18 SES 03 A, Professional Learning in Physical Education and Sport Coaching
The development of basic skills in students is one of the basic purposes of the university, where future professionals are trained who must be prepared to meet the demands of society (Macías, Rodríguez-Sánchez, Aguilera & Gil-Fernández, 2017). These are intended to develop a professional profile different from the traditional one where learning becomes active, constructivist, they seek to provide students with greater autonomy in their learning process (Ramírez, Gónzalez & Salcines, 2017), that is, the student, passes, from Be a passive agent to be the protagonist of your learning process and the builder of your personal learning environment (Khün, 2017), so you must introduce participatory strategies that facilitate this objective. The student’s role in constructivist learning is active and the teacher’s role is that of a planner, facilitator and guide who supports the student by monitoring their progress (Lluch & Portillo, 2018; Martímez, 2015; Svinicki & Schallert, 2016).
Among the basic professional and personal skills that university students must acquire throughout their initial training, there is the learning ability that will allow them to continue studying autonomously. From the socio-constructivist vision of teaching and learning the competence of learning to learn is born, from this thought, learning is understood as a process of construction of meaning and attribution of meaning (LIuch & Portillo, 2018). The competence of learning to learn is considered fundamental in the process of lifelong learning that occurs throughout life. It is thought that a key component to developing the competence to learn to learn is the self-regulation of learning (Salmerón & Gutiérrez, 2012) since it is one of the cross-selling elements found in all subjects in the field University (Hortigüela & Pérez-Pueyo, 2016). This is conceived as a process by which students, in an autonomous and motivated way, organize their activity in order to achieve the objectives that are imposed or proposed (Hernández & Camargo, 2017). Self-regulation of learning is based on the active collaboration of the student in the personal process of their learning from the motivational, metacognitive and behavioural point of view (Zimmerman, 1989; Zimmerman, 2013). Specifically, self-regulated students use specific processes that transform their pre-existing skill into behaviour related to various areas of functioning (Zimmerman, 2013).
Bandura (1977). In his socio-cognitive theory, refers to self-regulated learning as a process where a student proposes his learning goals, monitors, regulates and controls the acquisition of knowledge. In this same sense, Bandura (1986), requires three threads of regulation: self-observation (focus, check), self- evaluation and self- reaction. For the development of this competence, it is essential that students develop the ability to think and act on their own, guiding these attitudes towards achieving their own goals. To achieve self-regulation, students must discern the deficiencies in their initial approach, find ways to correct them strategically and make the necessary effort to succeed in the future (Zimmerman 2013). In this way, the self- regulation of learning becomes an important part of the teaching-learning process, since it basically consists of organizing behavioural and environmental cognitive activities by students and leading to the success of learning.
As for the initial training of the students of Physical Activity and Sports Sciences, the specific needs of the degree, require the training to face and respond to the challenges that society demands, being one of these the constant professional update. For this, you must have the possibility to continue learning, formally through courses or through self-learning, once your higher education is finished.
The purpose of this study has been to know and analyse the strategies of self-regulation of student learning in their last year of training in the degree of Physical Activity and Sports Sciences.
The design of this research is exploratory in nature, where a quantitative, non-experimental methodology is used, whit a descriptive statistic, where the self-regulation of student learning at the University of Alicante is referred to and analyzed. The sample consisted of 77 students belonging to the last year of the Physical Activity Sports Sciences degree (18 women, 59 men), of the academic year 2018-2019. The instrument to collect the quantitative data was the Self-Regulation Learning Strategy Inventory -Self-Report (SRSI-SR) adapted and validated by Hernández & Camacho (2017), which consists of 18 items of Likert scale of four points (1 = never, 2 = almost never, 3 = almost always, 4 = always). Likewise, the aforementioned questionnaire contemplates four factors to be assessed: inadequate regulation habits, organization of the environment, a search of information, and organization of the task. The procedure followed was firstly, to select a questionnaire that evaluated the self-regulation of university student learning. In the second place, the questionnaire was provided for this research, using the Google Drive form to be completed online by the students of the last year Physical Activity and Sports Science course. In this process, students were informed of the confidentiality and anonymity of the answers. The quantitative data were structured and analyzed using the statistical package SPSS version 23 for Windows, using descriptive statistics, means, standard deviation, and cross tables. For the comparison of means, the t statistic was used.
Factor I. Inappropriate habits. Regarding the results obtained from the investigations related to the inappropriate regulation habits factor, we observed in a first descriptive analysis that in general terms they have an adequate habit of regulating their learning, ask the teacher when they do not understand a topic, they are not easily distracted When they are studying, they do not give up easily when they do not understand the subject, and they do not ignore subjects that are difficult to understand. Factor II. Organization of the environment. This factor refers to studying in quiet places without distractions or interruptions, we observe that students in general terms create a favorable environment for their learning. Factor III. Find information. In the items related to the search for bibliographic references and the search for complementary material, students show less acquired competence. The same does not happen with the item that refers to the investigation when an assigned task is not understood. Factor IV. Organization of the task. Students generally have a habit of the proper organization (they order the sequence of tasks, coordinate study time, organize a study schedule, use a method to organize study material, and finally think of the best way to study). As Salmerón and Gutiérrez (2012) mention, students still come from an educational system, characterized by the hierarchy where the student continues to reproduce the academic discourse, this fact does not adapt to the new current curricular or social demands that promote a more independent work of the students. Finally, this is of interest to be able to implement specific intervention strategies that promote the development of study techniques and autonomous learning, as referred to in the educational policies of the European Union.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of So-cial and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359-373. Hernández, A, & Camargo, A. (2017). Adaptación y validación del inventario de estrategias de autorregulación en estudiantes universitarios. Suma Psicológica, 24, 9-16. Hortigüela, D., & Pérez-Pueyo, A. (2016). Influencia de la regulación del trabajo del alumnado universitario en la implicación hacia las tareas. Psychology, Society & Education, 8(1), 39-51. Khün, C. (2017). Are Students Ready to (re)-Design their Personal Learning Environment. The case of the E-Dynamic Space. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 6(1), 11-19. Lluch, L., & Portillo, M. (2018). La competencia de aprender a aprender. En el marco de la edu-cación superior. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 78, (2), 59-76. Macías, E.,Rodríguez-Sánchez, M., Aguilera, J, & Gil-Hernández, S. (2017). Adquisición de competencias transversales a través de la tutoría en la universidad. La cuestión Universita-ria, 9, 88-107 Martínez, J. A. (2015). Nuevos roles del profesor y del estudiante universitario en el contexto del Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Aplicación al área de organización de empresas. Cuadernos de Educación y Desarrollo, 55, 1-34. Recuperado de http://atlante.eumed.net/wp-content/ uploads/competencias1.pdf Ramírez, A., Gónzalez , N., & Salcines, I. (2017) Las Competencias Docentes Genéricas en los Grados de Educación. Visión del Profesorado Universitario. Estudios Pedagógicos, 44, (2), 259-277 Salmerón, H. y Gutierrez, C. (2009). Desarrollo de la Competencia Matemática a través de pro-gramas de Aprender a Aprender infusionados en el currículum ordinario. Revista Iberoa-mericana de Evaluación Educativa, VOL 2 (2), 141-156 Salmerón H. & Gutiérrez C. (2012), La competencia de aprender a aprender y el aprendizaje au-torregulado. Revista de Curriculum y formación del profesorado,16, (1), 5-1 Svinicki M. D., & Schallert D. L. (2016). Learning through group work in the college classroom: Evaluating the evidence from an instructional goal perspective. En M. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education: handbook of theory and research (pp. 513-558). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339. Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). From cognitive modeling to self-regulation: a social cognitive career path. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 135-147.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- 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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.