Learning Strategies and Engagement in University Students

Session Information

22 SES 05.5 PS, General Poster Session

General Poster Session

Time:
2014-09-03
12:30-14:00
Room:
Poster Area C (between B019 - B024)
Chair:

Contribution

Are the university students with good learning strategies more involved in learning than their peers with worse strategies? This is the research question that guides our work and we believe that it is indeed the case. The aim of this paper is therefore to find out whether such relationship exists for the university students in the selected sample[1].

We understand learning strategies such as organized, conscious and intentional whole that the learner does to effectively achieve a learning objective in a given social context. Acting strategically means that you want to learn effectively and to design and implement action plans adjusted to the planned goals and to the context conditions, selecting and implementing procedures, skills and techniques for effective learning (Garcia & Pintrich, 1993) whose effectiveness has to be assessed to modify what is needed. Learning strategies  comprise affective-motivational support elements ( "want" , which supposes dispositions and adequate climate for learning) , metacognitive elements ( " make decisions and evaluate them " , which involves student self-regulation) and cognitive elements ( "power " , which involves management strategies, skills and techniques related to information processing ) (Abascal, 2003; Ayala, Martinez & Yuste, 2004; Garcia & Pintrich, 1991; Gargallo, 2000; González-Cabanach, Valle, Rodriguez & Piñeiro, 2002, Gonzalez-Pumariega, Núñez Pérez, González Cabanach & Valle, 2002; Monereo, 1997; Moral Santaella, 20008) .

This is a relevant topic from a pedagogical point of view because learning strategies influence academic performance, which has been proven in different studies: Camarero, Martin & Herrero (2000), Cano & Justicia (1993), Gargallo, Suarez-Rodríguez & Pérez-Pérez (2009), Pintrich (1995), Pintrich, Smith, Garcia & Mackeachie (1991), Roces, González-Pienda, Núñez, Gonzalez-Pumariega, Garcia & Alvarez (1999), Valle & Rodriguez (1998). This is because they are one of the most powerful explicative constructs of the learning processes of students. To better explain this influence, this paper will analyze the impact of learning strategies on student involvement in the learning process. To study these matters we will use the SEQ questionnaire (Kember & Leung, 2009). This questionnaire analyzes this implication considering different components: critical thinking, creative thinking, self-managed learning, adaptability, problem solving, communication skills, interpersonal and teamwork skills, and management of new technologies.

All of them are components involved in the learning-centered model proposed by the Bologna process of convergence, in which many European countries are involved  (student-centered learning, learning paradigm) (Attard, Di Ioio, Geven & Santa, 2010; Biggs, 2005; Kember, 2009; Monereo &Pozo, 2003; Samuelowicz & Bain, 2001).

This model provides professors new teaching and evaluation methods but also demand greater student engagement, which is a key element of the process, and who has has to hold an especially active role in it, becoming an autonomous and self-regulated learner (Hannafin, 2012, Machemer & Crawford, 2007).

If learning strategies are critical in the process and have an influence on the students’ implication, as we think, we can offer to other Spanish and European universities relevant data and propose training programmes. To examine this further, we are collecting data from students at three universities in the city of Valencia (Spain). The results presented here are from a three-year study, whose aims were obviously broader.


[1] It is the "Learning-centered methodologies at the university. Design, implementation and assessment”, approved by the Spanish Economy and Competitiveness’ Ministry into the National Basic Research Program, 2001 (2013-2015) (Financing Plan E, PGE), directed by Professor Ph.D. Bernardo Gargallo (code EDU2012-32725).

 

Method

TThe research work is based on a survey design. The sample consisted of 686 students from different degree programmes at the three universities of Valencia (Spain): 360 from the University of Valencia, 193 from the Polytechnic University of Valencia, and 103 from the Catholic University of Valencia. The sampling method is purposeful sampling, since participants were selected from a sampling of teachers who apply innovative methods of centered learning. The participants belong to three different strands of knowledge: Education, Health and Engineering. In the first year of research different data were collected from their students in order to diagnose their particular learning process, to make comparisons and to analyze the relationships between constructs. The information was collected from two questionnaires. In order to evaluate the learning strategies we used the LSUSQ (Gargallo, Suárez-Rodríguez & Pérez-Pérez, 2009). This 88-item questionnaire is constructed using Likert-scale format. The questionnaire is divided into two scales and six subscales. The first scale, of affective, support and control strategies (α = 0.776), consists of four subscales: motivational strategies (α=.692), affective components (α=.678), meta-cognitive strategies (α=.766) and context control strategies, social interaction and use of resources strategies (α=.768). The second scale, of strategies related to information processing (α=.859), consists of two subscales: search and selection of information strategies (α=.660) and processing and use of information strategies (α=.841). The reliability for all the questionnaire is α= .897. In order to evaluate the involvement of the student we used the SEQ questionnaire (Student Engagement Questionnaire) (Kember & Leung, 2009). It consists of 35 items organized into two scales. The first one evaluates the development of 8 capabilities/factors: critical thinking, creative thinking, self-managed learning, adaptability, problem solving, communication skills, interpersonal skills and group work, use of new technologies. The second one evaluates the development of 9 capabilities/factors: active learning, teaching for understanding, feedback to help learning, evaluation, relationship between teachers and students, workload, cooperative learning, and coherence of the curriculum. The questionnaire is constructed using Likert-scale format. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the factors/capabilities of both scales ranges from 64 to 82. For the purposes of this paper, we will only use the capabilities of the first scale, based on the commitment/involvement of the student, not the capabilities of the second one, more related to the management of the learning context by the professor. The information was gathered through on-line questionnaires. Statistical analyses, performed by SPSS 19.0, were descriptive and ANOVA.

Expected Outcomes

The total score of learning strategies obtained by students was used to classify students into three groups according to their management, using the percentile scores: A "low" group in attitudes, made up of students placed below the 25th percentile, an "average" group, consisting of students located between the 25th and 75th, and a "high" group, consisting of students located above the 75th percentile. It was carried out one-way ANOVA to verify the possible differences between the three groups in the eight components of the SEQ questionnaire: critical thinking, creative thinking, self-managed learning, adaptability, problem solving, communication skills, interpersonal skills and group work, use of new technologies The results of the ANOVA displayed significant differences (p <.001) among the three groups in all the variables analyzed. Then post-hoc tests (Scheffe) were performed to analyze between which groups significant differences existed. They were found in the eight capabilities/factors analyzed, favoring the average group compared to the low group and also favoring the high group compared to both of them. The only area with any significant difference between the average and the high group was in creative thinking. This implies that the better learning strategies the students managed the more implication in their learning they had. Therefore, learning strategies appear to be an essential element in the process of student involvement, so that teachers should work to encourage the use of learning strategies of university students in their classes. We know that the learning centered methods help the students to improve their learning strategies (Gargallo, 2008), so that professors should use them in their lectures: the cooperative work, the problem-based learning, the project method, the works of initiation to research, the case method, etc., together with formative assessment procedures that give feedback to the students, are good tools for this aim.

References

Attard, A., Di Ioio, E., Geven, K. & Santa, R. (2010). Student centered learning. An insight into theory and practice.Bucarest: Partos Timisoara. Biggs, J. (2005). Calidad del aprendizaje universitario. Madrid: Narcea. Camarero, F., Martín, F & Herrero, J. (2000). Estilos y estrategias de aprendizaje en estudiantes universitarios, Psicothema, 12:4, 615-622. Cano, F. & Justicia. F. (1993). Factores académicos, estrategias y estilos de aprendizaje, Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, 46: 1, 89-99. Gargallo, B. (2008): Estilos de docencia y evaluación de los profesores universitarios y su influencia sobre los modos de aprender de sus estudiantes. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 241, 425-445. Gargallo, B., Suárez-Rodríguez, J. M. & Pérez-Pérez, C. (2009). El cuestionario CEVEAPEU. Un instrumento para la evaluación de las estrategias de aprendizaje de los estudiantes universitarios, RELIEVE, 15: 2, 1-31. http://www.uv.es/RELIEVE/v15n2/RELIEVEv15n2_5.htm Hannafin, M. (2012). Student-Centered Learning. En N.M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 3211-3214). Nueva York: Springer. Kember, D. (2009). Promoting student-centred forms of learning across an entire university. Higher Education, 58, 1-13. Kember, D. & Leung, D.Y.P. (2009): Development of a questionnaire for assessing students’ perceptions of the teaching and learning environment and its use in quality assurance. Learning Environ Res, 12, 15-29. Machemer, P.L. & Crawford, P. (2007). Student perceptions of active learning in a large cross-disciplinary classroom. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8 (1), 9-30. Monereo, C. & Pozo, J.I. (2003). La universidad ante la nueva cultura educativa. Enseñar y aprender para la autonomía. Madrid: Síntesis. Pintrich, P.R. (1995). Understanding self-regulated learning, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 63, pp. 3-12. Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D. A. F., García, T. & Mackeachie, W.J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor: Universidad de Michigan. Technical Report No. 91-B-004. Roces, C., González-Pienda, J. A., Núñez, J. C., González-Pumariega, S., García, Mª. S. & Álvarez, L. (1999). Relaciones entre motivación, estrategias de aprendizaje y rendimiento académico en estudiantes universitarios, Mente y Conducta en Situación Educativa. Revista electrónica del Departamento de Psicología. Universidad de Valladolid, 1: 1, 41-50. Samuelowicz, K. & Bain, J.D. (2001). Revisiting academics’ beliefs about teaching and learning, Higher Education, 41, 299-325. Valle, A. & Rodríguez, A. (1998) Estrategias de aprendizaje y rendimiento académico, Boletín de Psicología, 60, 27-53.

Author Information

Bernardo Gargallo López (presenting / submitting)
University of Valencia, Spain
University of Valencia (Spain)
Theory of Education
Valencia
University of Valencia, Spain
University of Valencia, Spain
Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain
Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.