Relationships between students’ conceptions of constructivist learning and their regulation and processing strategies

Abstract

The present study investigated relationships between students' conceptions of constructivist learning on the one hand, and their regulation and processing strategies on the other hand. Students in a constructivist, problem-based learning curriculum were questioned about their conceptions of knowledge construction and self-regulated learning, as well as their beliefs regarding their own (in)ability to learn and motivation to learn. Two hypothesized models were tested within 98 psychology students, using a structural equation modelling approach: The first model implemented regulation and processing variables of the Inventory of Learning Styles [ILS, Vermunt (Learning styles and regulation of learning in higher education -towards process-oriented instruction in autonomous thinking, 1992)], the second model of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire [MSLQ, Pintrich and de Groot (Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40, 1990)]. Results showed that structural relations exist between conceptions of constructivist learning and regulation and processing strategies. Furthermore, students who express doubt with regard to their own learning capacities are at risk for adopting an inadequate regulation strategy. A three-tiered structure of conceptual, controlling, and operational level appeared valid for the MSLQ variables, but not entirely for those of the ILS.Education involves the interplay of learners, teachers, and learning environments. In contrast to a few decades ago, the learner has received a more central role. Students themselves decide to a larger extent what and how to learn and they actually need to take responsibility for their own learning in order to become more effective learners (e.g., Kuhn 2007). One view on learning that considers the learner as an active agent in the process of 123Instr Sci (2008) 36:445-462 DOI 10.1007 knowledge acquisition is constructivism. Constructivism is an umbrella term for various views on learning (Gijbels et al. 2006), which focus on how learners create meaning and which argue that this knowledge construction process requires active engagement of the learner. A working definition of constructivism could be: A theory of how we learn, grounded in philosophy, that has led to the development of several educational applications (e.g., problem-based learning). Constructivism is, however, embodied in numerous ways (e.g., Windschitl 2002). Nevertheless, most views share four core features or constructs that should be considered while creating learning environments for students. These constructs can be labelled as (1) knowledge construction, (2) cooperative learning, (3) selfregulated learning, and (4) the use of meaningful, authentic problems in education (e.g., Driscoll 2005; Marshall 1992). In short, knowledge construction refers to the use of prior knowledge when new information is interpreted. Second, cooperative learning embodies the idea that social interaction and negotiation can help learners in their knowledge acquisition process. A third construct...

A Learning Patterns Perspective on Student Learning in Higher Education: State of the Art and Moving Forward

“…Overall, they confirm the strong interrelations between students' processing and regulations strategies, learning conceptions, and learning motivations that form the core of the learning patterns model (Edelbring 2012). For example, in a problem-based curriculum, Loyens et al (2008) found structural positive relations between Dutch students' constructive conceptions of learning on the one hand and their use of deep processing and self-regulation strategies on the other hand. The learning conceptions 'construction of knowledge' was negatively related to external regulation and lack of regulation.…”

“…Many studies reviewed in this paper have used Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) as an elegant way to deal with a large number of variables at the same time (e.g. De Clercq et al 2013;Loyens et al 2008;Martínez-Fernández and Vermunt 2015;Zhu et al 2008). Fryer et al (2016) used a longitudinal variant of SEM to analyse variables from two waves of data collection from the same students.…”

Rejection Sensitivity, Self-Efficacy, and Learning Strategy: Mediating and Moderating the Role of Basic Needs Satisfaction

“…Learning strategies were measured via their cognitive aspects (Ito, 1996;Pintrich & De Groot, 1990), their meta-cognitive aspects (Ichihara & Arai, 2006), and self-motivational strategy scales (Ito & Shinto, 2003) that included 23 items (α = .87). These items have been used in previous studies (Jones, Estell, & Alexander, 2008;Loyens, Rikers, & Schmidt, 2008). Participants were asked to rate how often they use learning strategies using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (Not apply) to 5 (Apply), and averages derived.…”

Literature Review of GA Pilots Transition to Advanced Cockpit Technologies

“…It comes from cumulative experiences and sharing of different ideas and then changing one's internalized response to those ideas or views (Bednar, Cunnigham, Duffy, Perry, 1995). A pilot with already some years of flying have a strong background in aviation that guided constructivism provided by the facilitator for the pilots need in transitioning can have a positive effect in their learning and adaption to the new avionics platforms (Loyens et al 2008). This, however, cannot be self-regulated instruction but guided positive reinforcement coupled with a scaffolding methodology (Loyens et al 2008;Brown, 1987).…”

“…A pilot with already some years of flying have a strong background in aviation that guided constructivism provided by the facilitator for the pilots need in transitioning can have a positive effect in their learning and adaption to the new avionics platforms (Loyens et al 2008). This, however, cannot be self-regulated instruction but guided positive reinforcement coupled with a scaffolding methodology (Loyens et al 2008;Brown, 1987). Homko (2011) in his research article stated What can be taken from this observation is an understanding that older people could well be taught to use technology in much the same way as younger people are taught.…”