OBJECTIVES 1.- To describe the learning profile of students in terms of how they perceive ICTs for learning. 2.- To analyse students´ approaches to learning in terms of their rating or assessment of how necessary ICTs are in learning. PARTICIPANTS A sample of 443 students (138 males - 31.2%, and 300 females - 67.7%) participated in this study. F % (1) Arts and Humanities 48 10.8 (2) Social and Legal Sciences 163 36.8 (3) Sciences 143 32.3 (4) Health Sciences 58 13.1 (5) Engineering and Architecture 31 7 TOTAL 443 100 INSTRUMENTS Data was gathered using the CPE-R-2F, which is a widely used Spanish version of Biggs, Kember & Leung´s Revised Two-factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) (2001). CPE-R-2F has 20 items rated on a five-point Likert scale. Additionally, three items on the assessment students make of ICTs to aid their learning were introduced. RESULTS The first objective aims to describe students in terms of their perception of the use of ICTs in learning. Two groups were identified: the first group views ICTs necessary or very necessary, while the second considers ICTs hardly necessary or not necessary at all. The former group is made up of 403 students (70.9% females, 29.1% males; 91% of the total of participants) and views ICTS as necessary or very necessary tools to approach their learning. As to age, 76.8% is between 18 and 20 years old, and the remaining 23.2% gathers the rest (a homogeneous group up to age 67). As to branches of knowledge, 38.2% study a Social and Legal Sciences degree, 30.3% are in Sciences, 13.9% are in Health Sciences, 11.2% are in Arts and Humanities, and 6.5% are in Engineering and Architecture. The rest of the sample (N=40.9%) make up the second group which views ICTs hardly necessary or not necessary at all to accomplish a learning task. Females are 45% of this group, which means 25.9% less (compared to the former group) consider ICTs as necessary tools. In males, the percentage grows from 29.1% to 55%. These results do not match those found among students who rate ICTs as necessary or very necessary tools. In Social and Legal Sciences, there is a higher predisposition to introduce ICTs in teaching-learning processes, which is why this subgroup will be studied in more detail in future research.

In the second objective students who view ICTs as necessary or very necessary tools (N=403) adopt mostly a deep approach (92.1%), while 7.9% adopt a surface approach. Students who view ICTs hardly necessary or not necessary at all use a deep approach less often (85%), which is 7.1% less than students who consider them as necessary or very necessary tools. The remaining 15% uses a surface approach. In terms of mean of scores, deep approach in both groups of students is very similar: M=30.51 (sd=6.15) for the 1st group; and M=30.53 (sd=6.38) for the 2nd group. These results suggest that students who rate ICTs higher as learning tools, adopt a deep approach more often. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS This study shows that most participants view ICTs as very necessary tools in the learning process. Although in both groups analysed there is a higher percentage of females, in the second group the percentage of males is larger. Students who rate ICTs as very necessary tools are congruent in their learning and use the most appropriate strategies according to their personal motivation towards learning. This outcomes supports Biggs´s (1987) 3P Model. ICTs are tools which may contribute positively to student learning. The results of this study suggest that those students who rate ICTs highest, use a deep approach more often. This does not imply that the use of ICTs promotes the adoption of a deep approach, but it may hinder the use of a superficial approach. Older students view ICTs as very useful tools, and also adopt a deep approach to learning. Previous studies (Mirete & García-Sánchez, 2014) suggests that the introduction of ICTs in learning is a real need, which enables more flexible processes in the educational context and promotes self-learning and self-management.