Estrategias cognitivas, etapa educativa y rendimiento académico

  1. Susana Rodríguez
  2. Isabel Piñeiro
  3. Bibiana Regueiro
  4. Iris Estevez
  5. Carolina Val
Revista:
Revista de Psicología y Educación

ISSN: 1699-9517

Ano de publicación: 2017

Volume: 12

Número: 1

Páxinas: 19-34

Tipo: Artigo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso aberto editor

Outras publicacións en: Revista de Psicología y Educación

Resumo

Cognitive strategies affect student understanding by activating and focusing their information processing. In this research we intend to verify if there are statistically significant differences in the use of different cognitive strategies among students of different educational stages and how cognitive strategies relate to academic performance. In a descriptive-correlational cross-sectional study, a questionnaire was administered to 265 students to estimate their use of different cognitive strategies. Two analyzes of variance were carried out, which allowed us to verify statistically significant differences in the use of selection, repetition and elaboration strategies among students of different stages and differences in the

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Chi, M.T.H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: a conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 73–105.
  • Chi, M.T.H., y Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.
  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2ª ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K.A., Marsh, E.J., Nathan, M.J., y Willingham, D.T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising direction from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science and the Public Interest, 14, 4–58.
  • Fiorella, L., y Mayer, R.E. (2015). Learning as a generative activity: Eight learning strategies that promote understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Gijbels, D., Van de Watering, G., Dochy, F., y Van den Bossche, P. (2005). The relationship between students’ approaches to learning and the assessment of learning outcomes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20(4), 327-341.
  • González, R, González-Pienda, J.A., Rodríguez, S., Núñez, J.C., y Valle, A. (2004). Estrategias y técnicas de estudio. Madrid: Pearson Prentice Hall
  • Hernández, P., y García, L. (1995). Estrategias Cognitivas de Aprendizaje (ECA). La Laguna: Departamento de Psicología Evolutiva y Psicobiología. Universidad de La Laguna.
  • Jairam, D., Kiewra, K. A., RogersKasson, S., Patterson-Hazley, M., y Marxhausen, K. (2014). SOAR versus SQ3R: A test of two study systems. Instructional Science, 42, 409–420.
  • Justicia, F., Pichardo, M. C., Cano, F., Berbén, A. B. G., y De la Fuente, J. (2008). The revised two-factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F): Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses at item level. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 23(3), 355-372.
  • Kiewra, K. A. (2005). Learn how to study and SOAR to success. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Marton, F., y Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4-11.
  • Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text: The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 357-371.
  • Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2ª ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2ª ed., pp. 43–71). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Mayer, R. E., y Wittrock, M. C. (2006). Problem solving. In P. Alexander, P. Winne, y G. Phye (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 287–303). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Novak, J. D. (2010). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Pressley, M., y Harris, K. R. (2006). Cognitive strategy instruction: From basic research to classroom instruction. In P. Alexander, y P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2ª ed). (pp. 265-286). San Diego, CA: AcademicPress.
  • Rodríguez, S., Valle, A., y Núñez, J. C. (2014). Enseñar a aprender. Estrategias, actividades y recursos instruccionales. Madrid: Pirámide.
  • Sweller, J., Ayres, P., y Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.
  • Valle, A., Rodríguez, S., González, R., Núñez, J. C., y González-Pienda, J. A. (2007). El estudiante eficaz. Aprendizaje y enseñanza de habilidades de estudio. Madrid: CCS.
  • Weinstein, C. E., y Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315-327). New York: Macmillan.
  • Winne, P. H., y Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, y A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-306). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Wittrock, M. C. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345–376.
  • Zimmerman, B. J., y Schunk, D. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2ª ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fonte de datos: Dialnet