探索接受第二次机会教育的低学历成年人的学习者特征:学习动机和学习策略在数量和质量上的个体差异

IF 2.7 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL European Journal of Psychology of Education Pub Date : 2024-04-12 DOI:10.1007/s10212-024-00834-5
Bea Mertens, Sven De Maeyer, Vincent Donche
{"title":"探索接受第二次机会教育的低学历成年人的学习者特征:学习动机和学习策略在数量和质量上的个体差异","authors":"Bea Mertens, Sven De Maeyer, Vincent Donche","doi":"10.1007/s10212-024-00834-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research on learning strategies and learning motivation in different educational contexts has provided valuable insights, but in this field, low-educated adults remain an understudied population. This study addresses this gap by means of a person-oriented approach and seeks to investigate whether quantitatively and qualitatively different learner profiles can be distinguished among low-educated adults in second-chance education (SCE) by relating three key components of learning: learning motivation, regulation and processing strategies. Five hundred twelve adult learners of six SCE-institutions filled in a Learning and Motivation questionnaire. Latent profile analysis showed the presence of motivational profiles differing both in quantity and quality (i.e. good- versus poor-quality and high- versus low-quantity motivational profiles) and regulatory profiles being distinct in the use of regulation strategies (i.e. self-regulated versus unregulated profiles). Mainly quantitatively different processing profiles were found among low-educated adults (i.e. active, moderate, inactive processing profiles). When integrating all three components of learning, analyses identified two more optimal motivational-learning profiles, combining good-quality motivation with a moderately active use of self-regulation and processing strategies (i.e. good-quality motivation – self-regulated – active processing profile and good-quality motivation – moderate profile) and two more suboptimal profiles in which poor-quality or low-quantity motivation was combined with the inactive use of self-regulation and processing strategies (i.e. poor-quality motivation – unregulated – inactive processing profile, low-quantity motivation – unregulated – inactive processing profile). A fifth motivational-learning profile exhibited a pattern of poor-quality motivation combined with a moderately-active use of self- regulation and processing strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":47800,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychology of Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring learner profiles among low-educated adults in second-chance education: individual differences in quantity and quality of learning motivation and learning strategies\",\"authors\":\"Bea Mertens, Sven De Maeyer, Vincent Donche\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10212-024-00834-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Research on learning strategies and learning motivation in different educational contexts has provided valuable insights, but in this field, low-educated adults remain an understudied population. This study addresses this gap by means of a person-oriented approach and seeks to investigate whether quantitatively and qualitatively different learner profiles can be distinguished among low-educated adults in second-chance education (SCE) by relating three key components of learning: learning motivation, regulation and processing strategies. Five hundred twelve adult learners of six SCE-institutions filled in a Learning and Motivation questionnaire. Latent profile analysis showed the presence of motivational profiles differing both in quantity and quality (i.e. good- versus poor-quality and high- versus low-quantity motivational profiles) and regulatory profiles being distinct in the use of regulation strategies (i.e. self-regulated versus unregulated profiles). Mainly quantitatively different processing profiles were found among low-educated adults (i.e. active, moderate, inactive processing profiles). When integrating all three components of learning, analyses identified two more optimal motivational-learning profiles, combining good-quality motivation with a moderately active use of self-regulation and processing strategies (i.e. good-quality motivation – self-regulated – active processing profile and good-quality motivation – moderate profile) and two more suboptimal profiles in which poor-quality or low-quantity motivation was combined with the inactive use of self-regulation and processing strategies (i.e. poor-quality motivation – unregulated – inactive processing profile, low-quantity motivation – unregulated – inactive processing profile). A fifth motivational-learning profile exhibited a pattern of poor-quality motivation combined with a moderately-active use of self- regulation and processing strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Psychology of Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Psychology of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-024-00834-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychology of Education","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-024-00834-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对不同教育背景下的学习策略和学习动机的研究提供了宝贵的见解,但在这一领域,低学历成人仍然是一个研究不足的群体。本研究通过以人为本的方法填补了这一空白,并试图通过将学习的三个关键要素:学习动机、调节和处理策略联系起来,研究二次教育(SCE)中的低学历成人是否可以从数量和质量上区分出不同的学习者特征。六所二次机会教育机构的 512 名成年学习者填写了一份学习与动机问卷。潜特征分析表明,动机特征在数量和质量上存在差异(即质量好与质量差、数量多与数量少的动机特征),调节特征在调节策略的使用上存在差异(即自我调节与非调节特征)。在受教育程度低的成人中,主要发现了数量上不同的加工特征(即积极加工特征、适度加工特征和不积极加工特征)。当把学习的所有三个组成部分综合起来时,分析发现了两种更为理想的学习动机--学习状况,即良好的学习动机与适度积极地使用自我调节和加工策略相结合(即:良好的学习动机--自我调节--加工策略)。优质动机--自我调节--积极处理概况和优质动机--适度概况),以及另外两种次优概况,即劣质或低质量动机与不积极使用自我调节和处理策略相结合(即劣质动机--未调节--不积极处理概况,低质量动机--未调节--不积极处理概况)。第五种学习动机特征表现为劣质动机与适度积极地使用自我调节和处理策略相结合的模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Exploring learner profiles among low-educated adults in second-chance education: individual differences in quantity and quality of learning motivation and learning strategies

Research on learning strategies and learning motivation in different educational contexts has provided valuable insights, but in this field, low-educated adults remain an understudied population. This study addresses this gap by means of a person-oriented approach and seeks to investigate whether quantitatively and qualitatively different learner profiles can be distinguished among low-educated adults in second-chance education (SCE) by relating three key components of learning: learning motivation, regulation and processing strategies. Five hundred twelve adult learners of six SCE-institutions filled in a Learning and Motivation questionnaire. Latent profile analysis showed the presence of motivational profiles differing both in quantity and quality (i.e. good- versus poor-quality and high- versus low-quantity motivational profiles) and regulatory profiles being distinct in the use of regulation strategies (i.e. self-regulated versus unregulated profiles). Mainly quantitatively different processing profiles were found among low-educated adults (i.e. active, moderate, inactive processing profiles). When integrating all three components of learning, analyses identified two more optimal motivational-learning profiles, combining good-quality motivation with a moderately active use of self-regulation and processing strategies (i.e. good-quality motivation – self-regulated – active processing profile and good-quality motivation – moderate profile) and two more suboptimal profiles in which poor-quality or low-quantity motivation was combined with the inactive use of self-regulation and processing strategies (i.e. poor-quality motivation – unregulated – inactive processing profile, low-quantity motivation – unregulated – inactive processing profile). A fifth motivational-learning profile exhibited a pattern of poor-quality motivation combined with a moderately-active use of self- regulation and processing strategies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
3.30%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Psychology of Education (EJPE) is a quarterly journal oriented toward publishing high-quality papers that address the relevant psychological aspects of educational processes embedded in different institutional, social, and cultural contexts, and which focus on diversity in terms of the participants, their educational trajectories and their socio-cultural contexts. Authors are strongly encouraged to employ a variety of theoretical and methodological tools developed in the psychology of education in order to gain new insights by integrating different perspectives. Instead of reinforcing the divisions and distances between different communities stemming from their theoretical and methodological backgrounds, we would like to invite authors to engage with diverse theoretical and methodological tools in a meaningful way and to search for the new knowledge that can emerge from a combination of these tools. EJPE is open to all papers reflecting findings from original psychological studies on educational processes, as well as to exceptional theoretical and review papers that integrate current knowledge and chart new avenues for future research. Following the assumption that engaging with diversities creates great opportunities for new knowledge, the editorial team wishes to encourage, in particular, authors from less represented countries and regions, as well as young researchers, to submit their work and to keep going through the review process, which can be challenging, but which also presents opportunities for learning and inspiration.
期刊最新文献
Giving voice to educators: Primary school teachers explain how they promote values to their pupils Developing gestures in the infant classroom: from showing and giving to pointing The authenticity dilemma: towards a theory on the conditions and effects of authentic learning Peers and value preferences among adolescents in school classes: a social network and longitudinal approach The ups and downs of online intergroup contact interventions: popular narratives and secondary transfer effect
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1