Deep learning self-regulation strategiesValidation of a situational model and its questionnaire

  1. Ernesto Panadero
  2. Jesús Alonso-Tapia
  3. Daniel García-Pérez
  4. Juan Fraile
  5. José Manuel Sánchez Galán
  6. Rodrigo Pardo
Journal:
Revista de psicodidáctica

ISSN: 1136-1034

Year of publication: 2021

Volume: 26

Issue: 1

Pages: 10-19

Type: Article

DOI: 10.1016/J.PSICOE.2020.11.003 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Revista de psicodidáctica

Abstract

Measuring self-regulated learning is crucial to improve our educational interventions. Self-report has been the major data collection method and a number of questionnaires exist. Importantly, the vast majority of the questionnaires are constructed from general theoretical models. Our aim was to develop a model and its questionnaire –i.e. Deep Learning Strategies questionnaire- to investigate how students regulate their learning strategies in more realistic learning situations. Four scales were created: (1) Basic learning self-regulation strategies; (2) Visual elaboration and summarizing strategies; (3) Deep information processing strategies; and (4) Social learning self-regulation strategies. A total of 601 higher education students formed the sample. We analyzed, first, the internal validity of the questionnaire. Three structural models were tested: (M1) mono-factor; (M2) scales correlate among them freely, and (M3) the scales are indicators of a general construct. The latter model showed a slight better fit. Additionally, a path analysis was carried out to study the degree in which the use of the Deep learning strategies depends on personal factors and is associated to performance. It was found that the use depends directly and positively on learning goal orientation, on the self-messages defining the self-regulation style of emotion and motivation focused on learning, and on effort. Besides, these two last variables convey the effect of self-efficacy that, at the same time, affects effort. Academic performance, depends positively on effort but negatively to the use of deep learning strategies. It is hypothesized this negative relationship is due to the method of measurement of academic performance.

€ View funding

Funding information

Funders

  • Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad) National I+D Call
    • EDU2016-79714-P

Bibliographic References

  • Aizpurua, A., Lizaso, I., & Iturbe, I. (2018). Learning strategies and reasoning skills of university students. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 23(2), 110–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2018.01.001
  • Allal, L. (2020). Assessment and the co-regulation of learning in the classroom. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(4), 332–349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1609411
  • Alonso-Tapia, J., Nieto, C., Merino-Tejedor, E., Huertas, J. A., & Ruiz, M. (2018). Assessment of learning goals in university students from the perspective of ‘person-situation interaction’: the Situated Goals Questionnaire (SGQ-U). Studies in Psychology, 39(1), 20–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02109395.2017.1412707
  • Alonso-Tapia, J., Panadero, E., & Ruiz, M. A. (2014). Development and validity of the Emotion and Motivation Self-regulation Questionnaire (EMSR-Q). Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17(e55), 1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2014.41
  • Baird, J., Andrich, D., Hopfenbeck, T. N., & Stobart, G. (2017). Assessment and learning: Fields apart? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(3), 317–350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1319337
  • Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology, 54(2), 199–231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00205.x
  • Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007
  • Cerezo, R., Fernández, E., Amieiro, N., Valle, A., Rosario, P., & Núñez, J. C. (2019). Mediating role of self-efficacy and usefulness between self-regulated learning strategy knowledge and its use. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 24(1), 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2018.08.001
  • Coertjens, L., Donche, V., De Maeyer, S., van Daal, T., & Van Petegem, P. (2017). The growth trend in learning strategies during the transition from secondary to higher education in Flanders. Higher Education, 73(3), 499–518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0093-x
  • Dignath, C., Büttner, G., & Langfeldt, H. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 101–129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003
  • Fryer, L. K., & Dinsmore, D. L. (2020). The promise and pitfalls of self-report. Frontline Learning Research, 8(3), 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.14786/flr.v8i3.623
  • García-Pérez, D., Fraile, J., & Panadero, E. (2020). Learning strategies and self-regulation in context: How higher education students approach different courses, assessments, and challenges. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00488-z
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson-Prentice Hall.
  • Holley, C. D., & Dansereau, D. F. (1984). Spatial learning strategies. Academic Press. Hofverberg, A., & Winberg, M. (2020). Challenging the universality of achievement goal models: A comparison of two culturally distinct countries. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(3), 333–354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2018.1544170
  • Jiménez, L., García, A. J., López-Cepero, J., & Saavedra, F. J. (2018). The brief-ACRA scale on learning strategies for university students. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 23(1), 63–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2017.03.001
  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102 1
  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). MPLUS: Statistical analysis with latent variables: user’s guide (7th ed.). Muthén & Muthén
  • Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76, 413–448. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543076003413
  • Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(422) http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422
  • Panadero, E., Fraile, J., Fernández Ruiz, J., Castilla-Estévez, D., & Ruiz, M. A. (2019). Spanish university assessment practices: Examination tradition with diversity by faculty. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(3), 379–397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1512553
  • Panadero, E., Klug, J., & Järvelä, S. (2016). Third wave of measurement in the self-regulated learning field: when measurement and intervention come hand in hand. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(6), 723–735. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2015.1066436
  • Pekrun, R. (2020). Self-report is indispensable to assess students’ learning. Frontline Learning Research, 8(3), 185–193. http://dx.doi.org/10.14786/flr.v8i3.637
  • Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 452–502). Academic Press. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). University of Michigan.
  • Pozo, J. I. (1989). Teorías cognitivas del aprendizaje. Morata.
  • Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 353–387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026838
  • Roth, A., Ogrin, S., & Schmitz, B. (2016). Assessing self-regulated learning in higher education: A systematic literature review of self-report instruments. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28(3), 225–250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11092-015-9229-2
  • Salomon, G., & Globerson, T. (1989). When teams do not function the way they ought to. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 89–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90018-9
  • Samuelstuen, M. S., & Bråten, I. (2007). Examining the validity of self-reports on scales measuring students’ strategic processing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 351–378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709906x106147
  • Schellings, G. (2011). Applying learning strategy questionnaires: problems and possibilities. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 91–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9069-
  • Schneider, M., & Preckel, F. (2017). Variables associated with achievement in higher education: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 143(6), 565–600. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000098
  • Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
  • Soderstrom, N. C., & Bjork, R. A. (2015). Learning versus performance: An integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 176–199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1745691615569000
  • Veenman, M. (2011). Alternative assessment of strategy use with self-report instruments: A discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 6(2), 205–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9080-x
  • Weinstein, C. E., Schulte, A. C., & Palmer, D. R. (1987). Learning and Study Strategies Inventory. H & H Publishing Company.
  • Weinstein, C. E., & Palmer, D. R. (2002). LASSI: Learning and Study Strategies Inventory. H & H Publishing Company.
  • Winne, P. (2020). A proposed remedy for grievances about self-report methodologies. Frontline Learning Research, 8(3), 164–173. http://dx.doi.org/10.14786/flr.v8i3.625
  • Zhou, Y., & Wang, J. (2019). Goal orientation, learning strategies, and academic performance in adult distance learning. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 47(7) http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.8195
  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.13–40). Academic Press.
  • Zimmerman, B. J., Bonner, S., & Kovach, R. (1996). Goal 3: Developing text comprehension and summarization skills. In B. J. Zimmerman, S. Bonner, & R. Kovach (Eds.), Psychology in the classroom: A series on applied educational psychology. Developing self-regulated learners: Beyond achievement to self-efficacy (pp. 47–67). American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10213-003
  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The educational psychology series. Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 299–315). Routledge
Data source: Dialnet