A contextual approach is taken to investigate study strategies as used by students in regular settings of secondary schools. By closely connecting qualitative descriptions of students’ use of study strategies to a description of the individual and environmental context in which they use these strategies, we aim to explain their strategy choices. Moreover, we attempt to describe the metacognitive processes that students use in order to adapt their strategy choices to the demands and conditions of given study tasks.

Multiple case studies are currently performed in two schools. In each school, three tenth-grade classes engaged with different subject domains (history, geography, biology) are followed as students perform two types of study tasks that are common to Dutch secondary education – a “test preparation study task” and a “project based study task”.

Various types of data are collected, including field notes of lessons observed, instructional-learning materials and audio protocols of interviews and students thinking aloud while working on assignments. All of these data are systematically archived, annotated, and/or transcribed, depending on their expected value for the first of two major goals of this study: providing rich descriptions of interesting examples of students’ strategy motives and ways of adapting strategies to specific contexts. These descriptions are given both at a concrete level and an analytical level, the latter drawing from the theoretical model of strategy adaptation, which we have based on a literature review. The second major goal of this study is to describe students’ and teachers’ reactions to the concrete descriptions of examples in so called feedback sessions. We consider their reactions as a validation of the variables and language used in the model. Indeed, our ultimate goal is to develop a theoretical model that helps teachers and students to describe and reflect upon their own educational practice. 

Previous research on self-regulated studying shows that students do often not adapt their study strategies according to the tasks as set by their teacher (Broekkamp & Van Hout-Wolters, in press; Winne & Hadwin, 1998). For instance, students may spend a lot of attention to topics deemed irrelevant by the teachers. Similarly, students may choose a reproductive study strategy in order to prepare for a test that requires them to apply instead of reproduce knowledge. According to our model of strategy adaptation (Broekkamp & Van Hout-Wolters, in press) there are broadly three explanations for such discrepancies. First, students do not have the skills to execute the strategies required by their teacher. Second, students do have the skills to execute the required strategies but are not able to choose the appropriate strategy when needed. Third, students choose strategies that are more or equally appropriate than those intended by their teacher given their study goals and the particular situation in which they find themselves.  

To distinguish among the three kinds of explanation, research is needed that considers the contexts in which students choose and execute strategies. A contextual approach to the study of learning that explains why students choose particular study strategies, however, has been quite rare (cf. Mayer, 2003).

At the conference, we present the results of multiple case studies, in which students are followed when performing regular study tasks within the current school year. Our focus is on various types of study strategies, including learning strategies that students use to acquire information from text as well as writing strategies to report about acquired information (as are common in “project based study tasks”). By closely connecting qualitative descriptions of students’ use of study strategies to a description of the individual and environmental context in which they use these strategies, we aim to arrive at explanations for their strategy choices. Moreover, we attempt to describe the metacognitive processes that students use in order to make such strategy choices.

Method

Multiple case studies are performed in two schools. In each school, three tenth-grade classes engaged with different subject domains are followed as students perform two types of study tasks that are common to Dutch secondary education. A “test preparation study task”, in which students study a single textbook in order to prepare themselves for a test containing various questions, is contrasted with a “project based study task”, in which students study multiple texts in order to produce a product (e.g., essay, oral presentation, website) that is focused on a single “thriving question”. Within-student comparisons are made for the two study tasks in order to determine possible differences in study strategies and associated motivations and adaptation processes.

In addition, we make comparisons between students in three different subject domains and in two different schools. We contrast subject domains that are similar regarding their emphasis of text studying, but different in content – history, geography and biology. We compare a school with a ‘black’ and a ‘white’ student population, in terms of the number of students with immigrant parents. Both schools are located in Amsterdam.

Various types of data are collected, including field notes of lessons observed, instructional-learning materials (e.g., tests, text books, study guides, student notes) and audio protocols of interviews (with students or teachers) and students thinking aloud while working on assignments. The latter method is used for two students per class, who are paid for allowing a researcher to be present when making their homework.

All of these data are systematically archived, annotated, and/or transcribed, depending on their expected value for the first of two major goals of this study: providing rich descriptions of interesting examples of students’ strategy motives and ways of adapting strategies to specific contexts. These descriptions are given both at a concrete level and an analytical level, the latter drawing from the theoretical model of strategy adaptation, which we have based on a literature review (Broekkamp and Van Hout-Wolters, in press). The second major goal of this study is to describe student’ and teachers’ reactions to the concrete descriptions of examples in so called feedback sessions. We consider their reactions as a validation of the variables and language used in the model. Indeed, our ultimate goal is to develop a theoretical model that helps teachers and students to describe and reflect upon their own educational practice (Doyle, 1997). 

Results

As a prelimary result, we here briefly describe an example of four motivated students in a history class who worked together on a project report and showed very intensive reflection on the demands of the assignment before writing the report. This reflection followed from conflicting information in the assignment. However, neither the teacher nor other students of this class were sensitive to this problem. In the end, the reports of the four students were more attuned to the task demands and indeed got the highest grades. Still, the other students generally got satisfying grades too. This example illustrates processes, motivations and conditions that may be involved when students’ attempt to adapt strategies to meet demands of regular class assignments.

Literature

Broekkamp, H., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (In Press, Online First). Students’ adaptation of study strategies when preparing for classroom tests. Educational Psychology Review.

Doyle W. (1997). Heard any really good stories lately? A critique of the critics of narrative in educational research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 93–99.

Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.