Abstract
This article describes the historical origins and development of a series of well-known study strategy inventories and seeks to identify their conceptual bases. The theories and evidence influencing the development of 6 contrasting instruments are considered before examining empirical evidence of similarities and differences between the measurement instruments. This analysis is tackled in three stages, looking first at inventories developed in the 1970s and 1980s that focused mainly on motivation, study methods, and learning processes. The more recent work that brought in mental models, metacognition, and self-regulation is then introduced, leading to a concluding section that discusses the conceptual bases of the whole set of inventories. The trends found in this research area are described and used to explore the current confusion of overlapping terms describing apparently similar aspects of learning and studying in higher education.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Atkinson, J. W., and Feather, N. T. (1966). A Theory of Achievement Motivation, Wiley, New York.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Beaty, L., Gibbs, G., and Morgan, A. (1997). Learning orientations and study contracts. In Marton, F., Hounsell, D. J., and Entwistle, N. J. (eds.), The Experience of Learning (2nd edn.), Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh, UK, pp. 72–88.
Biggs, J. B. (1970). Faculty pattern in study behaviour. Aust. J. Psychol. 22: 161–174.
Biggs, J. B. (1976). Dimensions of study behaviour: Another look at a.t.i. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 46: 68–80.
Biggs, J. B. (1979). Individual differences in study processes and the quality of learning outcomes. Higher Educ. 8: 381–394.
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying, Australian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne, Australia.
Biggs, J. B. (1993). What do inventories of students’ learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 63: 3–19.
Biggs, J. B. (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.
Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., and Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 71: 133–149.
Boekerts, M., Pintrich, P., and Zeidner, M. (eds.). (2000). Handbook of Self-Regulation, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Broadbent, D. E. (1966). The well-ordered mind. Am. Educ. Res. J. 3: 281–295.
Brown, W. F., and Holtzman, W. H. (1966). Manual of the Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes, Psychological Corporation, New York.
Cano-Garcia, F. C., and Justicia-Justicia, F. J. (1994). Learning strategies, styles and approaches: An analysis of their interrelationships. Higher Educ. 27: 239–260.
Craik, F. I. M., and Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 11: 671–684.
Craik, F. I. M., and Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. J. Exp. Psychol. (Gen.) 104: 268–294.
Dearing Committee. (1997). Higher Education in the Learning Society, National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (also HMSO), London.
Entwistle, N. J. (1997). Metacognitive and strategic awareness of learning processes and understanding. In Paper presented at the 7th EARLI conference, Athens, Greece.
Entwistle, N. J. (1998). Improving teaching through research on student learning. In Forest, J. J. F. (ed.), University Teaching: International Perspectives, Garland, New York, pp. 73–112.
Entwistle, N. J. (2000). Approaches to studying and levels of understanding: The influences of teaching and assessment. In Smart, J. C. (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. XV), Agathon, New York, pp. 156–218.
Entwistle, N. J., and Entwistle, D. M. (1970). The relationships between personality, study methods and academic performance. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 40: 132–141.
Entwistle, N. J., Hanley, M., and Hounsell, D. J. (1979). Identifying distinctive approaches to studying, Higher Educ. 8: 365–380.
Entwistle, N. J., and Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding Student Learning, Croom Helm, London.
Entwistle, N. J., Thompson, J. B., and Wilson, J. D. (1974). Motivation and study methods. Higher Educ. 3: 379–396.
Entwistle, N. J., and Waterston, S. (1988). Approaches to learning and levels of processing: A comparison of inventories derived from contrasting theoretical bases. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 58: 258–265.
Entwistle, N. J., and Wilson, J. D. (1977). Degrees of Excellence: The Academic Achievement Game, Hodder and Stoughton, London.
Fishbein, M. (1967). Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement, Wiley, New York.
Garcia, T. (1996). Self-regulation: An introduction. Learn. Individ. Differences 8: 161–163.
Geisler-Brenstein, E., and Schmeck, R. (1996). The revised inventory of learning processes: A multifaceted perspective on individual differences in learning. In Birenbaum, M., and Dochy, F. (eds.), Alternatives in Assessment of Achievements, Learning Processes, and Prior Knowledge, Kluwer Academic, Norwell, MA.
Janssen, P. J. (1996). Studaxology: The expertise students need to be effective in higher education. Higher Educ. 31: 117–141.
Marton, F., Dall'Alba, G., and Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions of learning. Int. J. Educ. Res. 19: 277–300.
Marton, F., and Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I. Outcome and process. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 46: 4–11.
Marton, F., and Säljö, R. (1997). Approaches to learning. In Marton, F., Hounsell, D. J., and Entwistle, N. J. (eds.), The Experience of Learning (2nd ed.), Scottish Academic, Edinburgh, UK, pp. 39–58.
McKeachie, W. J. (1990). Research on college teaching: The historical background. J. Educ. Psychol. 82: 189–200.
Messick, S. (1994). The matter of style: Manifestations of personality in cognition, learning and teaching. Educ. Psychol. 21: 121–136.
Meyer, J. H. F. (1991). Study orchestration: The manifestation, interpretation and consequences of contextualised approaches to studying. Higher Educ. 22: 297–316.
Meyer, J. H. F. (2000a). An overview of the development and application of the Reflections on Learning Inventory (RoLI). In Paper presented at the invitational RoLI Symposium, Imperial College, London, July 25.
Meyer, J. H. F. (2000b). Variation in contrasting forms of “memorising” and associated observables. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 70: 163–176.
Pask, G. (1976). Styles and strategies of learning. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 46: 128–148.
Pask, G. (1988). Learning strategies, teaching strategies and conceptual or learning style.In Schmeck, R. (ed.), Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, Plenum, New York, pp. 83–100.
Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A Scheme, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Pervin, L. A. (2001). Persons in context: Defining the issues, units, and processes. In Collis, J. M., and Messick, S. (eds.), Intelligence and Personality: Bridging the Gap in Theory and Measurement, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 307–317.
Phillips, D. C. (ed.). (2000). Constructivism in Education, National Society for the Study of Education, Chicago, IL.
Pintrich, P. R., and Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In Maehr, M. L., and Pintrich, P. R. (eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement: Vol. 7. Goals and Self-regulatory Processes, JAI, Greenwich, CT, pp. 371–402.
Pintrich, P. R., and Garcia, T. (1993). Intra-individual differences in students’ motivation and self-regulated learning. Ger. J. Educ. Psychol. 7: 99–107.
Pintrich, P. R., and Garcia, T. (1994). Self-regulated learning in college students: Knowl-edge, strategies and motivation. In Pintrich, P. R., Brown, D. R., and Weinstein, C.-E. (eds.), Student Motivation, Cognition and Learning, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 113–134.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., and McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, Ann Arbor, MI.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., and McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educ. Psychol. Meas. 53: 801–813.
Prosser, M., and Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching: The Experience of Higher Education, SRHE/Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education, Kogan Page, London.
Richardson, J. T. E. (2000). Researching Student Learning: Approaches to Studying in Campus-Based and Distance Education, SRHE/Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.
Säljö, R. (1979). Learning in the Learner's Perspective. I. Some Common-sense Conceptions (Report 76), University of Gothenburg, Department of Education, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Schmeck, R., Geisler-Brenstein, E., and Cercy, S. P. (1991). Self-concept and learning: The revised inventory of learning processes. Educ. Psychol. 11: 343–362.
Schmeck, R., Ribich, F., and Ramanaiah, N. (1977). The development of a self-report inventory for assessing individual differences in learning processes. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 1: 413–431.
Schunk, D. H., and Zimmerman, B. J. (eds.). (1994). Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance: Issues and Educational Applications, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Speth, C., and Brown, R. (1988). Study approaches, processes and strategies: Are three perspectives better than one? Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 58: 247–257.
Tait, H., and Entwistle, N. J. (1996). Identifying students at risk through ineffective study strategies. Higher Educ. 31: 97–116.
Tait, H., Entwistle, N. J., and McCune, V. (1998). ASSIST: A reconceptualisation of the Approaches to Studying Inventory. In Rust, C. (ed.), Improving Student Learning: Improving Students as Learners, Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford.
Van Rossum, E. J., and Schenk, S. (1984). The relationship between learning conception, study strategy and learning outcome. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 54: 73–83.
Vermunt, J. D. (1996). Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and strategies: A phenomenographic analysis. Higher Educ. 31: 25–50.
Vermunt, J. D. (1998). The regulation of constructive learning processes. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 68: 149–171.
Vermunt, J. D., and van Rijswijk, F. A. W. M. (1988). Analysis and development of students´ ý skill in self-regulated learning. Higher Educ. 17: 647–682.
Volet, S. E. (1997). Cognitive and affective variables in academic learning: The significance of direction and effort in students’ goals. Learn. Instr. 7: 235–254.
Wankowski, J. A. (1973). Temperament, Motivation and Academic Achievement, Birmingham University Educational Survey, Birmingham, UK.
Weinstein, C.-E. (1982). Training students to use elaboration learning strategies. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 7: 301–311.
Weinstein, C.-E., and Mayer, R. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In Wittrock, M. C. (ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd edn.), Macmillan, New York, pp. 315–327.
Weinstein, C.-E., and Meyer, D. K. (1991). Cognitive learning strategies and college teaching. In New Directions for Teaching and Learning (45), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Weinstein, C.-E., Schulte, A., and Palmer, D. (1987). Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI), H. and H., Clearwater, FL.
Wilson, K. L., Smart, R. M., and Watson, R. J. (1996). Gender differences in approaches to learning in first year psychology students. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 66: 59–71.
Wolters, C. A. (1998). Self-regulated learning and college students’ regulation of motivation. J. Educ. Psychol. 90: 224–235.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In Zimmerman, B. J., and Schunk, D. H. (eds.), Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theory, Research and Practice, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 1–26.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Entwistle, N., McCune, V. The Conceptual Bases of Study Strategy Inventories. Educational Psychology Review 16, 325–345 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0003-0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0003-0