Discovering the Learning Gradient of Students’ Preferences for Learning Environment
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data from National Dataset during COVID-19
2.2. Data from LEARN Surveys
2.3. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
4. Discussion
4.1. Comparison of Our Quantitative and Qualitative Results
4.2. Metacognition and Students’ Learning Strategies
4.3. The Importance of Students’ Learning Approaches
4.4. Learning Approaches and the Ability to Self-Regulate Their Study Efforts
4.5. Social Interaction Important—But Not Equally for All Students
4.6. A Need for More Support Online for Some Students
4.7. Future Research
4.8. Limitations
4.9. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Anthonysamy, Lilian. 2021. The use of metacognitive strategies for undisrupted online learning: Preparing university students in the age of pandemic. Education and Information Technologies 26: 6881–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anthonysamy, Lilian, Ah Choo Koo, and Soon Hin Hew. 2020. Self-regulated learning strategies in higher education: Fostering digital literacy for sustainable lifelong learning. Education and Information Technologies 25: 2393–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Artelt, Cordula, Jurgen Baumert, Nele Julius-McElvany, and Jules Peschar. 2003. Learners for Life: Student Approaches to Learning. Results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD. [Google Scholar]
- Asikainen, Henna, and Nina Katajavuori. 2022. First-Year Experience in the COVID-19 Situation and the Association between Students’ Approaches to Learning, Study-Related Burnout and Experiences of Online Studying. Social Sciences 11: 390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asikainen, Henna, Telle Hailikari, and Markus Mattsson. 2018. The Interplay between Academic Emotions, Psychological Flexibility and Self-Regulation as Predictors of Academic Achievement. Journal of Further and Higher Education 42: 439–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bak, Carsten Kronborg, and Simon Schulin. 2022. Rekruttering og Fastholdelse af UC Syd Studerende [Recruitment and Retention of UC Syd Students]. Haderslev: University College Southern Denmark. [Google Scholar]
- Bak, Carsten Kronborg, and Simon Schulin. 2023. University College Students’ Experiences with Online Teaching One Year after COVID-19 Lockdown in Spring 2020. Social Sciences 12: 156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernard, Robert M., Eugene Borokhovski, Richard F. Schmid, Rana M. Tamim, and Philip C. Abrami. 2014. A Meta-Analysis of Blended Learning and Technology Use in Higher Education: From the General to the Applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 26: 87–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biggs, John B. 1987. Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Research Monograph. Hawthorn: Australian Council for Educational Research. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. [Google Scholar]
- Dabbagh, Nada. 2007. The Online Learner: Characteristics and Pedagogical Implications. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 7: 217–26. [Google Scholar]
- Deary, Ian J., Steve Strand, Pauline Smith, and Cres Fernandes. 2007. Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence 35: 13–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellis, Robert A., Feifei Han, and Abelardo Pardo. 2017. Improving Learning Analytics—Combining Observational and Self-Report Data on Student Learning. Educational Technology & Society 20: 158–69. [Google Scholar]
- Entwistle, Noel James, and Paul Ramsden. 1982. Understanding Student Learning. New York: Social Science Research Council, C. Helm. Ltd. [Google Scholar]
- Evans, Carol. 2014. Exploring the Use of a Deep Approach to Learning with Students in the Process of Learning to Teach. In Learning Patterns in Higher Education. Edited by David Gijbels, Vincent Donche, John T. E. Richardson and Jan D. Vermunt. Dimensions and Research Perspectives. EARLI Book Series; London and New York: Routledge, pp. 187–213. [Google Scholar]
- Flavell, John H. 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist 34: 906–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Georgsen, Marianne, and Ane Qvortrup. 2021. Erfaringer og Oplevelser med Onlineundervisning på 9 Videregående Uddannelsesinstitutioner i Foråret 2020. [Experiences with Online Education at 9 Higher Education Institutions in Spring 2020]. Available online: https://laeremiddel.dk/viden-og-vaerktoejer/rapporter/erfaringer-og-oplevelser-med-online-undervising/ (accessed on 29 December 2022).
- Govaerts, Natalie, Eva Kyndt, Filip Dochy, and Herman Baert. 2011. Influence of learning and working climate on the retention of talented employees. Journal of Workplace Learning 23: 35–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herrmann, Kim J., Anna Bager-Elsborg, and Anna Parpala. 2017. Measuring perceptions of the learning environment and approaches to learning: Validation of the learn questionnaire. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 61: 526–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holzer, Julia, Selma Korlat, Christian Haider, Martin Mayerhofer, Elisabeth Pelikan, Barbara Schober, Christiane Spiel, Toumazis Toumazi, Katariina Salmela-Aro, Udo Käser, and et al. 2021. Adolescent Well-Being and Learning in Times of COVID-19—A Multi-Country Study of Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction, Learning Behavior, and the Mediating Roles of Positive Emotion and Intrinsic Motivation. PLoS ONE 16: e0251352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huckins, Jeremy F., Alex W. daSilva, Weichen Wang, Elin Hedlund, Courtney Rogers, Subigya K. Nepal, Jialing Wu, Mikio Obuchi, Eilis I. Murphy, Meghan L. Meyer, and et al. 2020. Mental Health and Behavior of College Students During the Early Phases of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Longitudinal Smartphone and Ecological Momentary Assessment Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 22: e20185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hussain, M. Azhar, and Jørgen T. Lauridsen. 2017. Videregående Kvantitative Metoder [Advanced Quantitative Methods]. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. [Google Scholar]
- Joksimovic, Srecko, Dragan Gasevic, Thomas Loughin, Vitomir Kovanovic, and Marek Hatala. 2015. Learning at Distance: Effects of Interaction Traces on Academic Achievement. Computers & Education 87: 204–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaparounaki, Chrysi K., Mikaella E. Patsali, Danai-Priskila V. Mousa, Eleni V. K. Papadopoulou, Konstantina K. K. Papadopoulou, and Konstantinos N. Fountoulakis. 2020. University Students’ Mental Health amidst the COVID-19 Quarantine in Greece. Psychiatry Research 290: 113111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Katajavuori, Nina, Kimmo Vehkalahti, and Henna Asikainen. 2021. Promoting University Students’ Well-Being and Studying with an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)-Based Intervention. Current Psychology 42: 4900–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khaddage, Ferial, Rhonda Christensen, Wing Lai, Gerald Knezek, Cathie Norris, and Elliot Soloway. 2015. A model driven framework to address challenges in a mobile learning environment. Education and Information Technologies 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuittinen, Matti, and Matti Meriläinen. 2011. The effect of study-related burnout on student perceptions. Journal of International Education in Business 4: 42–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kyndt, Eva, Filip Dochy, Patrick Onghena, and Herman Baert. 2011. The Learning Intentions of Low-Qualified Employees: A Multilevel Approach. Adult Education Quarterly 63: 165–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lawson, Gwendolyn M., Meghan E. McKenzie, Kimberly D. Becker, Lisa Selby, and Sharon A. Hoover. 2019. The Core Components of Evidence-Based Social Emotional Learning Programs. Prevention Science 20: 457–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, Fan, Kari Lock Morgan, and Alan M. Zaslavsky. 2018. Balancing Covariates via Propensity Score Weighting. Journal of the American Statistical Association 113: 390–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindblom-Ylänne, Sari, Anna Maria Parpala, and Liisa Postareff. 2019. What Constitutes the Surface Approach to Learning in the Light of New Empirical Evidence? Studies in Higher Education 44: 2183–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MacQueen, James. 1967. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. Paper presented at Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Riverside, CA, USA, June 21–July 18; vol. 1, pp. 281–97. [Google Scholar]
- Marinoni, Giorgio. 2020. The Impact of COVID-19 on Global Higher Education. International Higher Education 102: 7–9. [Google Scholar]
- McGrew, Kevin, and Barbara Wendling. 2010. Cattell–Horn–Carroll cognitive-achievement relations: What we have learned from the past 20 years of research. Psychology in the Schools 47: 651–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Means, Barbara, Yukie Toyama, Robert Murphy, and Marianne Bakia. 2013. The Effectiveness of Online and Blended Learning: A Meta-Analysis of Empirical Literature. Teachers College Record 115: 1–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morosanova, Varvara I., Irina N. Bondarenko, and Tatiana G. Fomina. 2022. Conscious Self-regulation, Motivational Factors, and Personality Traits as Predictors of Students’ Academic Performance: A Linear Empirical Model. Psychology in Russia 15: 170–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navarro, Peter, and Judy Shoemaker. 1999. The Power of Cyberlearning: An Empirical Test. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 11: 29–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliwa, Robert. 2022. Relationship between student satisfaction with online learning and intelligence types. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 33: 143–61. [Google Scholar]
- Parpala, Anna, and Sari Lindblom-Ylänne. 2012. Using a research instrument for developing quality at the university. Quality in Higher Education 18: 313–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parpala, Anna, Nina Katajavuori, Anne Haarala-Muhonen, and Henna Asikainen. 2021. How Did Students with Different Learning Profiles Experience “Normal” and Online Teaching Situation during COVID-19 Spring? Social Sciences 10: 337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parpala, Anna, Sari Lindblom-Ylänne, Erkki Komulainen, and Noel Entwistle. 2013. Assessing students’ experiences of teaching–learning environments and approaches to learning: Validation of a questionnaire in different countries and varying contexts. Learning Environments Research 16: 201–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parpala, Anna, Sari Lindblom-Ylänne, Erkki Komulainen, Topi Litmanen, and Laura Hirsto. 2010. Students’ Approaches to Learning and Their Experiences of the Teaching-Learning Environment in Different Disciplines. The British Journal of Educational Psychology 80, Pt 2: 269–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pavin Ivanec, Tea. 2022. The Lack of Academic Social Interactions and Students’ Learning Difficulties during COVID-19 Faculty Lockdowns in Croatia: The Mediating Role of the Perceived Sense of Life Disruption Caused by the Pandemic and the Adjustment to Online Studying. Social Sciences 11: 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petillion, Riley J., and W. Stephen McNeil. 2020. Student Experiences of Emergency Remote Teaching: Impacts of Instructor Practice on Student Learning, Engagement, and Well-Being. Journal of Chemical Education 97: 2486–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pintrich, Paul R. 1999. The Role of Motivation in Promoting and Sustaining Self-Regulated Learning. International Journal of Educational Research 31: 459–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rambøll. 2016. Kortlægning. E-læring på videregående uddannelser [Mapping. E-Learning in Higher Education]. Copenhagen. Available online: https://ufm.dk/publikationer/2017/kortlaegning-af-e-laering-ved-de-videregaende-uddannelser (accessed on 11 January 2023).
- Rea, Stephany Duany, Lisi Wang, Katherine Muenks, and Veronica X. Yan. 2022. Students Can (Mostly) Recognize Effective Learning, So Why Do They Not Do It? Journal of Intelligence 10: 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, John T., and Linda Price. 2003. Approaches to studying and perceptions of academic quality in electronically delivered courses. British Journal of Educational Technology 34: 45–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogers, Donna, and Karen Swan. 2004. Self-Regulated Learning and Internet Searching. Teachers College Record 106: 1804–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rowe, Luke I., John Hattie, and Robert Hester. 2021. g versus c: Comparing individual and collective intelligence across two meta-analyses. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 6: 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schneider, W. Joel, and Kevin S. McGrew. 2012. The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories Tests and Issues. Edited by Dawn P. Flanagan and Patti L. Harrison. New York: The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
- Schraw, Gregory, and David Moshman. 1995. Metacognitive Theories. Educational Psychology Review 7: 351–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trigwell, Keith, Michael Prosser, and Fiona Waterhouse. 1999. Relations between Teachers’ Approaches to Teaching and Students’ Approaches to Learning. Higher Education 37: 57–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trigwell, Keith, Robert A. Ellis, and Feifei Han. 2012. Relations between students’ approaches to learning experienced emotions and outcomes of learning. Studies in Higher Education 37: 811–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Truong, Huong May. 2016. Integrating learning styles and adaptive e-learning system: Current developments, problems and opportunities. Computers in Human Behavior 55: 1185–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Urhahne, Detlef. 2020. Learning approaches. Educational Psychology 40: 533–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uslu Kocabaş, Hatice, and Bünyamin Bavlı. 2021. Addressing the Challenges of Online Student Engagement during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Paper presented at 8th International Congress on Curriculum and Instruction, Burdur, Turkey, March 25–27. [Google Scholar]
- Utama, Muhammad Reza, Yelvi Levani, and Ayu Lidya Paramita. 2020. Medical Students’ Perspectives about Distance Learning during Early COVID 19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study. Qanun Medika—Medical Journal Faculty of Medicine Muhammadiyah Surabaya 4: 255–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Eekert, Nina, Sara De Bruyn, Edwin Wouters, and Sarah Van de Velde. 2023. Understanding Mental Wellbeing amongst Potentially Vulnerable Higher Education Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Social Sciences 12: 282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Chongying, and Hong Zhao. 2020. The Impact of COVID-19 on Anxiety in Chinese University Students. Frontiers in Psychology 11: 1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmerman, Barry J. 2000. Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of Self-Regulation. Edited by Monique Boekaerts, Paul R. Pintrich and Moshe Zeidner. Cambridge: Academic Press, pp. 13–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmerman, Barry J. 2002. Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview. Theory into Practice 41: 64–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmerman, Barry J., and Anastasia Kitsantas. 2014. Comparing Students’ Self-Discipline and Self- Regulation Measures and Their Prediction of Academic Achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology 39: 145–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmerman, Barry J., and Andju Sara Labuhn. 2012. Self-Regulation of Learning: Process Approaches to Personal Development. In APA Educational Psychology Handbook, Vol 1: Theories, Constructs, and Critical Issues, APA Handbooks in Psychology®. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 399–425. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmerman, Barry J., and Dale H. Schunk. 2011. Self-Regulated Learning and Performance. In Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance. Edited by Barry J. Zimmerman and Dale H. Schunk. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmermann, Martha, Casandra Bledsoe, and Anthony Papa. 2020. The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on College Student Mental Health: A Longitudinal Examination of Risk and Protective Factors. Psychiatry Research 305: 114254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Characteristics | Population (n = 6386) | Respondents (n = 1316) | Respondent Weighting (n = 1316) |
---|---|---|---|
Age (years—mean) | 28.16 | 29.46 | 28.17 |
Women (%) | 76.5% | 83.8% | 76.7% |
Danish origin (%) | 88.9% | 86.9% | 88.6% |
Qualifying education—general high school (%) | 33.0% | 34.8% | 32.8% |
Institute | |||
Education | 19.4% | 18.9% | 18.2% |
Pedagogue | 30.5% | 28.7% | 28.8% |
Society and administrations | 20.6% | 19.7% | 20.4% |
Health | 29.5% | 32.7% | 30.6% |
Questions | Response Options |
---|---|
Q: How much do you agree or disagree with the following statement:
| The response options were on a four-point Likert scale: (1) strongly disagree, (2) somewhat disagree, (3) somewhat agree, and (4) strongly agree |
Questions | Response Options |
---|---|
Learning outcome | |
Q: When you compare the teaching during the COVID-19 lockdown with the teaching before, how do you experience…
| The response options were on a four-point Likert scale: (1) much worse, (2) A little worse, (3) A little better, and (4) much better |
Self-regulated learning | |
How much do you agree or disagree that during the COVID-19 lockdown you have been able to…
| The response options were on a four-point Likert scale: (1) strongly disagree, (2) somewhat disagree, (3) somewhat agree, and (4) strongly agree |
Learning Outcome | Self-Regulation | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Low Degree of Learning Outcome | High Degree of Learning Outcome | Low Degree of Self-Regulation | High Degree of Self-Regulation | |
Cluster 1: Prefers 100% online teaching | 18.6% | 81.4% | 27.4% | 72.6% |
Cluster 2: Mixed (50/50 physical- online) | 38.8% | 61.2% | 54.6% | 45.4% |
Cluster 3: Prefers physical classroom teaching | 67.0% | 33.0% | 73.1% | 26.9% |
Significance chi-square | <0.001 Cramer’s V = 0.420 (moderate connection) | <0.001 Cramer’s V = 0.390 (moderate connection) |
Q: Which Form of Teaching Would You Prefer in Your Remaining Study Time? | Impact of Social Activities (Whether Physical or Online Teaching) on Students’ Learning Outcomes. | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Low Importance | Medium Importance | High Importance | p | V | |
A: I would prefer physical classroom teaching for the rest of my study | 4.5% | 32.1% | 63.4% | <0.001 | 0.17 |
A: I would prefer a combination of physical attendance and online teaching for the rest of my study | 11.5% | 44.2% | 44.3% | ||
A: I would prefer only online teaching for the rest of my study | 19.7% | 48.4% | 32% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 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
Bak, C.K.; Schulin, S.; Krammer, J. Discovering the Learning Gradient of Students’ Preferences for Learning Environment. J. Intell. 2023, 11, 206. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11110206
Bak CK, Schulin S, Krammer J. Discovering the Learning Gradient of Students’ Preferences for Learning Environment. Journal of Intelligence. 2023; 11(11):206. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11110206
Chicago/Turabian StyleBak, Carsten Kronborg, Simon Schulin, and Jeanne Krammer. 2023. "Discovering the Learning Gradient of Students’ Preferences for Learning Environment" Journal of Intelligence 11, no. 11: 206. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11110206