During the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, universities had to shift from face-to-face to emergency remote education. Students were forced to study online, with limited access to facilities and less contact with peers and teachers, while at the same time being exposed to more autonomy. This study examined how students adapted to emergency remote learning, specifically focusing on students’ resource-management strategies using an individual differences approach. One thousand eight hundred university students completed a questionnaire on their resource-management strategies and indicators of (un)successful adaptation to emergency remote learning. On average, students reported being less able to regulate their attention, effort, and time and less motivated compared to the situation before the crisis started; they also reported investing more time and effort in their self-study. Using a k-means cluster analysis, we identified four adaptation profiles and labeled them according to the reported changes in their resource-management strategies: the overwhelmed, the surrenderers, the maintainers, and the adapters. Both the overwhelmed and surrenderers appeared to be less able to regulate their effort, attention, and time and reported to be less motivated to study than before the crisis. In contrast, the adapters appreciated the increased level of autonomy and were better able to self-regulate their learning. The resource-management strategies of the maintainers remained relatively stable. Students’ responses to open-answer questions on their educational experience, coded using a thematic analysis, were consistent with the quantitative profiles. Implications about how to support students in adapting to online learning are discussed.

Cognitive psychological research from the last decades has shown that learning strategies that create desirable difficulties during learning, e.g., practice testing, are most effective for long-term learning outcomes. However, there is a paucity of research on how to effectively translate these insights into training students in higher education. Therefore, we designed an intervention program aiming to create awareness about, foster reflection on, and stimulate practice of effective learning strategies. In a first examination of the pilot intervention (N = 47), we tested the effects of the intervention on metacognitive knowledge and self-reported use of effective learning strategies during selfstudy, using a control-group mixed-methods design. The intervention program had positive effects on knowledge about effective learning strategies and increased the use of practice testing. Qualitative interview results suggested that to sustainably change students' learning strategies, we may consider tackling their uncertainty about effort and time, and increase availability of practice questions.

Applying effective learning strategies during self-study is important to build long-term knowledge. However, students rarely use such strategies, because they lack metacognitive knowledge and believe they are too effortful. To facilitate students use of these so-called desirable difficulties during self-study, we developed the Study Smart program, an intervention geared toward creating awareness of, reflection on, and practice with effective learning strategies. Based on a three-year design and implementation process, we share the problems we encountered and illustrate with student testimonials. Moreover, we reflect on future steps to be taken in research and practice. Among them is the need to debunk nave theories about learning strategies in students and teachers and to support the behavior change needed to develop effective study habits by implementing effective learning strategies in teaching and providing follow-up reflection sessions.

In higher education, many students make poor learning strategy decisions. This, in part, results from the counterintuitive nature of effective learning strategies: they enhance long-term learning but also cost high initial effort and appear to not improve learning (immediately). This mixed-method study investigated how students make learning strategy decisions in category learning, and whether students can be supported to make effective strategy decisions through a metacognitive prompt, designed to support accurate monitoring of effort and learning. Participants (N = 150) studied painting styles through blocked and interleaved practice, rated their perceived effort and perceived learning across time, and chose between either blocked or interleaved practice. Half of the participants (N = 74) were provided with a metacognitive prompt that showed them how their subjective experiences per strategy changed across time and required them to relate these experiences to the efficacy of learning strategies. Results indicated that subjective experiences with interleaved practice improved across time: students’ perceived learning increased as their perceived effort decreased. Mediation analysis revealed that the increased feeling of learning increased the likelihood to select interleaved practice. The percentage of students who chose interleaved practice increased from 13 to 40%. Students’ learning strategy decisions, however, did not benefit from the metacognitive prompt. Qualitative results revealed that students initially had inaccurate beliefs about the efficacy of learning strategies, but on-task experiences overrode the influence of prior beliefs in learning strategy decisions. This study suggests that repeated monitoring of effort and learning have the potential to improve the use of interleaved practice.

Background: During self-study, students need to monitor and regulate mental effort to replete working memory resources and optimize learning results. Taking breaks during self-study could be an effective effort regulation strategy. However, little is known about how breaktaking relates to self-regulated learning. Aims: We investigated the effects of taking systematic or self-regulated breaks on mental effort, task experiences and task completion in real-life study sessions for 1 day. Sample: Eighty-seven bachelor's and master's students from a Dutch University. Methods: Students participated in an online intervention during their self-study. In the self-regulated-break condition (n = 35), students self-decided when to take a break; in the systematic break conditions, students took either a 6-min break after every 24-min study block (systematic-long or 'Pomodoro technique', n = 25) or a 3-min break after every 12-min study block (systematic-short, n = 27). Results: Students had longer study sessions and breaks when self-regulating. This was associated with higher levels of fatigue and distractedness, and lower levels of concentration and motivation compared to those in the systematic conditions. We found no difference between groups in invested mental effort or task completion. Conclusions: Taking pre-determined, systematic breaks during a study session had mood benefits and appeared to have efficiency benefits (i.e., similar task completion in shorter time) over taking self-regulated breaks. Measuring how mental effort dynamically fluctuates over time and how effort spent on the learning task differs from effort spent on regulating break-taking requires further research.