We are carrying out a three-year research , which purports, among other aspects, to assess to what extent learning strategies of students have an influence on their academic achievement. The conclusions herein exposed are the result of our first year of work. After examining several existing questionnaires for evaluation of learning strategies (MSLQ by Pintrich, Smith, García and Mckeachie (1991), LASSI by Weinstein and Palmer (1987), ACRA by Román and Gallego (1994), etc), we could not find any questionnaire that fitted sufficiently to our research objectives. Therefore, we devised our own questionnaire: LSUSQ, Learning Strategies of University Students Questionnaire. The 94-item questionnaire is constructed using Likert-scale format with five possible answers for each item, ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". Table 1 shows the questionnaire structure. The questionnaire was validated with a sample of 545 students from the two public universities: the University of Valencia/Estudi General (UVEG), and the Polytechnic University of Valencia (UPV). The sample is representative with a level of confidence of 95% and a maximum margin of error of 5% keeping an equivalent composition for both universities. The questionnaire obtained a high degree of internal consistency. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the entire 94-item questionnaire was .891. Table 1 shows alpha coefficients for scales, dimensions and sub-scales. It was carried out a factor analysis of principal components with varimax rotation in order to verify the construct validity. Those found factors, coinciding with the abovementioned sub-scales, confirmed the theoretical structure from which the questionnaire was devised. Also, it was carried out a cluster analysis following k- means procedure introducing factor scores as variables in order to establish student groups formed depending on their learning strategies. Four groups were found: three groups had a poor strategic profile (the first one consisting of 156 students, the second of 104 students and the third one of 15 students) and the other group had a positive strategic profile (with 261 students). Later, existing differences in grades were examined (ANOVA plus post hoc) between established groups depending on their strategic profile, where significant differences were found benefiting the group with positive strategic profile. This pattern is coherent with results from other studies obtained through other procedures (Cano and Justicia, 1991 and 1993; Lindner and Harris, 1992, 1993 and 1998; Pintrich, 1995; Pintrich and García, 1991; Robison, 2002; Valle and Rodríguez, 1998; Williams, 1996; Zimmerman and Martínez-Pons, 1986). SCALES DIMENSIONS SUB-SCALES AFFECTIVE, SUPPORT AND CONTROL/SELF-MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES (a=.776) MOTIVATIONAL STRATEGIES (a=.692) Self-efficiency and expectations ( a=..765) Intrinsic Motivation ( a=..687) Task value ( a=..727) Internal Attributions ( a=..501) External Attributions ( a=..533) Conception of Intelligence as modifiable (a=..571) Extrinsic Motivation ( a=..494) AFFECTIVE COMPONENTS (a=.678) Physical and emotional condition ( a=..720) Anxiety control ( a=..666) META-COGNITIVE STRATEGIES ( a=..766) Planning ( a=..766) Control, self-regulation ( a=..661) Self-assessment ( a=..593) Knowledge of objectives and criteria evaluation (a=..549) CONTEXT CONTROL STRATEGIES, SOCIAL INTERACTION AND USE OF RESOURCES STRATEGIES ( a=..768) Social interaction and learning abilities with classmates ( a=..678) Context control ( a=..761) STRATEGIES RELATED TO INFORMATION PROCESSING ( a=..859) SEARCH AND SELECTION OF INFORMATION STRATEGIES ( a=..660) Knowledge of sources and search of information ( a=..627) Selection of information ( a=..620) PROCESSING AND USE OF INFORMATION STRATEGIES ( a=..841) Acquisition of information ( a=..686) Elaboration ( a=..694) Organization ( a=..841) Personalisation and creativity, critical thinking (a=..819) Storage. Memorizing. Use of mnemonic resources ( a=..777) Storage. Simple repetition Transfer. Use of information ( a=..721) Use of resources for using acquired information ( a=..559) Tabla 1. Questionnaire Structure