Learning to learn at university. The effects of an instrumental subject on learning strategies and academic achievement / Aprender a aprender en la universidad. Efectos de una materia instrumental sobre las estrategias de aprendizaje y el rendimiento académico
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2016
Learning to learn at university. The effects of an instrumental subject on learning strategies and academic achievement / Aprender a aprender en la universidad. Efectos de una materia instrumental sobre las estrategias de aprendizaje y el rendimiento académico
Self-regulated learning is very important at university, since students must manage the strategies and abilities necessary to be autonomous and effective in their learning. The aim of this study was to analyse the effects of a course designed for this purpose on learning strategies and students’ achievement of first-year university students. A quasi-experimental pre-test/post-test design was used, with an experimental group and a control group, applying measurement instruments before starting and after finishing the course. The learning process was analysed on this course, with students being trained in the use of relevant learning strategies — metacognitive strategies, strategies for processing and using information and affective and motivational strategies. The sample consisted of 47 students, 23 of them belonging to the experimental group and 24 of them to the control group, from various degrees at the University of Valencia. The results confirmed significant improvements in the learning strategy scores of the experimental group compared to the control group. There was also an improvement in academic achievement, but in this case the differences were not statistically significant.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanduraA. (1978). The self-system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 33, 344–358. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.33.4.344
2.
BanduraA. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3.
BanduraA. (1989). Regulation of Cognitive Processes through Perceived Self-Efficacy. Developmental Psychology, 25, 729–735. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.25.5.729
4.
BoekaertsM. (2006). Self-regulation and effort investment. In SigelE.RenningerK. A. (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 4, Child Psychology in Practice (pp. 345–377). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
5.
BoekaertsM.NiemivirtaM. (2000). Self-regulation in learning: Finding a balance between learning and ego-protective goals. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP. R.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 417–450). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
6.
CabreraL.BethencourtJ. T.ÁlvarezP.GonzálezM. (2006). El problema del abandono de los estudios universitarios. Relieve, 12, 171–202.
7.
CampbellD. T.StanleyJ. (1979). Diseños experimentales y cuasiexperimentales en la investigación social. Buenos Aires: Amorrortu.
8.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9.
CornoL. (1994, April4-8). Implicit teachings and self-regulated learning. Comunicación presentada en el Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.
10.
DisethÅ.MartinsenØ. (2003). Approaches to Learning, Cognitive Style, and Motives as Predictors of Academic Achievement. Educational Psychology, 23, 195–207. doi:10.1080/01443410303225
11.
FritzC. O.MorrisP. E.RichlerJ. J. (2012). Effect Size Estimates: Current Use, Calculation, and Interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 141, 2–18.
12.
GargalloB.Suárez-RodríguezJ.Pérez-PérezC. (2009). El cuestionario CEVEAPEU. Un instrumento para la evaluación de las estrategias de aprendizaje de los estudiantes universitarios. Relieve, 15, 1–31.
13.
Hernández PinaF.RosárioP.CuestaJ. D. (2008). Impacto de un programa de autorregulación del aprendizaje en estudiantes de grado. Revista de Educación, 353, 571–588.
14.
HoferB. K.YuS. L. (2003). Teaching self-regulated learning through a “Learning to Learn” course. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 30–33. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP3001_05
15.
HoferB. K.YuS. L.PintrichP. R. (1998). Teaching college students to be self-regulated learners. In SchunkD. H.ZimmermanB. J. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 57–83). New York, NY: Guilford.
MonereoC. (1997). La construcción del conocimiento estratégico en el aula. In Pérez CabaníM. ª. L. (Eds.), La enseñanza y el aprendizaje de estrategias desde el currículum (pp. 21–34). Gerona: Horsori.
18.
NortonL. S.CrowleyC. M. (1995). Can students be helped to learn? An evaluation of an approaches to learning programme for first year degree students. Higher Education, 29, 307–328. doi:10.1007/BF01384496
19.
NücklesM.HübnerS.RenklA. (2009). Enhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols. Learning and Instruction, 19, 259–271. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.002
20.
PardoA.San MartínR. (2010). Análisis de datos en ciencias sociales y de la salud II. Madrid: Editorial Síntesis.
21.
PintrichP. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In AmesC.MaehrM. (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Motivation enhancing environments (Vol. 6, pp. 117–160). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
22.
PintrichP. R. (1995). Understanding self-regulated learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 63, 3–12. doi:10.1002/tl.37219956304
23.
PintrichP. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 451–502). California: Academic Press.
24.
PintrichP. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 385–407. doi:10.1007/s10648-004-0006-x
25.
RosárioP.MourãoR.NúñezJ. C.González-PiendaJ.SolanoP.ValleA. (2007). Eficacia de un programa instruccional para la mejora de procesos y estrategias de aprendizaje en la enseñanza superior. Psicothema, 19, 422–427.
26.
SoaresA. P.GuisandeM. A.AlmeidaL. S.PáramoM. (2009). Academic achievement in first-year Portuguese college students: The role of academic preparation and learning strategies. International Journal of Psychology, 44, 204–212. doi:10.1080/00207590701700545
27.
TuckmanB. W. (2003). The Effect of Learning and Motivation Strategies Training on College Students Achievement. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 430–437. doi:10.1353/csd.2003.0034
28.
WeinsteinC. E.HusmanJ.DierkingD. (2000). Self-Regulation Interventions with a focus on learning strategies. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP. R.ZeinderM. (Eds.), Handbook of Self-regulation (pp. 727–747). San Diego: Academic Press.
29.
YipM. C. W. (2007). Differences in learning and study strategies between high and low achieving university students: A Hong Kong study. Educacional Psychology, 27, 597–606. doi:10.1080/01443410701309126
30.
YipM. C. W. (2009). Differences between high and low academic achieving university students in learning and study strategies: A further investigation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15, 561–57. doi:10.1080/13803610903354718
31.
YipM. C. W. (2012). Learning strategies and self-efficacy as predictors of academic performance: A preliminary study. Quality in Higher Education, 18, 23–34. doi:10.1080/13538322.2012.667263
32.
ZimmermanB. J. (1986). Becoming a self-regulated learner: Which are the key sub-processes?Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 307–313. doi:10.1016/0361-476X(86)90027-5
33.
ZimmermanB. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 64–70. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
34.
ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. H. (Eds.). (1989). Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theory. Research and Practice. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
