar

• 46

  RobinsonP. A. (2020). The critical literacies advancement model (CLAM): a framework for promoting positive social change. Baton Rouge, LA: Loiusiana State University.

  • Google Scholar

• 47

  SchwabK. (2018). The Global competitiveness Report. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

  • Google Scholar

• 48

  SkaeV. A.BruceJ. L.WilmotP. D. (2020). Teachers’ engagement with learners in inclusive foundation phase classrooms. S. Afr. J. Educ. Child. Educ.10, 1–11. doi: 10.4102/sajce.v10i1.873

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  SpaullN.PretoriusE. (2019). “Still failing at the first hurdle: examining early grade reading in South Africa,” in South African schooling: the enigma of inequality. eds. SpaullN.JansenJ. (Cham: Springer Nature).

  • Google Scholar

• 50

  StolkJ.MartelloR. M.SomervilleM. (2010). Engineering students’ definitions of and responses to self-directed learning.International journal of education,26, 900–913.

  • Google Scholar

• 51

  TengM. F.ZhangL. J. (2021). Development of children’s metacognitive knowledge, reading, and writing in English as a foreign language: evidence from longitudinal data using multilevel models. Br. J. Educ. Psychol.91, 1202–1230. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12413,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  UNESCO. (2018). Defining literacy. Paris: UNESCO

  • Google Scholar

• 53

  VersterM.MentzE.Du Toit-BritsC. (2020). “Teachers’ position regarding their curriculum as praxis: a self-directed learning capability perspective,” in Self-directed learning research and its impact on educational practice (NWU self-directed learning series volume 3). eds. MentzE.BaileyR. (Cape Town: AOSIS).

  • Google Scholar

• 54

  VesterM.MentzE.Du Toit-BritsC. (2024). Self-directed learning professional development used as intervention to enhance teachers; curriculum praxis. S. Afr. J. Educ.44, 1–17. doi: 10.15700/saje.v44n1a2346

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  WagnerS. R. (2011). After the final bell: the self-directed learning practices of elementary school teachers. (PhD–Dissertation). Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee.

  • Google Scholar