The motivated strategies for learning questionnaire: A measure for students' general motivational beliefs and learning strategies?

Asia-Pacific Education Researcher

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 357-369

  Rotgans, Jerome I ^a   Schmidt, Henk G ^b  

^a Republic Polytechnic   (Singapore)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Confirmatory factor analysis; Construct validity; Motivated strategies for learning questionnaire; Predictive validity; Self regulated learning; Student motivation

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957103917     PISSN: 01195646     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3860/taper.v19i2.1603     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Arbuckle, J. L. (2003). Amos 5.0 Update to the Amos user's guide. Chicago: SmallWaters Corp.
2. Bandalos, D. L., Finney, S. J., & Geske, J. A. (2003). A model of statistics performance based on achievement goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 604-616.
3. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238-246.
4. Biggs, J. (1987). Study Process Questionnaire Manual. Student approaches to learning and studying. Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd.
5. Biggs, J. (1993). What do inventories of students' learning process really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 3-19.
6. Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The revised two factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 133-155.
7. Bong, M. (2004). Academic motivation in self-efficacy, task value, achievement goal orientations, and attributional beliefs. Journal of Educational Research, 97(6), 287-298.
8. Bong, M., & Hocevar, D. (2002). Measuring self-efficacy: Multitrait-multimethod comparison of scaling procedures. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(2), 143-172.
9. Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15(1), 1-40.
10. Brookhart, S. M., & Durkin, D. T. (2003). Classroom assessment, student motivation, and achievement in high school social studies classes. Applied Measurement in Education, 16(1), 27-54.
11. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with Amos: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc Inc.
12. Dyne, A., Taylor, P., & Boulton-Lewis, G. (1994). Information processing and the learning context: An analysis from recent perspectives in cognitive psychology. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64(3), 359-372.
13. Eccles, J. S. (Ed.). (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviour. San Francisco: Freeman.
14. Entwistle, N. J., & McCune, V. (2004). The conceptual bases of Study Strategy Inventories. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 325-345.
15. Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.
16. Entwistle, N. J., & Waterston, S. (1988). Approaches to studying and levels of processing in university students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 258.
17. Fan, X., Thompson, B., & Wang, L. (1999). Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 56-83.
18. Grossman, P., & Stodolsky, S. (1995). Content as context: The role of school subjects in secondary teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(8), 5-11.
19. Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (2001). Rethinking construct reliability within latent systems. In R. Cudeck, S. d. Toit & D. Sörbom (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future - A festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog (pp. 195-216). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
20. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
21. Lonka, K., Olkinuora, E., & Mäkinen, J. (2004). Aspects and prospects of measuring studying and learning in higher education. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 301-323.
22. Mäkinen, J., Olkinuora, E., & Lonka, K. (Eds.). (2002). Orientations to studying in Finnish higher education. Comparison of study orientations in university and vocational higher education. Tampere, Finland: Tampere University Press.
23. Ommundsen, Y. (2003). Implicit theories of ability and self-regulation strategies in physical education classes. Educational Psychology, 23(2), 141-157.
24. Pintrich, P. R. (1988a). A process-oriented view of student motivation and cognition. In J. Stark & L. Mets (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning through research: New directions for institutional research (Vol. 57, pp. 65-79). San Francisco: Jossy-Bass.
25. Pintrich, P. R. (1988b). Student learning and college teaching. In R. E. Young & K. E. Eble (Eds.), College teaching and learning: Preparing for new commitments. New directions for teaching and learning (Vol. 33, pp. 71-86). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26. Pintrich, P. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. Advances in motivation and achievement, 6, 117-160.
27. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
28. Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407.
29. Pintrich, P. R., Simith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(3), 801.
30. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.
31. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist 26(3), 207-231.
32. Seibert, D. C. (2002). Effects of engagement principles in a video teleconferencing environment on the development of knowledge, motivation and clinical expertise. Dissertation Abstract International 63(6), 2136.
33. Stodolsky, S., & Grossman, P. (1995). The impact of subject matter on curricular activity: An analysis of five academic subjects. American Education Research Journal, 32(2), 227-249.
34. Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (2004). Development and use of the Approaches to Teaching Inventory. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 409.
35. Vermetten, Y. J., Lodewijks, H. G., & Vermunt, J. D. (1999). Consistency and variability of learning strategies in different university courses. Higher Education, 37(1), 1-21.
36. Vermunt, J. D. (1998). The regulation of constructive learning processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(2), 149-172.
37. Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49-77.
38. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analyses. Developmental Review, 12(3), 165-310.
39. Wolters, C. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms. Instructional Sciences, 26(1-2), 27-47.
40. Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R., & Coppola, B. (2003). Skill and will: The role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1081-1094.