» Articles » PMID: 30349498

Academic Goal Profiles and Learning Strategies in Adolescence

Overview
Journal Front Psychol
Date 2018 Oct 24
PMID 30349498
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The objective of this study was to verify whether or not a combination of academic goals may be established in different profiles of high school students. Subsequently, the study examined if statistically significant differences exist between the profiles obtained with respect to learning strategies used by the students. The Achievement Goal Tendencies Questionnaire (AGTQ) and the Learning and Studies Skills Inventory-High School Version (LASSI-HS) were administered to a sample of 2,069 high school students aged 12-16 ( = 14.11; = 1.35) and which was formed by 1,073 girls and 996 boys. Four academic goal profiles were identified using latent class analysis: a group of students with a high academic goal (HAG) profile (668 students), a group of students with a low academic goal (LAG) profile (502 students), a group of students with a predominance of learning goals and achievement goals (LGAG) (489 students) and a final group of students with a predominance of social reinforcement goals and achievement goals (410 students). The results revealed statistically significant differences between the profiles obtained with respect to learning strategies because students from the combined LGAG and HAG profiles used more learning strategies that those in the LAG and Achievement Goals and Social Reinforcement (AGSR)groups. However, the relationship between these motivational profiles and the obtainment of a higher academic performance has not been proven and it should be the subject of study in future research. Consequently, this study can be used to help in the development of strategies and intervention programs to promote the use of multiple academic goals in high school students.

Citing Articles

Brain optimization with additional study time: potential brain differences between high- and low-performance college students.

Xu Z, Zhang P, Tu M, Zhang M, Lai Y Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1209881.

PMID: 37829066 PMC: 10566635. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1209881.


Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Version of the Goal Orientation Scales in Ecuadorian Undergraduate Students.

Barreno S, Veas A, Navas L, Castejon J Front Psychol. 2020; 11:597934.

PMID: 33329266 PMC: 7733920. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.597934.

References
1.
Valle A, Regueiro B, Nunez J, Rodriguez S, Pineiro I, Rosario P . Academic Goals, Student Homework Engagement, and Academic Achievement in Elementary School. Front Psychol. 2016; 7:463. PMC: 4814489. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00463. View

2.
Smeets K, Oostermeijer S, Lappenschaar M, Cohn M, van der Meer J, Popma A . Are Proactive and Reactive Aggression Meaningful Distinctions in Adolescents? A Variable- and Person-Based Approach. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2016; 45(1):1-14. PMC: 5219021. DOI: 10.1007/s10802-016-0149-5. View

3.
Prevatt F, Petscher Y, Proctor B, Hurst A, Adams K . The Revised Learning and Study Strategies Inventory: An Evaluation of Competing Models. Educ Psychol Meas. 2015; 66(3):448-458. PMC: 4557889. DOI: 10.1177/0013164405282454. View

4.
Seifert T . Characteristics of ego- and task-oriented students: a comparison of two methodologies. Br J Educ Psychol. 1995; 65 ( Pt 1):125-38. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1995.tb01136.x. View

5.
Schreiber J . Latent Class Analysis: An example for reporting results. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2016; 13(6):1196-1201. DOI: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2016.11.011. View