Carlton J. Fong , Erika A. Patall , Kate E. Snyder , Meagan A. Hoff , Sara J. Jones , Robin E. Zuniga-Ortega
{"title":"Academic underachievement and its motivational and self-regulated learning correlates: A meta-analytic review of 80 years of research","authors":"Carlton J. Fong , Erika A. Patall , Kate E. Snyder , Meagan A. Hoff , Sara J. Jones , Robin E. Zuniga-Ortega","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Academic underachievement, the discrepancy between students' academic potential and performance, remains both an educational problem and a mystery after nearly a century of research. Of enduring interest has been identifying factors behind underachievement, one of which relates to students’ motivation and self-regulated learning. To explore the state of known research, we conducted a systematic and meta-analytic review of the past 80 years of empirical research comparing underachieving and non-underachieving students on various motivational and self-regulated learning correlates. Based on 1044 effect sizes from 125 studies (156 unique samples, </span><em>N</em><span> = 56,640 students), our overall meta-analytic findings suggested that underachieving students tend to have higher external locus of control (</span><em>g</em> = 0.30) and lower levels of competence beliefs (<em>g</em><span> = −0.48), autonomous motivation and task values (</span><em>g</em> = −0.48), self-regulated learning strategies (<em>g</em> = −0.59), and mastery goals (<em>g</em> = −0.39) relative to non-underachieving students. Differences in competence beliefs between underachieving and non-underachieving students were moderated by grade level and underachievement identification method. Implications for the theoretical bases for academic underachievement and the educational practices to reverse or prevent underachievement are discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"41 ","pages":"Article 100566"},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000593","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Academic underachievement, the discrepancy between students' academic potential and performance, remains both an educational problem and a mystery after nearly a century of research. Of enduring interest has been identifying factors behind underachievement, one of which relates to students’ motivation and self-regulated learning. To explore the state of known research, we conducted a systematic and meta-analytic review of the past 80 years of empirical research comparing underachieving and non-underachieving students on various motivational and self-regulated learning correlates. Based on 1044 effect sizes from 125 studies (156 unique samples, N = 56,640 students), our overall meta-analytic findings suggested that underachieving students tend to have higher external locus of control (g = 0.30) and lower levels of competence beliefs (g = −0.48), autonomous motivation and task values (g = −0.48), self-regulated learning strategies (g = −0.59), and mastery goals (g = −0.39) relative to non-underachieving students. Differences in competence beliefs between underachieving and non-underachieving students were moderated by grade level and underachievement identification method. Implications for the theoretical bases for academic underachievement and the educational practices to reverse or prevent underachievement are discussed.
期刊介绍:
Educational Research Review is an international journal catering to researchers and diverse agencies keen on reviewing studies and theoretical papers in education at any level. The journal welcomes high-quality articles that address educational research problems through a review approach, encompassing thematic or methodological reviews and meta-analyses. With an inclusive scope, the journal does not limit itself to any specific age range and invites articles across various settings where learning and education take place, such as schools, corporate training, and both formal and informal educational environments.