KHÁM PHÁ CHIẾN LƯỢC HỌC TẬP CỦA SINH VIÊN Exploring students’ learning strategies

(1)

TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL ĐẠI HỌC SÀI GÒN OF SAIGON UNIVERSITY

Số 79 (08/2021) No. 79 (08/2021)

Email: [email protected] ; Website: http://sj.sgu.edu.vn/

KHÁM PHÁ CHI ẾN LƯỢ C H Ọ C T Ậ P C Ủ A SINH VIÊN Exploring students’ learning strategies

TS. Võ Văn Việt

Trường Đại học Nông Lâm TP.HCM

TÓM TẮT

Với nhận định rằng việc hiểu rõ hơn các chiến lược học tập của sinh viên giúp nhà trường hướng dẫn và hỗ trợ tốt hơn, mục tiêu của nghiên cứu này là khám phá các chiến lược học tập của sinh viên Trường Đại học Nông Lâm TPHCM. Thiết kế nghiên cứu mô tảđã được áp dụng. Mẫu nghiên cứu gồm 1127 sinh viên, được lựa chọn bằng kỹ thuật chọn mẫu thuận tiện, đã đồng ý tự nguyện tham gia nghiên cứu. Dữ liệu điều tra được phân tích bằng kỹ thuật thống kê mô tả với các đại lượng như trung bình, tần suất, độ lệch chuẩn được tính toán với sự hỗ trợ của phần mềm SPSS phiên bản 22. Giá trị trung bình và tần suất, tỷ lệ phần trăm thu của mỗi biến quan sát trong mười thành phần của chiến lược học tập cung cấp những thông tin hữu ích đểđánh giá vềđiểm mạnh và những vấn đề cần chú ý trong các chiến lược học tập của sinh viên.

Từ khóa: chiến lược học tập, đánh giá, hành vi, giáo dục đại học ABSTRACT

Proposing that better understanding students’ learning strategies may provide better guidance and support, the objective of current study was to explore learning strategies used by undergraduate students in Nong Lam University, Viet Nam. A descriptive research design with the participation of 1,127 conveniently selected students was applied. Mean, frequency, and standard deviation were calculated with the assistance of SPSS version 22. The mean scores, frequencies, and percentages obtained from each item of ten subscales of learning strategies provide valid assessment of the strengths and areas of students’

learning strategies in need of attention.

Keywords: learning strategy, assessment, behavior, higher education

INTRODUCTION

In general, learning strategies are what students employ to help facilitate the learning process. As Weinstein & Mayer (1983) defined learning strategies are behaviors and thoughts in which a learner engages and are intended to influence the learner's encoding process. Students who have adequate learning strategies tend to be more independent and autonomous in their

studying and learning (Weinstein & Mayer, 1983: 3). Various studies have shown the positive relationship between learning strategies used by students and the learning outcomes (Loomis, 2000; Salehi & Enayati, 2009; Mohammadi et al., 2017). The adoption of different dimensions of learning strategy resulted in varying levels of academic achievement. However, it is necessary to emphasize that learning

Email: [email protected]

(2)

strategies used by students varied depending on their learning situations and contextual features though there is general agreement that so few students were suitably equipped with effective learning strategies. Consequently, many of them were suspended or expelled after a year of school. Therefore, understanding what learning strategies students employed is a concern of lecturers and university administrators.

Many studies in world literature have been conducted on students’ learning strategies, but very few studies have been found in Vietnam. Thus, this study aims to describe the learning strategies adopted by undergraduate students in Nong Lam University, Vietnam, which may help lecturers and administrators in planning active teaching strategies and support students in employing effective learning strategies.

LITERATURE REVIEW

There are several definitions of learning strategies in the literature. The early definition of learning strategy was proposed by Weinstein & Mayer (1983), who defined

“learning strategies as behaviors and thoughts in which a learner engages and which are intended to influence the learner's encoding process” (p.3). Oxford (1990) says that learning strategies involve activities/actions that allow learners to collect, store, retrieve and use information, etc., to make learning simpler, faster and more effective. Learning strategies are the tools that a student uses effectively to gain knowledge towards a high academic achievement successfully.

To help students understand their learning strategies, many self- assessment instruments were developed. One of them

was designed by Weinstein & Schulte named Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI). Weinstein et al created the first LASSI in 1987, which included 77 items to gather; information about learning and study practices and attitudes. The LASSI was developed to provide diagnostic information to inform interventions (by students or institutions) to improve academic achievement, and it was also used for predictive or evaluative purposes. The focus of the LASSI was on individual students’ cognitive, behavioral and attitudinal approaches to their studies. The LASSI has been used and studied in a number of countries. LASSI was then modified in 2002 (second edition) (Weinstein, C.E., & Palmer, 2002) and 2016 (third edition) (Weinstein et al, 2016).

The LASSI aimed to measure ten subscales of learning strategies, and each subscale was grouped in one of three components/scales of strategic learning.

Skill components/scales include three subscales: information processing, selecting main ideas, and test strategies. Will components/scales also include three subscales: anxiety, attitude, and motivation.

Self-regulation/learning strategies components/

scales include four subscales: concentration, self-testing, time management, and study aid/

using academic resources (in the third edition) (Weinstein et al., 1987), (Weinstein, C.E., & Palmer, 2002), (Weinstein et al., 2016).

Weinstein, C.E., & Palmer (2002) defined these ten subscales of LASSI as follows: The Anxiety subscale assesses how much students worry about school and their academic performance; the Attitude subscale assesses students' attitudes and interest in college and academic success.. It

(3)

determines if the student has a desire to succeed academically; the Concentration subscale assesses students' ability to direct and maintain attention on academic tasks;

the Information Processing subscale assesses how well students' can use imagery, verbal elaboration, organization strategies, and reasoning skills as learning strategies to help build bridges between what they already know and what they are trying to learn and remember, i.e., knowledge acquisition, retention and future application; the Motivation subscale assesses students' diligence, self-discipline, and willingness to exert the effort necessary to successfully complete academic requirements; the Selecting Main Ideas subscale assesses students' skill at identifying important information in lectures or textbooks; the Self-Testing subscale assesses students' use of reviewing and comprehension monitoring techniques to determine their level of understanding of the information to be learned; the Test Strategies subscale assesses students’

ability to prepare for tests and their test- taking strategies; the Time Management subscale assesses students’ ability to organize their schedules for academic purposes (Weinstein, C.E., & Palmer, 2002).

METHODOLOGY

This study aims to understand learning strategies used by undergraduate students.

Therefore, the research methodology used was a descriptive quantitative research design. Data was collected by using a self- report questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of two independent parts, including socio-demographic questions and learning and studying strategy questions.

Instrument

Participants were administered a Vietnamese version of the learning strategy questionnaire, initially developed by Claire E Weinstein & Palmer (2002). The questionnaire consists of 10 subscales:

attitude, motivation, time management, anxiety, concentration, information processing, selecting main ideas, study aids, self-testing, and test strategies. The author has tested the reliability of the subscales and the Cronbach’s alphas ranged from .73 to .89 (Claire E Weinstein & Palmer, 2002).

The Five-point Likert scales were used to determine the strategies. Indicators on the scales ranging from 1 (not at all typical of me) to 5 (Very much typical of me).

Participants

The participants of the study were 1,127 full-time undergraduate students of Nong Lam University, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam, who had completed at least one semester.

Data collection

Data were collected during the second semester of the 2019-2020 school year. All students were invited to complete the questionnaire online. The duration for accepted responses was one month, which started from the 1^st of February and ended on the 29^th of February.

Data analysis

Mean, frequency, and standard deviation of each item of the five points on five-point Likert subscales of the questionnaire were calculated with the assist of Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22. More than half of the items in the questionnaire were inversely scored. Therefore, this should be noted when interpreting and explaining the results.

Before computing the mean of a given item,

(4)

reversed items have been recoded.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION Demographic characteristics

Table 1 reports the demographic characteristics of respondents. Of the 1,127 students who joined the survey, 770

(68.3%) were female and 357 (31.7%) were male. Most of the respondents were freshmen (n=427, 37.9%), followed by juniors (n=272, 24.1%), sophomores (n=262, 23.3%), and seniors (n=166, 14.8%

of the sample).

Table 1: Respondent Demographic

Frequency Percent

Sex Male 357 31.7

Female 770 68.3

Year of study

Freshmen 427 37.9

Sophomore 262 23.2

Junior 272 24.1

Senior 166 14.8

Total 1,127 100.0

Father’s education attainment

Illiterate 24 2.1

Some primary school 174 15.4

Secondary school graduate 348 30.9

High school graduate 293 26.0

Bachelor degree 275 24.4

Master degree and higher 13 1.2

Mother’s education attainment

Illiterate 26 2.3

Some primary school 262 23.2

Secondary school graduate 479 42.5

High school graduate 241 21.4

Bachelor degree 104 9.2

Master degree and higher 14 1.2

Students whose fathers attained less than a high school education were high in percentage at 46.3% (522 out of 1,127).

46.3% of students had fathers with less than a high school education; 26% of the students’ fathers had graduated from high school, and 25.6% had received university degrees. Percentages of students whose fathers cannot read or write were

small, 2.1%. Comparably, 65.7% of students whose mothers had less than a high school education; 21,4% of the students’

mothers had graduated from high school, and 10.4% had received university degrees.

2.3% of the mothers were illiterate.

Descriptive analysis of students’

learning and studying strategies

As mentioned in the methodology section,

(5)

the descriptive analysis of the data was conducted by using frequency and percentages of responses to each item of subscales in which they chose any of the five alternatives of “not at all typical of me”, “not very typical of me”,

“somewhat typical of me”, “fairly typical of me” and “very much typical of me”. It is assumed that positive responses are “fairly

typical of me” or “very much typical of me”

and negative responses are “not at all typical of me” or “not very typical of me.”

Descriptive analysis of the will component/scale

This section provides analysis of three subscales of the Will component: anxiety, attitude, and motivation.

Table 2: Descriptive statistics of the Anxiety subscale

Responses (*) Mean Std.

Deviation

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

Item 46. I worry that I will flunk out of school.

Count 155 40 204 626 102 2.57 1.150

% 13.8% 3.5% 18.1% 55.5% 9.1%

Item 69. When I am studying, worrying about doing poorly in a course interferes with my concentration.

Count 64 36 289 646 92 2.41 .900

% 5.7% 3.2% 25.6% 57.3% 8.2%

Item 72. Courses in certain subjects, such as math, science, or a foreign language, make me anxious.

Count 83 20 316 551 157 2.40 .998

% 7.4% 1.8% 28.0% 48.9% 13.9%

Item 43. When I am taking a test, worrying about doing poorly interferes with my concentration.

Count 79 27 249 636 136 2.36 .970

% 7.0% 2.4% 22.1% 56.4% 12.1%

Item 61. Even when I am well prepared for a test, I feel very anxious.

Count 45 30 260 642 150 2.27 .870

% 4.0% 2.7% 23.1% 57.0% 13.3%

Item 78. I get so nervous and confused when taking an examination that I fail to answer questions to the best of my ability.

Count 22 15 289 637 164 2.20 .770

% 2.0% 1.3% 25.6% 56.5% 14.6%

Item 29. I get discouraged because of low grades.

Count 39 17 267 592 212 2.18 .874

% 3.5% 1.5% 23.7% 52.5% 18.8%

Item 35. I feel very panicky when I take an important test.

Count 20 9 214 540 344 1.95 .828

% 1.8% 0.8% 19.0% 47.9% 30.5%

(*) 1: Not at all typical of me, 2: Not very typical of me, 3: Somewhat typical of me, 4: Fairly typical of me, 5:

Very much typical of me.

Descriptive statistics for the Anxiety subscale is shown in table 2. The highest mean score is only 2.57 (item 46), and the lowest mean is 1.95 (item 35). It must be

noted that means were computed after recoding the reverse items. It means that the lower the mean, the higher the degree of worry about school and academic

(6)

performance. In Table 2, all eight items in the subscale have a prominence of “Fairly typical of me”, about 47-57% of the respondents. In addition, 9.1% (n=102) of the students responded “Very much typical of me” for item 46, and 8.2% (n=157), 13.9% (n=157), 12.1% (n=136), 13.3% (n=150), 14.6%

(n=164), 18.8% (n=212), 30.5% (n=344) for

items 69, 72, 43, 61,78, 29, and 35, respectively. It can be inferred that students in the sample feel uneasy about their studies.

More than half of them are worried about being dismissed from school, about difficult subjects like math, English language, and about having low grades. They also feel nervous and worried when taking tests.

Table 3: Descriptive statistics of the Attitude subscale

Statements Responses (*)

Mean

Std.

Deviation

1 2 3 4 5

Item 6. I am able to study subjects I do not find interesting.

Count 42 32 327 666 60 3.59 .793

% 3.7% 2.8% 29.0% 59.1% 5.3%

Item 36. I have a positive attitude about attending my classes.

Count 11 15 372 601 128 3.73 .715

% 1.0% 1.3% 33.0% 53.3% 11.4%

Item 41. I would rather not be in school.

Count 559 22 113 409 24 3.61 1.444

% 49.6% 2.0% 10.0% 36.3% 2.1%

Item 76. In my opinion, what is taught in my courses is not worth learning.

Count 285 34 189 592 27 2.96 1.290

% 25.3% 3.0% 16.8% 52.5% 2.4%

Item 70. I do not care if I finish college as long as I have a good time.

Count 270 25 162 629 41 2.87 1.292

% 24.0% 2.2% 14.4% 55.8% 3.6%

Item 48. I do not care about getting a general education, I just want to get a good job.

Count 156 36 243 639 53 2.65 1.104

% 13.8% 3.2% 21.6% 56.7% 4.7%

Item 17. I only study the subjects I like.

Count 108 29 262 687 41 2.54 .974

% 9.6% 2.6% 23.2% 61.0% 3.6%

Item 51. I dislike most of the work in my classes.

Count 87 47 291 662 40 2.54 .931

% 7.7% 4.2% 25.8% 58.7% 3.5%

The mean score of each item in table 3 shows that item 6, which is concerning the ability to study subjects that are not interesting, has the highest mean score of 3.59 and is followed by items 36 and 41 with mean scores of 3.73 and 3.61 respectively.

Item 17 which focuses only on favorite subjects and item 51 about disliking most of the work in classes has the lowest mean of 2.54. Results in Table 3 also show that most of the students (N=726, 64.4%) who responded positively to item 6, they are able

(7)

to study subjects they do not find interesting while only 74 out of 1,127 considered themselves unable to (or responded negatively to) study subjects they did not find interesting. The majority of the students in the sample (n=729, 64.7%) had a positive attitude about attending their classes, while only 26 students (2.3%) had negative feelings (item 36). Remarkably, 433 students (38.4%) felt regret to attending school (item 41). 54.9% (n=619) of the students indicated that what was taught in their courses is not worth learning (item 76);

26.2% of the students did not have a good

time at school (item 70); 670 out of 1,127 students (59.4%) want to get a good job and do not care about general education (item 48). Furthermore, 728 students (64.6%) only like studying favorite subjects (item 17).

While 702 students (62.2%) dislike most of the work in classes such as presentations, teamwork, assignments, etc. (item 51). It can be assumed that students in the sample have a positive attitude toward classes and school.

However, they seem to be interested in finishing the courses to get the degree for seeking jobs instead of focusing on the knowledge attained.

Table 4: Descriptive statistics of the Motivation subscale

Statements Responses (*) Mean Std.

Deviation

1 2 3 4 5

Item 30. Even if I am having difficulty in a course, I can motivate myself to complete the work.

Count 8 12 292 639 176 3.85 .708

% 0.7% 1.1% 25.9% 56.7% 15.6%

Item 65. I am up to date in my class assignments.

Count 23 15 307 619 163 3.78 .780

% 2.0% 1.3% 27.2% 54.9% 14.5%

Item 42. I set goals for the grades I want to get in my classes.

Count 24 21 371 588 123 3.68 .776

% 2.1% 1.9% 32.9% 52.2% 10.9%

Item 56. Even when I don’t like a course, I work hard to get a good grade.

Count 31 21 353 601 121 3.67 .798

% 2.8% 1.9% 31.3% 53.3% 10.7%

Item 14. I set high standards for myself in school.

Count 22 29 358 627 91 3.65 .746

% 2.0% 2.6% 31.8% 55.6% 8.1%

Item 80. Even when study materials are dull and uninteresting, I manage to keep working until I finish.

Count 24 33 371 635 64 3.61 .734

% 2.1% 2.9% 32.9% 56.3% 5.7%

Item 39. Even if I do not like an assignment, I am able to get myself to work on it.

Count 29 24 404 604 66 3.58 .747

% 2.6% 2.1% 35.8% 53.6% 5.9%

Item 22. When work is difficult, I either give up or study only the easy parts.

Count 67 43 356 603 58 2.52 .887

% 5.9% 3.8% 31.6% 53.5% 5.1%

(*)1: Not at all typical of me, 2: Not very typical of me, 3: Somewhat typical of me, 4: Fairly typical of me, 5:

Table 4 shows descriptive statistics of the Motivation subscale. This table also displays the frequency, percentage, and mean arranged from highest to lowest with the standard deviation for each item associated with the Motivation subscale.

The results show that item 30, which is for self-motivation, has the highest mean score, followed by items 65, 42, and 56 with mean scores of 3.78, 3.68, and 3.67. Item 22 shows the lowest mean of 2.52. The frequency of each item shows that the

(8)

majority of the frequencies respond with

“Fairly typical of me” in eight items. The second construct is “Somewhat typical of me.” specifically, 815 students (72.3%) responded positively to item 30 that they can self-motivate to complete the work despite difficulties. There are 782 students (69.4%) fulfilled their assignments on time (responded positively to item 65). 711 students (63.1%) set goals for the grades they wanted to achieve in classes (responded positively to item 42).722 students (64%) try their best to get good grades even though they don’t like the course (responded positively to item 56).

63.7% (n=718) of the respondents reported setting high standards in school (responded

positively to item 14). Interestingly, 62.02%

(n=699) of the respondents reported that they can manage to keep working until they finish, even when study materials are dull and uninteresting (responded positively to item 80). Astonishingly, 661 students (58.6%) stated either giving up or studying only the easy parts when work is difficult (responded positively to item 22). The above analysis indicates that students are relatively motivated.

Descriptive analysis of the self- regulation component/scale

This section provides analysis of four subscales of the self-regulation component, including concentration, self -testing, study aids, and time management.

Table 5: Descriptive statistics of the Concentration subscale

Mean Std.

Deviation

1 2 3 4 5

Item 75. If I get distracted during class, I am able to refocus my attention.

Count 18 16 383 626 84 3.66 .706

% 1.6% 1.4% 34.0% 55.5% 7.5%

Item 1. I concentrate fully when studying.

Count 9 16 527 496 79 3.55 .681

% 0.8% 1.4% 46.8% 44.0% 7.0%

Item 49. I find it hard to pay attention during lectures.

Count 49 43 416 584 35 2.54 .805

% 4.3% 3.8% 36.9% 51.8% 3.1%

Item 32. My mind wanders a lot when I study.

Count 55 47 376 587 62 2.51 .858

% 4.9% 4.2% 33.4% 52.1% 5.5%

Item 79. I find that during lectures I think of other things and don’t really listen to what is being said.

Count 25 30 439 570 63 2.45 .739

% 2.2% 2.7% 39.0% 50.6% 5.6%

Item 16. I find it difficult to maintain my concentration while doing my coursework.

Count 42 40 313 663 69 2.40 .811

% 3.7% 3.5% 27.8% 58.8% 6.1%

Item 8. Because I don’t listen carefully, I don’t understand some course material.

Count 27 23 356 639 82 2.36 .748

% 2.4% 2.0% 31.6% 56.7% 7.3%

Item 55. I am very easily distracted from my studies.

Count 18 26 395 563 125

% 1.6% 2.3% 35.0% 50.0% 11.1% 2.33 .766 (*) 1: Not at all typical of me, 2: Not very typical of me, 3: Somewhat typical of me, 4: Fairly typical of me, 5:

(9)

The findings in Table 5 show that item 75, which is the ability to refocus attention, has the highest mean score of 3.66 and is followed by items 1, and 49 with mean scores of 3.55, and 2.54 respectively. Item 55 has the lowest mean of 2.33. Moreover, the majority of the frequencies reply with

“Fairly typical of me” in eight items. The second construct is “Somewhat typical of me.” Notably, 710 out of 1,127 students in the sample (63%) stated that they are able to refocus attention after being distracted (responded positively to item 75). There are 575 students (51%) fully concentrate when studying (responded positively to item 1).

However, 649 students (57.6%) have trouble concentrating on lectures or their

mind wanders a lot when studying (responded positively to item 32). Table 4 also indicates that more than half of the students did not really listen to what was being said during class (n=633, 56.12%) (responded positively to item 79), found it difficult to maintain concentration while doing coursework (n=732, 64.9%) (responded positively to item 16), did not understand some course material (n=721, 64%) (responded positively to item 8), and were easily distracted from studies (n=688,61.1%) (responded positively to item 55). Analysis of the concentration subscale revealed that students have difficulties maintaining concentration on academic works.

Table 6: Descriptive statistics of the Self- testing subscale

Mean Std.

Deviation

1 2 3 4 5

Item 9. I try to identify potential test questions when reviewing my class material.

Count 22 16 224 665 200 3.89 .773

% 2.0% 1.4% 19.9% 59.0% 17.7%

Item 18. When preparing for an exam, I create questions that I think might be included.

Count 32 25 305 649 116 3.70 .794

% 2.8% 2.2% 27.1% 57.6% 10.3%

Item 33. I stop periodically while reading and mentally go over or review what was said.

Count 17 32 346 618 114 3.69 .750

% 1.5% 2.8% 30.7% 54.8% 10.1%

Item 74. After a class, I review my notes to help me understand the information that was presented.

Count 18 25 371 624 89 3.66 .724

% 1.6% 2.2% 32.9% 55.4% 7.9%

Item 37. I test myself to see if I understand what I am studying.

Count 29 35 398 589 76 3.57 .772

% 2.6% 3.1% 35.3% 52.3% 6.7%

Item 47. To help make sure I understand the material, I review my notes before the next class.

Count 34 37 377 617 62 3.56 .777

% 3.0% 3.3% 33.5% 54.7% 5.5%

Item 60. To check my understanding of the material in a course, I make up possible test questions and try to answer them.

Count 29 45 485 512 56 3.46 .763

% 2.6% 4.0% 43.0% 45.4% 5.0%

Item 25. I go over homework assignments when reviewing class materials.

Count 61 38 427 560 41 3.43 .843

% 5.4% 3.4% 37.9% 49.7% 3.6%

(10)

Table 6 describes the self-testing strategies of students. Mean scores of 10 items show that item 9, which is for identifying potential test questions when reviewing class material, has the highest rank. The second highest is item followed by items 33, 74, and 37, with mean scores of 3.69, 3.66, and 3.57. An analysis of the data also revealed that 885 students (76.7%) responded positively to item 9, trying to identify potential test questions when reviewing class material. 765 students (67.9%) responded positively to item 18, which means they create questions they think might be included when preparing for an exam. 732 students (64.9%) stop periodically while reading and mentally review what was said (responded positively to item 33). 713 students (63.3%) responded

positively to the item 74 that they review notes to help understand the information after a class. 665 students (59%) responded positively to item 37 to test themselves to check their understanding. 679 students (60.2%) review their notes before the next class to make sure they understand the material (responded positively to item 47).

568 students (50.4%) responded positively to item 60 that they make up possible test questions and try to answer them to check their understanding of the material in a course. 601 students (53.3%) go over homework assignments when reviewing class materials (responded positively to item 25). It can, therefore, be inferred that students in the sample know how to use specific methods to review school material for tests.

Table 7: Descriptive statistics of the Study Aids subscale

Mean Std.

Deviation

1 2 3 4 5

Item 12. My underlining is helpful when I review text material.

Count 19 6 107 510 485 4.27 .790

% 1.7% 0.5% 9.5% 45.3% 43.0%

Item 54. I use special study helps, such as italics and headings, that are in my textbook.

Count 24 6 149 614 334 4.09 .796

% 2.1% 0.5% 13.2% 54.5% 29.6%

Item 20. If there is a web site for my textbook, I use the information provided there to help me learn the material.

Count 3 20 221 638 245 3.98 .713

% 0.3% 1.8% 19.6% 56.6% 21.7%

Item 77. If I am having trouble studying, I ask another student or the instructor for help.

Count 19 16 290 617 185 3.83 .775

% 1.7% 1.4% 25.7% 54.7% 16.4%

Item 40. When they are available, I attend review sessions for my classes.

Count 38 22 243 657 167 3.79 .838

% 3.4% 2.0% 21.6% 58.3% 14.8%

Item 71. I try to find a study partner or study group for each of my classes.

Count 29 20 337 570 171 3.74 .828

% 2.6% 1.8% 29.9% 50.6% 15.2%

Item 66. When I am having trouble with my coursework, I do not go to the instructor for help.

Count 116 27 268 649 67 2.54 1.017

% 10.3% 2.4% 23.8% 57.6% 5.9%

Item 34. I go to the college learning center for help when I am having difficulty learning the material in a course.

Count 15 11 237 633 231 2.06 .755

% 1.3% 1.0% 21.0% 56.2% 20.5%

(*) 1: Not at all typical of me, 2: Not very typical of me, 3: Somewhat typical of me, 4: Fairly typical of me, 5: Very much typical of me.

(11)

Data in table 7 show how students used study-aids strategies. It can be seen clearly that item 12 has the highest mean score of 4.27 and is followed by items 54, 20, and 77, with the mean scores of 4.09, 3.98, and 3.83, respectively. Analysis of the data also showed that students often used or responded positively to the following aids: underlining

(n=995, 88.3%), italics and headings (n=948, 84.1%), websites (n=883, 78.3%), friends and teachers (n=802, 71.1%), review sessions (n=824, 73.1%), group study (n=741, 65.8&), etc. to review and better understand text material, and textbooks. It is noticeable that most of the students in the sample did not go to the instructor for help.

Table 8: Descriptive statistics of the Time Management subscale

1 2 3 4 5 Mean Std.

Deviation Item 7. When I decide to study, I set aside

a specific length of time and stick to it.

Count 26 13 313 599 176 3.79 .802

% 2.3% 1.2% 27.8% 53.1% 15.6%

Item 62. I set aside more time to study the subjects that are difficult for me.

Count 19 27 307 612 162 3.77 .783

% 1.7% 2.4% 27.2% 54.3% 14.4%

Item 13. When it comes to studying, procrastination is a problem for me.

Count 35 28 347 605 112 3.65 .814

% 3.1% 2.5% 30.8% 53.7% 9.9%

Item 4. I find it hard to stick to a study schedule.

Count 68 51 367 614 27 2.57 .864

% 6.0% 4.5% 32.6% 54.5% 2.4%

Item 59. I do not have enough time to study because I spend too much time with my friends.

Count 99 39 318 618 53 2.57 .968

% 8.8% 3.5% 28.2% 54.8% 4.7%

Item 31. I spread out my study times, so I

do not have to “cram” for a test. Count 58 41 369 560 99 3.53 .898

% 5.1% 3.6% 32.7% 49.7% 8.8%

Item 67. I end up “cramming” for every test.

Count 63 30 382 585 67 2.50 .871

% 5.6% 2.7% 33.9% 51.9% 5.9%

Item 28. I put off studying more than I should.

Count 54 32 356 628 57 2.47 .834

% 4.8% 2.8% 31.6% 55.7% 5.1%

In table 8, students replied to the items related to their time management strategies.

Based on the calculations, it is apparent that the mean score of item 7 was 3.79 (highest) and is followed by items 62, 13, and 4 with mean scores of 3.77, 3.65, and 2.57. The data

also showed the highest frequency of replies was with “Fairly typical of me” in eight items. More specially, of 1,127 students, there were 775 (68.7%) responded positively to the item 7 that they set aside a specific length of time when studying. While 774

(12)

student (68.7%) set aside more time to study the difficult subjects (responded positively to the item 62). More than half of the learners spread out their study times, so they do not have to “cram” for a test (responded positively to the item 31); and 717 students (63.65%) face procrastination when studying (responded positively to the item 13). Table 8 also reveals that more than half of the students who end up “cramming” for every

test find it hard to stick to a study schedule, do not have enough time to study because they spend too much time with friends, and put off studying.

Descriptive analysis of the skill component/scale

This section analyses three subscales of the skills component which includes information processing, selecting main ideas, and test strategies.

Table 9: Descriptive statistics of the Information Processing subscale

Mean Std.

Deviation

1 2 3 4 5

Item 15. When I am studying a topic, I try to make everything fit together logically.

Count 8 16 308 624 171 3.83 .719

% 0.7% 1.4% 27.3% 55.4% 15.2%

Item 44. I try to see how what I am studying would apply to my everyday life.

Count 12 20 304 606 185 3.83 .756

% 1.1% 1.8% 27.0% 53.8% 16.4%

Item 3. I try to find relationships between what I am learning and what I already know.

Count 9 33 287 632 166 3.81 .745

% 0.8% 2.9% 25.5% 56.1% 14.7%

Item 50. I try to relate what I am studying to my own experiences.

Count 14 22 362 620 109 3.70 .720

% 1.2% 2.0% 32.1% 55.0% 9.7%

Item 23. To help me learn the material presented in my classes, I relate it to my own general knowledge.

Count 9 27 380 614 97 3.68 .698

% 0.8% 2.4% 33.7% 54.5% 8.6%

Item 27. I translate what I am studying into my own words.

Count 32 29 357 578 131 3.66 .824

% 2.8% 2.6% 31.7% 51.3% 11.6%

Item 58. To help me learn the material, I complete at least some of the practice problems in my textbooks.

Count 18 23 421 586 79

% 1.6% 2.0% 37.4% 52.0% 7.0% 3.61 .718 Item 11. To help me remember new

principles we are learning in class, I practice applying them.

Count 50 37 441 538 61 3.46 .830

% 4.4% 3.3% 39.1% 47.7% 5.4%

Table 9 shows the mean and percentages representing the students’

responses to the information processing items. The results indicate that items 15 and 44 have the highest mean score of 3.83

followed by items 3, 50, and 23, with mean scores of 3.81, 3.70, and 3.68, respectively. Percentages representing the responses to the items in the subscale were also shown in table 9. The results specified

(13)

that most students gave positive responses that they try to make everything fit together logically (n=795, 70.6%). They try to see what they are studying would be applied to their everyday life (n=791, 70.2%), and try to find relationships between what they are learning and what they already know (n=798, 70.8%) (item 3), try to relate what they are studying to their own experiences (n=729, 64.7%)

(item 50), try to relate material they are learning to their own general knowledge (n=711, 63.1%) (item 23), try to translate what they are studying into their own words (n=709, 62.9%). Similarly, students complete at least some of the practice problems in their textbooks (n=665, 59%), and practice applying new principles they are learning in class (n=599, 53.1%) at the item 50 and 11.

Table 10: Descriptive statistics of the Select Main Ideas subscale

Mean Std.

Deviation

1 2 3 4 5

Item 10. During class discussions, I have trouble figuring out what is important enough to put in my notes.

Count 10 14 405 608 90 3.67 .678

% 0.9% 1.2% 35.9% 53.9% 8.0%

Item 64. During a demonstration in class, I can identify the important information I need to remember.

Count 15 26 532 500 54 3.49 .687

% 1.3% 2.3% 47.2% 44.4% 4.8%

Item 68. When I listen to class lectures, I am able to pick out the important information.

Count 24 27 541 484 51 3.45 .717

% 2.1% 2.4% 48.0% 42.9% 4.5%

Item 73. When completing a problem- solving task, it is difficult for me to pick out the important information.

Count 27 35 505 508 52 2.54 .740

% 2.4% 3.1% 44.8% 45.1% 4.6%

Item 57. It is hard for me to decide what is important to underline in a text.

Count 28 35 460 555 49 2.50 .741

% 2.5% 3.1% 40.8% 49.2% 4.3%

Item 53. When studying, I seem to get lost in the details and miss the important information.

Count 25 36 400 598 68 2.43 .750

% 2.2% 3.2% 35.5% 53.1% 6.0%

Item 21. I have difficulty identifying the important points in my reading.

Count 37 42 366 607 75 2.43 .807

% 3.3% 3.7% 32.5% 53.9% 6.7%

Item 24. There are so many details in my textbooks that it is difficult for me to find the main ideas.

Count 16 29 346 615 121 2.29 .748

% 1.4% 2.6% 30.7% 54.6% 10.7%

(14)

As shown in table 10, item 10, which is about trouble figuring out what is important enough to put in notes, has the highest mean score of 3.67 and is followed by items 64, 68 and 73 with mean scores of 3.49, 3.45 and 2.54 respectively, while item 24 stated “There are so many details in my textbooks that it is difficult for me to find the main ideas” and has the lowest mean score of 2.29. Besides that, 698 students (61.9%) have trouble figuring out what is important enough to put in notes (item 10). 560 students (49.7%) have difficulty picking out the important information when completing a problem- solving task (item 73). 604 students (53.5%) stated that it’s hard for them to

decide what is important to underline in a text (item 57). 666 students (69.1%) responded positively to item 53, that they seem to get lost in the details and miss the important information. 682 students (60.65%) responded positively to item 21 that they have difficulty identifying the important points in their reading. 736 students (65.3%) responded positively to item 24 that they have difficulty finding the main ideas because of so many details in textbooks. However, 554 students who can identify the vital information they need to remember (49.2%) (responded positively to item 64), and 535 students can pick out the critical information when they listen to class lectures (47.4%) (item 68).

Table 11: Descriptive statistics of the Test Strategies subscale

Mean Std.

Deviation

1 2 3 4 5

Item 52. I review my answers during essay tests to make sure I have made and supported my main points.

Count 9 7 186 606 319 4.08 .734

% 0.8% 0.6% 16.5% 53.8% 28.3%

Item 19. When I take a test, I realize I have studied the wrong material.

Count 147 38 278 641 23 2.69 1.052

% 13.0% 3.4% 24.7% 56.9% 2.0%

Item 5. In taking tests, writing papers, etc., I find I have misunderstood what was wanted and lose points because of it.

Count 92 52 321 624 38 2.59 .945

% 8.2% 4.6% 28.5% 55.4% 3.4%

Item 2. I am unable to summarize what I have just heard in a lecture or read in a textbook.

Count 56 45 421 579 26 2.58 .818

% 5.0% 4.0% 37.4% 51.4% 2.3%

Item 45. I have trouble understanding exactly what a test question is asking.

Count 57 53 397 592 28 2.57 .832

% 5.1% 4.7% 35.2% 52.5% 2.5%

Item 26. I have difficulty adapting my studying to different types of courses.

Count 40 41 374 603 69 2.45 .810

% 3.5% 3.6% 33.2% 53.5% 6.1%

Item 63. I do poorly on tests because I find it hard to plan my work within a short period of time.

Count 46 33 292 655 101 2.35 .843

% 4.1% 2.9% 25.9% 58.1% 9.0%

Item 38. When I study for a test, I have trouble figuring out just what to do to learn the material.

Count 29 28 345 623 102 2.34 .782

% 2.6% 2.5% 30.6% 55.3% 9.1%

(15)

The results of students’ responses to ten items concerning types of test strategies are shown in table 11. Calculations show that item 52, “I review my answers during essay tests to make sure I have made and supported my main points”, has the highest mean score of 4.08, followed by item 19,

“When I take a test, I realize I have studied the wrong material,” and then item 5, “In taking tests, writing papers, etc. I find I have misunderstood what was wanted and lose points because of it,” with mean scores of 2.69, and 2.59 respectively. Item 38, “When I study for a test, I have trouble figuring out just what to do to learn the material”, has the lowest mean score of 2.34. Remarkably, 82.1 % (n=925) responded positively to item 52 that they reviewed their essay tests answers to make sure they had made and supported their main points. However, 58.9% (n= 664) of the students admitted that they had studied the wrong material and realized when they took a test (item 19), while others reported misunderstanding what was wanted and so lost points in writing papers and tests (n=662, 59.6%) (item 5), are unable to summarize what they have just heard in a lecture or read in a textbook (n=605,53.7%) (item 2), have troubles in accurately understanding what a

test question is asking (n=620, 555) (item 45), have difficulties in adapting their studying to different types of courses (n=672, 67.1%) (item 26), find it hard to plan their work within a short period (n=756, 67.1%) (item 63), and have troubles in figuring out just what to do to learn the material (n=725, 64.4%) (item 38).

CONCLUSION

Overall, the current study aimed to explore students’ learning strategies. The results provide evidence that students are still facing many difficulties in adapting an effective learning strategy. Students in the sample show their weakness in all ten subscales of learning strategies, includes:

information processing, selecting main ideas, test strategies, anxiety, attitude, motivation, concentration, self-testing, time management, and study aid. Thus, university administrators should consider providing training and/or orientation to targeted students to prepare them for becoming strategic students. In addition, lectures should be aware of and enhance students’ skills and learning strategies for better academic performance. Finally, students should figure out the barriers to their learning and ways to master strategies.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The author has no conflicts of interest to declare.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I gratefully acknowledge the students at Nong Lam University who participated in this study.

REFERENCES

Loomis, K. D. (2000). Learning styles and asynchronous learning: Comparing the LASSI model to class performance. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 4(1), 23–32.

https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v4i1.1908.

(16)

Mohammadi, I., Thaghinejad, H., Suhrabi, Z., & Tavan, H. (2017). The correlation of learning and study strategies with academic achievement of nursing students. Journal of Basic Research in Medical Sciences, 4(3), 8–13.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language Learning strategies: what every teacher should knows. In New York. Boston,: Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Salehi, M., & Enayati, T. (2009). On The Relationship Between The Main Components Of Learning And Study Strategies (lass) And Academic Achievement Of Mazandaran Islamic Azad University Students. 1(3), 145–162.

Weinstein, C.E., & Palmer, D. R. (2002). LASSI User Manual (2nd ed.). Clearwater: H & H Publishing Company.

Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. (1983). The Teaching of Learning Strategies. Innovation Abstracts, 5(32), 2–4. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552540210420989

Weinstein, C. E., Palmer, D. R., & Acee, T. W. (2016). Learning and study strategies inventory LASSI third edition user’s manual 3rd Edition. H&H Publishing Company, Inc., 1–55. Retrieved from www.hhpublishing.com

Weinstein, C., Schulte, A., & Palmer, D. (1987). Learning and study strategies inventory (LASSI). Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing, 2. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=weinstein+lassi+1987&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=

0%2C10#0

Weinstein, Claire E, & Palmer, D. R. (2002). User’s manual for those administering the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory. Clearwater, FL: H&H Publishing.

Ngày nhận bài: 25/11/2020 Biên tập xong: 15/8/2021 Duyệt đăng: 20/8/2021