The Revised Learning and Study Strategies Inventory

Abstract

Two competing structural models for the revised Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) were examined. The test developers promote a model related to three uncorrelated components of strategic learning: skill, will, and self-regulation. Other investigators have shown empirical support for a three-factor correlated model characterized by effort-related activities, goal orientation, and cognitive activities (ER-GO-CA). Neither model has been verified on scores from the second edition of the LASSI. In the present sample of 297 college students, confirmatory factor analysis of the subscale scores provided support for the ER-GO-CA model. KeywordsLASSI; factor analysis; college students; learning strategies Learning and study strategies are important factors in understanding the academic achievement of college students. Measures of learning and study strategies can help screen and identify students at risk for poor performance, be used diagnostically to evaluate areas of difficulty that can lead to prescriptive or remedial plans, serve as pre-post outcome measures in evaluating academic treatment programs, and be useful in advising college students seeking a better awareness of their academic strengths and weaknesses. The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI;Weinstein & Palmer, 2002;Weinstein, Schulte, & Palmer, 1987) is a widely used instrument designed to accomplish the above tasks. It is estimated to be in use by more than 1,300 universities and colleges in the United States (Olaussen & Braten, 1998). LASSI scores have been shown to be positively correlated with grade point average, and the instrument is proposed to be an effective tool for predicting academic performance (Yip & Chung, 2002).The LASSI is composed of 10 subscales that allow a student to self-report on his or her thoughts, behaviors, and attitudes related to strategic learning. The original version, with 77 items, was published in 1987 (Weinstein et al., 1987), and a second edition, with 80 items, was released in 2002 (Weinstein & Palmer, 2002). The second edition was designed to update the items, incorporate current research findings and changes in educational practice and instruction, broaden the scope of the scales, create equal numbers of items for each Please address correspondence to Frances Prevatt, PhD, Chair, Department of Educational Psychology and Learning Systems, Codirector, Adult Learning Evaluation Center, 307 Stone, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306; fprevatt@coe.fsu.edu. subscale, improve the inter-item correlations, and create national norms on a more broadbased sample (Weinstein & Palmer, 2002). An analysis of the second edition reveals that all subscales now have 10 items. There are 38 items unchanged from the first edition and 42 items that are unique to the second edition. Of these 42 additions, 12 items appear to be only slightly modified, whereas 30 items appear to be substantially different from the first edition. HHS Public AccessA large body of research exists for the first edition of...

Computerized Progressive Attention Training (CPAT) vs. Active Control in Adults with ADHD

“…However, it is now recognized that ADHD frequently persists into adulthood, troubling approximately 2.5% of the adult population (American Psychiatric Association 2013) and generating significant impairments in academic, occupational, social, and emotional functioning (Barkley et al 2006;Biederman et al 2006). In particular, higher education poses great challenge for students with ADHD, coping with various academic difficulties such as inability to sustain attention while studying and deficient ability to focus attention on academic tasks (Prevatt et al 2006;Reaser et al 2007). At present, ADHD is primarily treated with medications which can ameliorate many of the core symptoms.…”

“…Hence, in the present study we use the term Bhigh functioning adults with ADHD^to describe this population. Nonetheless, these students still cope with unique challenges throughout their studies (Prevatt et al 2006;Reaser et al 2007), and could benefit from cognitive training if it will improve their attention functioning and/or ameliorate the magnitude of ADHD symptoms which in turn will hopefully improve their academic performance. Although it is especially challenging to demonstrate improvement in a population that is high functioning to begin with, the benefit for students with ADHD could be substantial, making them an important target-population for an intervention study.…”

Análisis De Las Propiedades Psicométricas Del Inventario De Estrategias De Aprendizaje Y Estudio (Lassi) en Estudiantes Universitarios

“…En su lugar se ha arribando a múltiples soluciones distintas del modelo originalmente propuesto (e.g. Badenier, 2006;Cano, 2006;Corral de Zurita & Alcalá, 2002;Olejnik & Nist, 1992;Olivarez & Tallent, 1994;Prevatt et al, 2006;Samuelstuen, 2003;Valle & Rodríguez, 1998). Los resultados aquí reportados se mueven en idéntica dirección.…”

“…Esta falta de coincidencia entre las dimensiones teorizadas y las extraídas del procedimiento factorial va en el mismo sentido del resto de los estudios desarrollados (e.g. Badenier, 2006;Cano, 2006;Corral de Zurita & Alcalá, 2002;Olejnik & Nist, 1992;Olivarez & Tallent, 1994;Prevatt, Petscher, Proctor, Hurst, & Adams, 2006;Samuelstuen, 2003;Valle & Rodríguez, 1998 (Stover et al, 2012).…”

Ders Calisma Becerileri ve Yaklasimi Olceginin Uyarlanmasi: Tıp Fakultesi Ogrencileri icin Gecerlik ve Guvenirlik Calismasi

“…Geliştirilen bu araçlar daha çok yükseköğretim düzeyinde uygulanmaktadır. Düşük performans gösteren sorunlu öğrencilerin tarama ile belirlenmesinde, öngörü veya iyileştirmeye yönelik planlar yapılması gereken zorluk alanlarını değerlendirirken teşhis amaçlı olarak, akademik iyileştirme programlarının öncesi ve sonrasında değerlendirilmesinde ve öğrencilere akademik yönden kendi güçlü ve zayıf yönlerine ilişkin farkındalık oluşturma ve tavsiyede bulunmak amacıyla bu tür ölçme araçları kullanılmaktadır (5).…”