This work focuses on the teaching and assessment of the learning-to-learn  (LTL) competence in university degrees, and its results come from a three-year research project ^[1]. LTL is a key competence for lifelong learning in the European education systems (EU, 2006 & 2018). The definition of LTL relies mainly on the scientific literature on Strategic Learning (Weinsten, 1988) and Self-Regulated Learning (Pintrich, 2004; Zimmerman, 2002).

At the beginning, the researchers included three dimensions to explain how students ‘learn to learn’: cognitive (skills, strategies and techniques related to information processing), metacognitive (awareness and management of the learning processes) and affective-motivational (self-concept, motivation, etc.) (Hoskins & Fredriksson, 2008).  

Later, a fourth dimension was added: the social/relational dimension, rooted in the social-cognitive theory (Thoutenhoofd & Pirrie, 2013). These ideas clearly influenced the current proposal of the EU (2018), who has renamed LTL as ‘personal, social and learning to learn competence’ (Caena, 2019; European Comission et al., 2020).

Based on a literature review, our research team developed a model on LTL, including these four dimensions and we added an ethical dimension (Gargallo et al. 2020). The student has to learn respecting ethical codes and contributing to create an increasingly equitable society (OECD, 2005; Cortina, 2013; Buxarrais & Conceiçao, 2017).

The objective of the European Union was for the students to achieve an adequate mastery of LTL at the end of compulsory schooling. However, it is not proved that university students handle it with an adequate skill, and they need specific training (Cameron and Rideout, 2020; Viejo and Ortega-Ruiz, 2018).

That’s why we are developing an intervention model to teach this competence, which can be useful for European researchers and university professors.  We are trying to test functional proposals to teach the competence, integrated into the teaching of university degree subjects. To do this, we defend a “constructive alignment” (Biggs, 2005), in which competences, contents, learning outcomes, and teaching and assessment procedures are aligned to achieve learning of quality.

In this way, the learning tasks to teach the competence can be used as assessment procedures, from a perspective of authentic tasks and authentic assessment: learning projects, problem solving, case studies, portfolios, etc. Furthermore, organized, and systematic observation will be a good procedure to assess the achievement of LTL.

Then, we developed the curricular design of LTL, specifying dimensions and sub-dimensions to work on, in the different subjects of the university degrees and in their academic years. We also concretized assessable learning results, contents and teaching and assessment procedures, and made the necessary materials.

Later, we are applying the training proposals organized in the previous phase, in two universities of Valencia (Spain) in different degrees (Education, Medicine, Engineering, and Architecture), and collecting evidence to assess the possible success achieved.

In this work, we present the results of the training proposals developed in the previous phase, in one of the subjects of the Education area. This is a first test to validate our proposal, specifically in the Theory of Education subject, which is taught in the 1st year of the Pedagogy degree at the University of Valencia.

[1] ‘The learning to learn competence in the university, its design and curriculum development. a model of intervention and its application in university degrees’ Project PID2021-123523NB-I00, funded by the MCIN/AEI /10.13039/501100011033 and by ERDF A way of making Europe.

The research used quantitative methodology (a pre-experimental design, with pretest-posttest) and qualitative methodology (a focus group with 7 students participating in the training program). The sample consisted of 42 students, who were assessed in pretest and posttest and participated in the training sessions of the program. To assess the competence, the QELtLCUS questionnaire (Gargallo et al., 2021) was used, as well as the assessment of two deliveries of a portfolio (authentic assessment). The first one was carried out before the application of the training program, and the second one after their application. These two deliveries were assessed by means of a rubric. The rubric analyzed the management of the components of the LTL competence necessary to develop a good portfolio (Planning, Self-assessment, Organization, Understanding, Communication abilities, etc.). The QELtLCUS questionnaire consists of 85 items organized in 5 scales, that assess the five dimensions listed above and 21 subdimensions. The questionnaire has a self-report format, and the student answers the items with a Likert-type scale, agree-disagree. As we have already said, the training program was applied in the subject of Theory of Education, in the 1st year of the Pedagogy degree at the University of Valencia, in five sessions of about one hour integrated into teaching. The subject is assigned 6 credits and 23 sessions of two and a half hours in the first semester of the 2022-23 academic year. In this subject, among other methods, the portfolio is used as a key instrument with which students demonstrate the achievement of the learning objectives. Students make two deliveries of the portfolio, one in the middle of the semester and another at the end, which collect their work and practical activities to demonstrate their learning. This is an authentic assessment, since the learning of the dimensions worked on in the program is analyzed in the portfolio, which complements the information collected through the QELtLCUS questionnaire. In the training program, several components of the cognitive (search skills, selection, elaboration, organization, understanding of information, critical thinking, and written expression skills), metacognitive (planning and self-assessment) and ethics dimension (hard work, responsible and committed) were worked, all of them linked to the contents that were being worked on in the subject. The objective of the program was to improve the quality of the processes and skills corresponding to the dimensions and components of the competence involved in learning through portfolios.

Statistical analyses were performed by SPSS 25, performing non-parametric pre- and post-test (Wilcoxon's Z), given the non-normality of the sample. The QELtLCUS results showed significant differences in the cognitive dimension (Z= 2.432, p<.05) and in two subdimensions: Information management (Z= 2.255, p<.05) and Communication skills (Z= 2.395, p<.05). Scores improved on the post-test. There were significant differences in the assessment rubric in 15 out of the 18 items, with better scores in the post-test: Self-assessment- and Self-regulation (Z= 4.756, p<.001), Information search (Z= 3.874, p<.001), Elaboration (Z= 3.646, p<.001), Organization (Z= 3.8021, p<.001), Comprehension (Z= 3.400, p<.001), Absence of conceptual errors (Z= 3.589, p<.001), Correct presentation (Z= 3.574, p<.001), Portfolio components (Z= 2.982, p<.001), Management of ICTs (Z= 3.844, p<.001), Paraphrasing of the text (Z= 3.020, p<.01), Spelling (Z= 3.802, p<.001), Critical Thinking (Z= 4.327, p<.001), and Honesty-Values (Z= 4.823, p<.001). There was no significant difference in three skills: Planning (Z= 1,811, p=.070), Bibliographic reference citation system (Z= 1,402, p=.161) and Compliance with delivery deadlines (Z= 1,000, p= .317), with better results in the post-test. The QELtLCUS results come from the answers of the students and from their subjective perception. The results of the rubric reflect the real execution by the students of a complex task, the portfolio. They were obtained from the portfolio correction made by three professors of the subject (there are three different groups with three professors), and they were assessed by taking the average of the scores awarded. The results of the focus group were also good, as the students assessed the training program developed very positively. For us, these are very promising results, which support the quality of the training program, and which encourage us to go on in this way, approaching the teaching of LTL with authentic tasks and authentic assessment linked to the contents of the subjects.

Buxarrais, Mª R. & Conceiçao, Mª (2017). Competencias y competencia ética en la educación superior. En E. Vila (Coord.) Competencias éticas y deontología profesional en la universidad (pp. 89-128). Aljibe. Caena, F. (2019). Developing a European Framework for the Personal, Social & Learning lo Learn Key Competence. Publications Office of the European Union. https://bit.ly/2vBzK8A Cameron, R. B. & Rideout. C.A. (2020). It’s been a challenge finding new ways to learn: fist-year students’ perceptions of adapting to learning in a university environment. Studies in Higher Education, 42 (11), 2153-2169. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1783525. Cortina, A. (2013) ¿Para qué sirve realmente la ética? Barcelona: Paidós. European Commission (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 Decembrer 2006 on Key Competences for LifeLong Learning. European Commission. https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/news/recommendation-18-december-2006-key-competences-lifelong-learning European Commission. (2018). Accompanying the document Proposal for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on Key Competences for LifeLong Learning. European Commission. Retrieved from http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-5464-2018-ADD-2/EN/pdf European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Sala, A., Punie, Y. & Garkov, V. (2020). LifeComp : the European Framework for personal, social and learning to learn key competence, Publications Office of the European Union, 2020, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/302967 Gargallo Lopez, B.; Perez-Perez, C.; Garcia-Garcia, F.J.; Gimenez Beut, J.A., & Portillo Poblador, N. (2020). The skill of learning to learn at university. Proposal for a theoretical model. Educación XX1, 23(1), 19-44, http://doi.org/0000-0002-7158-6737 Gargallo-López, B., Suárez-Rodríguez, J.M., Pérez-Pérez, C., Almerich Cerveró, G., & Garcia-Garcia, F.J. (2021). The QELtLCUS questionnaire. An instrument for evaluating the learning to learn competence in university students. RELIEVE, 27(1), art. 1. http://doi.org/10.30827/relieve.v27i1.20760 Hoskins, B. & Fredriksson, U. (2008). Learning to learn: what is it and can it be measured. Ispra: Joint Research Centre, Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen. Centre for Research on Lifelong Learning (CRELL). OCDE. (2005). La definición y selección de competencias clave. Recuperado de http://comclave.educarex.es/pluginfile.php/130/mod_resource/content/3/DESECO.pdf Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407. Thoutenhoofd, E.D. & Pirrie, A. (2015). From self-regulation to learning to learn: observations on the construction of self and learning. British Educational Research Journal, 4 (1), 72-84. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3128 Viejo, C. & Ortega-Ruiz, R. (2018). Competencias para la investigación: el trabajo de fin de Máster y su potencialidad formativa. Revista de innovación y buenas prácticas docentes, 5, 46-56. https://doi.org/10.21071/ripadoc.v5i.10970 Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: an overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 64-70.