Examining Self-Regulated Learning Strategy Model: A Measurement Invariance Analysis of MSLQ-CAL among College Students in China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Self-Regulated Learning Model and Learning Strategies
2.2. Previous Validation Studies on Learning Strategy Scales
2.3. Purpose of This Study
3. Method
3.1. Participants
3.2. Learning Strategy Scale and Procedure on Revising
3.3. Data Analysis
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions and Future Work
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zimmerman, B.J. Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives, 2nd ed.; Zimmerman, B.J., Schunk, D.H., Eds.; Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2001; pp. 1–38. [Google Scholar]
- Law, Y.K.; Chan, C.K.; Sachs, J. Beliefs about Learning, Self-regulated Strategies and Text Comprehension among Chinese Children. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2008, 78, 51–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sitzmann, T.; Ely, K. A meta-analysis of self-regulated learning in work-related training and educational attainment: What we know and where we need to go. Psychol. Bull. 2011, 137, 421–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Robbins, S.B.; Lauver, K.; Le, H.; Davis, D.; Langley, R.; Carlstrom, A. Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 2004, 130, 261–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kohnke, L.; Moorhouse, B.L. Adopting HyFlex in higher education in response to COVID-19: Students’ perspectives. Open Learn. J. Open Distance e-Learn. 2021, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broadbent, J. Comparing online and blended learner’s self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. Internet High. Educ. 2017, 33, 24–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broadbent, J.; Sharman, S.; Panadero, E.; Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. How does self-regulated learning influence formative assessment and summative grade? Comparing online and blended learners. Internet High. Educ. 2021, 50, 100805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anthonysamy, L.; Koo, A.C.; Hew, S.H. Self-regulated learning strategies in higher education: Fostering digital literacy for sustainable lifelong learning. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2020, 25, 2393–2414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO. Education for All Global Monitoring Report: Education for All 2000–2015–Achievements and Challenges; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: Paris, France, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Panadero, E. A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tong, F.; Guo, H.; Wang, Z.; Min, Y.; Guo, W.; Yoon, M. Examining cross-cultural transferability of self-regulated learning model: An adaptation of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire for Chinese adult learners. Educ. Stud. 2020, 46, 422–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pintrich, P.R. A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ); ERIC: Washington, WA, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Stefanou, C.; Lord, S.M.; Prince, M.J.; Stolk, J. The effect of different active learning environments on student outcomes related to lifelong learning. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 2012, 28, 606–620. [Google Scholar]
- Schunk, D.H. Self-regulated learning: The educational legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educ. Psychol. 2005, 40, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pintrich, P.R.; Zusho, A. Student motivation and self-regulated learning in the college classroom. In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2002; pp. 55–128. [Google Scholar]
- Jayawardena, P.R.; van Kraayenoord, C.E.; Carroll, A. Science teachers’ practices: Teaching for self-regulated learning in relation to Pintrich and Zusho’s (2007) model. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2019, 94, 100–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lau, K.L.; Chen, X.B. Perception of reading instruction and self-regulated learning: A comparison between Chinese students in Hong Kong and Beijing. Instr. Sci. 2013, 41, 1083–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, M.; Neber, H. Motivation and self-regulated science learning in high-achieving students: Differences related to nation, gender, and grade-level. High Abil. Stud. 2008, 19, 103–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pintrich, P.R.; Smith, D.A.; Garcia, T.; McKeachie, W.J. Reliability and Predictive Validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1993, 53, 801–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmerman, B.J. Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of Self-Regulation; Academic Press: Cambridge, MS, USA, 2000; pp. 13–39. [Google Scholar]
- Broadbent, J.; Poon, W.L. Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. Internet High. Educ. 2015, 27, 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Winne, P.H.; Hadwin, A.F.; Gress, C. The learning kit project: Software tools for supporting and researching regulation of collaborative learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 787–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnard, L.; Lan, W.Y.; To, Y.M.; Paton, V.O.; Lai, S.L. Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. Internet High. Educ. 2009, 12, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weinstein, C.E.; Schulte, C.; Palmer, D.H. LASSI User’s Manual; Hemisphere: Clearwater, FL, USA, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Azevedo, R. Defining and measuring engagement and learning in science: Conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and analytical issues. Educ. Psychol. 2015, 50, 84–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKenzie, K.; Gow, K.; Schweitzer, R. Exploring First-Year Academic Achievement through Structural Equation Modelling. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 2004, 23, 95–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ramírez-Echeverry, J.J.; García-Carrillo, À.; Olarte Dussan, F.A. Adaptation and Validation of the Motivated Strategies for Learning questionnaire-MSLQ-In Engineering Students in Colombia. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 2016, 32, 1774–1787. [Google Scholar]
- Karadeniz, S.; Bueyuekoeztuerk, S.; Akgün, Ö.E.; Cakmak, E.K.; Demirel, F. The Turkish Adaptation Study of Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) for 12–18 Year Old Children: Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis. TOJET Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. 2008, 7, 10. [Google Scholar]
- Rotgans, J.I.; Schmidt, H.G. Cross-Cultural Validation of Self-Regulated Learning in Singapore. In What the West Can Learn from the East: Asian Perspectives on the Psychology of Learning and Motivation; McInerney, D.M., Tan, O.S., Liem, G.A.D., Tan, A., Eds.; Information Age Publishing: Charlotte, NC, USA, 2008; pp. 245–266. [Google Scholar]
- Meijs, C.; Neroni, J.; Gijselaers, H.J.; Leontjevas, R.; Kirschner, P.A.; de Groot, R.H. Motivated strategies for learning questionnaire part B revisited: New subscales for an adult distance education setting. Internet High. Educ. 2019, 40, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, Y.; Wang, J. Psychometric Properties of the MSLQ-B for Adult Distance Education in China. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 441. [Google Scholar]
- Putnick, D.L.; Bornstein, M.H. Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Dev. Rev. 2016, 41, 71–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Maun, D.; Shukla, K.D.; Chand, V.S. Validating motivated strategies for learning questionnaire and invariance test across gender and caste groups in India. Cogent Educ. 2020, 7, 1853303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stevens, T.; Tallent-Runnels, M.K. The learning and study strategies inventory-high school version: Issues of factorial invariance across gender and ethnicity. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2004, 64, 332–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bidjerano, T. Gender Differences in Self-Regulated Learning. In Proceedings of the 36th /2005 Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, Kerhonkson, NY, USA, 19–21 October 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Elfakki, F.A.M.; Alamri, M.M.; Ashraful, I.; Elnimeiri, M.; Frah, E. Self-Regulated Learning in the University of Tabuk: Gender Differences in Strategy and Outcomes. Rwanda J. Med. Health Sci. 2021, 4, 151–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tong, F.; Guo, H.; Wang, Z.; Min, Y. College Students’ Motivated Learning Strategies toward Their Majors: A Comparative Investigation. Adv. Psychol. 2017, 12, 1462–1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Virtanen, P.; Nevgi, A. Disciplinary and gender differences among higher education students in self-regulated learning strategies. Educ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 323–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bialosiewicz, S.; Murphy, K.; Berry, T. An introduction to measurement invariance testing: Resource packet for participants. Am. Eval. Assoc. 2013, 27, 1–37. [Google Scholar]
- Guo, H.; Tong, F.; Wang, Z.; Min, Y.; Tang, S. English-vs. Chinese-medium instruction in Chinese higher education: A quasi-experimental comparison. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- MacCallum, R.C.; Widaman, K.F.; Zhang, S.; Hong, S. Sample size in factor analysis. Psychol. Methods 1999, 4, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pajares, F. Gender and perceived self-efficacy in self-regulated learning. Theory Pract. 2002, 41, 116–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ho, E.S.C. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement of Hong Kong secondary school students. Educ. J. 2004, 32, 87–107. [Google Scholar]
- Stark, E. Examining the Role of Motivation and Learning Strategies in Student Success in Online versus Face-to-Face Courses. Online Learn. 2019, 23, 234–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Du, J.; Xu, J.; Fan, X. Investigating factors that influence students’ management of study environment in online collaborative groupwork. Res. Pap. Educ. 2015, 30, 451–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, L.; Zhang, J. Successful Online Learning Experience: Perceptions of Chinese Undergraduate Students. J. Educ. Learn. 2021, 10, 74–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Macan, T.H.; Shahani, C.; Dipboye, R.L.; Phillips, A.P. College students’ time management: Correlations with academic performance and stress. J. Educ. Psychol. 1990, 82, 760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brislin, R.W. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 1970, 1, 185–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaiser, H.F. The Application of Electronic Computers to Factor Analysis. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1960, 20, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tabachnick, B.G.; Fidell, L.S. Using Multivariate Statistics; Allyn and Bacon: Boston, MA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Bentler, P.M. Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Models. Psychol. Bull. 1990, 107, 238–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Steiger, J.H. Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2007, 42, 893–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives. Struct. Equ. Modeling Multidiscip. J. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brannick, M.T. Critical comments on applying covariance structure modeling. J. Organ. Behav. 1995, 16, 201–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, G.W.; Rensvold, R.B. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Modeling 2002, 9, 233–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salzberger, T.; Sinkovics, R.R.; Schlegelmilch, B.B. Data equivalence in cross-cultural research: A comparison of classical test theory and latent trait theory based approaches. Australas. Mark. J. 1999, 7, 23–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, F.F. Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Modeling Multidiscip. J. 2007, 14, 464–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costello, A.B.; Osborne, J. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 2005, 10, 7. [Google Scholar]
- Downing, K.; Ho, R.; Shin, K.; Vrijmoed, L.; Wong, E. Metacognitive development and moving away. Educ. Stud. 2007, 33, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calamlam, J.M.; Ferran, F.; Macabali, L.G. Perception on research methods course’s online environment and self-regulated learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. E-Learn. Digit. Media 2021, 20427530211027722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, W.; Wang, Y.; Yang, L.; Wang, C. Suspending classes without stopping learning: China’s education emergency management policy in the COVID-19 outbreak. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 2020, 13, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Item | Critical Thinking | Organization | Time Management | Study Environment | Peer Learning |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
% of variance | 4.37 | 3.70 | 30.56 | 6.10 | 6.23 |
Eigenvalue | 1.27 | 1.07 | 8.86 | 1.77 | 1.81 |
Cronbach’s alpha | 0.77 | 0.79 | 0.81 | 0.75 | 0.74 |
Item14 | 0.52 | ||||
Item22 | 0.45 | ||||
Item29 | 0.67 | ||||
Item44 | 0.48 | ||||
Item55 | 0.72 | ||||
Item10 | 0.65 | ||||
Item25 | 0.58 | ||||
Item40 | 0.54 | ||||
Item39 | 0.40 | ||||
Item52 | 0.65 | ||||
Item63 | 0.42 | ||||
Item68 | 0.63 | ||||
Item71 | 0.75 | ||||
Item15 | 0.53 | ||||
Item30 | 0.54 | ||||
Item45 | 0.86 | ||||
Item64 | 0.52 | ||||
Item69 | 0.50 | ||||
Item11 | 0.56 | ||||
Item26 | 0.59 | ||||
Item41 | 0.65 | ||||
Item54 | 0.67 |
Time Management | Organization | Peer Learning | Critical Thinking | Study Environment Management | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | |
M | 4.47 | 4.38 | 4.46 | 4.21 | 4.80 | 4.70 | 4.67 | 4.69 | 5.04 | 4.86 |
S.D. | 1.09 | 1.04 | 1.26 | 1.32 | 1.05 | 1.11 | 0.92 | 0.97 | 1.02 | 0.99 |
α | 0.824 | 0.790 | 0.782 | 0.789 | 0.824 | 0.742 | 0.780 | 0.771 | 0.755 | 0.728 |
Model | χ2 (df) | RMSEA | SRMR | CFI (ΔCFI) | Comparison | Decision |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model 1: Configural invariance | 993.606 (398) | 0.056 | 0.048 | 0.919 | Accept | |
Model 2: Metric invariance | 1018.656 (415) | 0.055 | 0.051 | 0.918 (−0.001) | Model 1 vs. Model 2 | Accept |
Model 3: Scalar invariance | 1059.127 (432) | 0.055 | 0.053 | 0.915 (−0.003) | Model 2 vs. Model 3 | Accept |
Model 4: Strict invariance | 1107.600 (454) | 0.055 | 0.056 | 0.911 (−0.004) | Model 3 vs. Model 4 | Accept |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Guo, H.; Tong, F.; Wang, Z.; Tang, S.; Yoon, M.; Ying, M.; Yu, X. Examining Self-Regulated Learning Strategy Model: A Measurement Invariance Analysis of MSLQ-CAL among College Students in China. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10133. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810133
Guo H, Tong F, Wang Z, Tang S, Yoon M, Ying M, Yu X. Examining Self-Regulated Learning Strategy Model: A Measurement Invariance Analysis of MSLQ-CAL among College Students in China. Sustainability. 2021; 13(18):10133. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810133
Chicago/Turabian StyleGuo, Haitao, Fuhui Tong, Zhuoying Wang, Shifang Tang, Myeongsun Yoon, Ming Ying, and Xiaofeng Yu. 2021. "Examining Self-Regulated Learning Strategy Model: A Measurement Invariance Analysis of MSLQ-CAL among College Students in China" Sustainability 13, no. 18: 10133. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810133
APA StyleGuo, H., Tong, F., Wang, Z., Tang, S., Yoon, M., Ying, M., & Yu, X. (2021). Examining Self-Regulated Learning Strategy Model: A Measurement Invariance Analysis of MSLQ-CAL among College Students in China. Sustainability, 13(18), 10133. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810133