{"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}
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.
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.