A closer look at students' knowledge of effective learning strategies, where they learn about them, and why they do not use them.

IF 3.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Shana K Carpenter, Christopher A Sanchez
{"title":"A closer look at students' knowledge of effective learning strategies, where they learn about them, and why they do not use them.","authors":"Shana K Carpenter, Christopher A Sanchez","doi":"10.1186/s41235-025-00693-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current survey measured students' knowledge, use, and perceived effectiveness of different learning strategies. Whereas a common assumption from previous research is that students forego using effective strategies because they lack awareness of them, the current results demonstrate that students are quite aware of certain strategies such as retrieval practice, spacing, and explaining, but are less aware of other strategies like pretesting and interleaving, and seem to overrate the effectiveness of highlighting and rereading notes. Even when students were aware of effective learning strategies, their primary reasons for not using them were the cognitive costs associated with them (time, effort, anxiety, and increased planning and preparation). Students reported teachers, friends, and self-discovery as the most common sources of learning about both effective and ineffective strategies, and published research as the least common source. We discuss the implications of these results for designing interventions aimed at improving students' self-regulated learning decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"10 1","pages":"83"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12686233/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-025-00693-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current survey measured students' knowledge, use, and perceived effectiveness of different learning strategies. Whereas a common assumption from previous research is that students forego using effective strategies because they lack awareness of them, the current results demonstrate that students are quite aware of certain strategies such as retrieval practice, spacing, and explaining, but are less aware of other strategies like pretesting and interleaving, and seem to overrate the effectiveness of highlighting and rereading notes. Even when students were aware of effective learning strategies, their primary reasons for not using them were the cognitive costs associated with them (time, effort, anxiety, and increased planning and preparation). Students reported teachers, friends, and self-discovery as the most common sources of learning about both effective and ineffective strategies, and published research as the least common source. We discuss the implications of these results for designing interventions aimed at improving students' self-regulated learning decisions.

Abstract Image

仔细观察学生对有效学习策略的了解,他们从哪里学到这些策略,以及为什么他们不使用它们。
本调查测量了学生对不同学习策略的认知、使用和感知效果。然而,以往研究的一个普遍假设是,学生放弃使用有效的策略是因为他们缺乏意识,而目前的结果表明,学生对某些策略(如检索练习、间隔和解释)非常了解,但对其他策略(如预测和交错)的了解较少,并且似乎高估了标记和重读笔记的有效性。即使当学生意识到有效的学习策略时,他们不使用它们的主要原因是与之相关的认知成本(时间、精力、焦虑、增加的计划和准备)。学生们报告说,老师、朋友和自我发现是学习有效和无效策略的最常见来源,而发表的研究是最不常见的来源。我们讨论了这些结果对设计旨在提高学生自我调节学习决策的干预措施的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书