In regressions predicting self-reported achievement, elaboration positively (Beta = 0.24) and cramming negatively (Beta = -0.30) predicted achievement, but only effort regulation and engagement remained significant in the combined model¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Strategy-only regression: elaboration (Beta = 0.24) and cramming (Beta = -0.30) were significant predictors of achievement, R2 = .18. → Rebecca Hey · Mark McDaniel · Flaviu A. Hodis 2024

Evidence¶

Rebecca Hey · Mark McDaniel · Flaviu A. Hodis 2024¶

Rebecca Hey · Mark McDaniel · Flaviu A. Hodis. (2024). How undergraduate students learn: uncovering interrelationships between factors that support self-regulated learning and strategy use. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09389-8

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Regression of self-reported achievement on rehearsal, elaboration, spacing, cramming, and self-testing (Table 6) in the NZ undergraduate survey; the article reports elaboration (Beta = 0.24) and cramming (Beta = -0.30) as the significant predictors, R2 = .18, and states "for every one standard deviation increase in elaboration, there is a 0.24 standard deviation increase in achievement".

"These results suggest that (all else being the same) for every one standard deviation increase in elaboration, there is a 0.24 standard deviation increase in achievement."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Self-control was not a significant predictor of any learning strategy or of self-reported achievement, and MCSR predicted only elaboration
• Cramming was negatively correlated with spacing (r = -0.54) and with all other learning strategies investigated — related
• Effort regulation and student engagement were the most consistent predictors of learning strategy use and self-reported achievement — related
• Students' strategy use formed mixed constellations: organisation and elaboration correlated strongly (r = 0.64), and effective strategies were also positively related to less effective ones such as rehearsal — related
• Students self-reported less cramming and more class preparation in the JiTT course than in their non-JiTT courses, except students receiving D or F grades — related