- -

Study Approaches of Life Science Students Using the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F)

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

Study Approaches of Life Science Students Using the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre: Leva-Brondo;Cebol ...
Tamaño: 1.118Mb
Formato: PDF
Descripción: Versión editorial
Abrir
dc.contributor.author Leiva-Brondo, Miguel es_ES
dc.contributor.author Cebolla Cornejo, Jaime es_ES
dc.contributor.author Peiró Barber, Rosa Mª es_ES
dc.contributor.author Andrés-Colás, Nuria es_ES
dc.contributor.author Esteras Gómez, Cristina es_ES
dc.contributor.author Ferriol Molina, María es_ES
dc.contributor.author Merle Farinós, Hugo Basilio es_ES
dc.contributor.author Díez Niclós, Mª José Teresa De Jesús es_ES
dc.contributor.author Pérez De Castro, Ana María es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2021-06-12T03:34:07Z
dc.date.available 2021-06-12T03:34:07Z
dc.date.issued 2020-07 es_ES
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/167875
dc.description.abstract [EN] Students' approaches to learning can vary between students of different ages, genders, years, degrees, or cultural contexts. The aim of this study was to assess the approaches to learning of different students of life science degrees. The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) has been used to assess the approaches to learning of 505 students of thirteen different subjects of four different degrees at Universitat Politecnica de Valencia in order to study the factors that influence their approaches. Results show a higher deep approach of the students. Differences were observed between subjects and gender, not related to level (bachelor or master) or year. The item reliability analysis showed a high consistency for the main scales, but not for the secondary scales of the R-SPQ-2F questionnaire. High correlation between the deep and surface scales were observed. These data can provide more information to the teachers, which may help them to develop strategies focused on promoting a deeper approach to learning for the students, more adapted to their subject, level, and year. es_ES
dc.description.sponsorship This research was partially funded by innovation educative projects (PIME/2017/A/016/A and PIME/19-20/168) by Vice-Rectorate for Studies, Quality and Accreditation of Universitat Politecnica de Valencia (UPV, Valencia, Spain). es_ES
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher MDPI AG es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof Education Sciences es_ES
dc.rights Reconocimiento (by) es_ES
dc.subject Deep learning es_ES
dc.subject Biotechnology es_ES
dc.subject Student learning approach es_ES
dc.subject.classification BIOQUIMICA Y BIOLOGIA MOLECULAR es_ES
dc.subject.classification BOTANICA es_ES
dc.subject.classification GENETICA es_ES
dc.title Study Approaches of Life Science Students Using the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.3390/educsci10070173 es_ES
dc.relation.projectID info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/UPV//PIME%2F19-20%2F168/ es_ES
dc.relation.projectID info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/UPV//PIME%2F2017%2FA%2F016%2FA/ es_ES
dc.rights.accessRights Abierto es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Departamento de Biotecnología - Departament de Biotecnologia es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Departamento de Ecosistemas Agroforestales - Departament d'Ecosistemes Agroforestals es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Leiva-Brondo, M.; Cebolla Cornejo, J.; Peiró Barber, RM.; Andrés-Colás, N.; Esteras Gómez, C.; Ferriol Molina, M.; Merle Farinós, HB.... (2020). Study Approaches of Life Science Students Using the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F). Education Sciences. 10(7):1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10070173 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod S es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10070173 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 1 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 18 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 10 es_ES
dc.description.issue 7 es_ES
dc.identifier.eissn 2227-7102 es_ES
dc.relation.pasarela S\415476 es_ES
dc.contributor.funder Universitat Politècnica de València es_ES
dc.description.references Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The Challenges of Defining and Measuring Student Engagement in Science. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1-13. doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924 es_ES
dc.description.references Jeong, J. S., González-Gómez, D., Conde-Núñez, M. C., & Gallego-Picó, A. (2019). EXAMINATION OF STUDENTS’ ENGAGEMENT WITH R-SPQ-2F OF LEARNING APPROACH IN FLIPPED SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE COURSE. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(6), 880-891. doi:10.33225/jbse/19.18.880 es_ES
dc.description.references Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. doi:10.3102/00346543074001059 es_ES
dc.description.references Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 579-595. doi:10.1037/a0032690 es_ES
dc.description.references Montenegro, A. (2017). Understanding the Concept of Agentic Engagement. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 19(1), 117. doi:10.14483/calj.v19n1.10472 es_ES
dc.description.references QS Enrolment Solutions https://www.internationalstudentsurvey.com/international-student-survey-2017/ es_ES
dc.description.references 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), 133-149. doi:10.1348/000709901158433 es_ES
dc.description.references MARTON, F., & SÄLJÖ, R. (1976). ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING: I-OUTCOME AND PROCESS*. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4-11. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x es_ES
dc.description.references MARTON, F., & SÄALJÖ, R. (1976). ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING-II OUTCOME AS A FUNCTION OF THE LEARNER’S CONCEPTION OF THE TASK. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(2), 115-127. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02304.x es_ES
dc.description.references Grabinger, R. S., & Dunlap, J. C. (2011). Rich environments for active learning: a definition. Research in Learning Technology, 3(2). doi:10.3402/rlt.v3i2.9606 es_ES
dc.description.references Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Becoming a self-regulated learner: Which are the key subprocesses? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 307-313. doi:10.1016/0361-476x(86)90027-5 es_ES
dc.description.references BIGGS, J. B. (1978). INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP DIFFERENCES IN STUDY PROCESSES. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 48(3), 266-279. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1978.tb03013.x es_ES
dc.description.references Schmeck, R. R., Ribich, F., & Ramanaiah, N. (1977). Development of a Self-Report Inventory for Assessing Individual Differences in Learning Processes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 413-431. doi:10.1177/014662167700100310 es_ES
dc.description.references Booth, P., Luckett, P., & Mladenovic, R. (1999). The quality of learning in accounting education: the impact of approaches to learning on academic performance. Accounting Education, 8(4), 277-300. doi:10.1080/096392899330801 es_ES
dc.description.references Eley, M. G. (1992). Differential adoption of study approaches within individual students. Higher Education, 23(3), 231-254. doi:10.1007/bf00145015 es_ES
dc.description.references Abhayawansa, S., & Fonseca, L. (2010). Conceptions of Learning and Approaches to Learning—A Phenomenographic Study of a Group of Overseas Accounting Students from Sri Lanka. Accounting Education, 19(5), 527-550. doi:10.1080/09639284.2010.502651 es_ES
dc.description.references Zhang, L.-F. (2000). University Students’ Learning Approaches in Three Cultures: An Investigation of Biggs’s 3P Model. The Journal of Psychology, 134(1), 37-55. doi:10.1080/00223980009600847 es_ES
dc.description.references Richardson, J. T. E. (1994). Cultural specificity of approaches to studying in higher education: A literature survey. Higher Education, 27(4), 449-468. doi:10.1007/bf01384904 es_ES
dc.description.references Hall *, M., Ramsay, A., & Raven, J. (2004). Changing the learning environment to promote deep learning approaches in first-year accounting students. Accounting Education, 13(4), 489-505. doi:10.1080/0963928042000306837 es_ES
dc.description.references Duff *, A. (2004). Understanding academic performance and progression of first-year accounting and business economics undergraduates: the role of approaches to learning and prior academic achievement. Accounting Education, 13(4), 409-430. doi:10.1080/0963928042000306800 es_ES
dc.description.references Davidson, R. A. (2002). Relationship of study approach and exam performance. Journal of Accounting Education, 20(1), 29-44. doi:10.1016/s0748-5751(01)00025-2 es_ES
dc.description.references Salamonson, Y., Weaver, R., Chang, S., Koch, J., Bhathal, R., Khoo, C., & Wilson, I. (2013). Learning approaches as predictors of academic performance in first year health and science students. Nurse Education Today, 33(7), 729-733. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.01.013 es_ES
dc.description.references Entwistle, N., & Entwistle, D. (2003). Preparing for Examinations: The interplay of memorising and understanding, and the development of knowledge objects. Higher Education Research & Development, 22(1), 19-41. doi:10.1080/0729436032000056562 es_ES
dc.description.references Frăsineanu, E. S. (2013). Approach to Learning Process: Superficial Learning and Deep Learning at Students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 76, 346-350. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.125 es_ES
dc.description.references Justicia, F., Pichardo, M. C., Cano, F., Berbén, A. B. G., & 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. doi:10.1007/bf03173004 es_ES
dc.description.references Fryer, L. K., Ginns, P., Walker, R. A., & Nakao, K. (2011). The adaptation and validation of the CEQ and the R-SPQ-2F to the Japanese tertiary environment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 549-563. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02045.x es_ES
dc.description.references Gurpinar, E., Kulac, E., Tetik, C., Akdogan, I., & Mamakli, S. (2013). Do learning approaches of medical students affect their satisfaction with problem-based learning? Advances in Physiology Education, 37(1), 85-88. doi:10.1152/advan.00119.2012 es_ES
dc.description.references Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E., Litmanen, T., & Hirsto, L. (2010). Students’ approaches to learning and their experiences of the teaching-learning environment in different disciplines. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 269-282. doi:10.1348/000709909x476946 es_ES
dc.description.references Gijbels, D., Van de Watering, G., Dochy, F., & 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. doi:10.1007/bf03173560 es_ES
dc.description.references Mogre, V., & Amalba, A. (2014). Assessing the reliability and validity of the Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ2F) in Ghanaian medical students. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 11, 19. doi:10.3352/jeehp.2014.11.19 es_ES
dc.description.references Mok, C. K. F., Dodd, B., & Whitehill, T. L. (2009). Speech-language pathology students’ approaches to learning in a problem-based learning curriculum. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11(6), 472-481. doi:10.3109/17549500903003052 es_ES
dc.description.references May, W., Chung, E.-K., Elliott, D., & Fisher, D. (2012). The relationship between medical students’ learning approaches and performance on a summative high-stakes clinical performance examination. Medical Teacher, 34(4), e236-e241. doi:10.3109/0142159x.2012.652995 es_ES
dc.description.references Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography ? Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177-200. doi:10.1007/bf00132516 es_ES
dc.description.references Graham, N. C., Entwistle, N., & Ramsden, P. (1984). Understanding Student Learning. British Journal of Educational Studies, 32(3), 284. doi:10.2307/3121589 es_ES
dc.description.references Wilson, K. L., Smart, R. M., & Watson, R. J. (1996). Gender differences in approaches to learning in first year psychology students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66(1), 59-71. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1996.tb01176.x es_ES
dc.description.references Boyle, E. A., Duffy, T., & Dunleavy, K. (2003). Learning styles and academic outcome: The validity and utility of Vermunt’s Inventory of Learning Styles in a British higher education setting. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(2), 267-290. doi:10.1348/00070990360626976 es_ES
dc.description.references Fox, R. A., McManus, I. C., & Winder, B. C. (2001). The shortened Study Process Questionnaire: An investigation of its structure and longitudinal stability using confirmatory factor analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(4), 511-530. doi:10.1348/000709901158659 es_ES
dc.description.references Zeegers, P. (2001). Approaches to learning in science: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 115-132. doi:10.1348/000709901158424 es_ES
dc.description.references Snelgrove, S., & Slater, J. (2003). Approaches to learning: psychometric testing of a study process questionnaire. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 43(5), 496-505. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02747.x es_ES
dc.description.references ROSSUM, E. J., & SCHENK, S. M. (1984). THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNING CONCEPTION, STUDY STRATEGY AND LEARNING OUTCOME. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 54(1), 73-83. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1984.tb00846.x es_ES
dc.description.references Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Higher Education, 37(1), 57-70. doi:10.1023/a:1003548313194 es_ES
dc.description.references Crawford, K., Gordon, S., Nicholas, J., & Prosser, M. (1998). Qualitatively different experiences of learning mathematics at university. Learning and Instruction, 8(5), 455-468. doi:10.1016/s0959-4752(98)00005-x es_ES
dc.description.references Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST) (Incorporating the Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory—RASI) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260291730_Approaches_and_Study_Skills_Inventory_for_Students_ASSIST_incorporating_the_Revised_Approaches_to_Studying_Inventory_-_RASI es_ES
dc.description.references Immekus, J. C., & Imbrie, P. K. (2009). A Test and Cross-Validation of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire Factor Structure Among Western University Students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(3), 495-510. doi:10.1177/0013164409355685 es_ES
dc.description.references Socha, A., & Sigler, E. A. (2014). Exploring and «reconciling» the factor structure for the Revised Two-factor Study Process Questionnaire. Learning and Individual Differences, 31, 43-50. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.12.010 es_ES
dc.description.references Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., & Lewis, M. (2007). Personality and approaches to learning predict preference for different teaching methods. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(3), 241-250. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2006.12.001 es_ES
dc.description.references Furnham, A., Monsen, J., & Ahmetoglu, G. (2009). Typical intellectual engagement, Big Five personality traits, approaches to learning and cognitive ability predictors of academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 769-782. doi:10.1348/978185409x412147 es_ES
dc.description.references Phan, H. P. (2017). Multiple regression analysis of epistemological beliefs, learning approaches, and self-regulated learning. Electronic Journal of Research in Education Psychology, 6(14). doi:10.25115/ejrep.v6i14.1262 es_ES
dc.description.references Stes, A., De Maeyer, S., & Van Petegem, P. (2013). Examining the Cross-Cultural Sensitivity of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) and Validation of a Dutch Version. PLoS ONE, 8(1), e54099. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054099 es_ES
dc.description.references Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 243-260. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.06.001 es_ES
dc.description.references Xie, Q., & Zhang, L. (2014). Demographic Factors, Personality, and Ability as Predictors of Learning Approaches. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(4), 569-577. doi:10.1007/s40299-014-0202-5 es_ES
dc.description.references Severiens, S., & Dam, G. (1998). A multilevel meta-analysis of gender differences in learning orientations. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(4), 595-608. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1998.tb01315.x es_ES
dc.description.references Rubin, M., Scevak, J., Southgate, E., Macqueen, S., Williams, P., & Douglas, H. (2018). Older women, deeper learning, and greater satisfaction at university: Age and gender predict university students’ learning approach and degree satisfaction. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 11(1), 82-96. doi:10.1037/dhe0000042 es_ES
dc.description.references Gow, L., & Kember, D. (1990). Does higher education promote independent learning? Higher Education, 19(3), 307-322. doi:10.1007/bf00133895 es_ES
dc.description.references Richardson, J. T. E., & King, E. (1998). Adult Students in Higher Education. The Journal of Higher Education, 69(1), 65-88. doi:10.1080/00221546.1998.11775125 es_ES
dc.description.references Richardson, J. T. E. (2013). Approaches to studying across the adult life span: Evidence from distance education. Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 74-80. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.04.012 es_ES
dc.description.references Harper, G., & Kember, D. (1986). Approaches to Study of Distance Education Students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 212-222. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.1986.tb00510.x es_ES
dc.description.references Leung, D. Y. P., Ginns, P., & Kember, D. (2008). Examining the Cultural Specificity of Approaches To Learning in Universities in Hong Kong and Sydney. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39(3), 251-266. doi:10.1177/0022022107313905 es_ES
dc.description.references Entwistle, N., & Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments. Higher Education, 19(2), 169-194. doi:10.1007/bf00137106 es_ES
dc.description.references Leung, S. F., Mok, E., & Wong, D. (2008). The impact of assessment methods on the learning of nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 28(6), 711-719. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2007.11.004 es_ES
dc.description.references Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive Conceptions of Learning. Review of Educational Research, 56(4), 411-436. doi:10.3102/00346543056004411 es_ES
dc.description.references Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 57-75. doi:10.1080/0729436990180105 es_ES
dc.description.references Berger, J.-L., & Karabenick, S. A. (2011). Motivation and students’ use of learning strategies: Evidence of unidirectional effects in mathematics classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 416-428. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.06.002 es_ES
dc.description.references Zakariya. (2019). Study Approaches in Higher Education Mathematics: Investigating the Statistical Behaviour of an Instrument Translated into Norwegian. Education Sciences, 9(3), 191. doi:10.3390/educsci9030191 es_ES
dc.description.references Munshi, F., Al-Rukban, M., & Al-Hoqail, I. (2012). Reliability and validity of an Arabic version of the revised two-factor study process questionnaire R-SPQ-2F. Journal of Family and Community Medicine, 19(1), 33. doi:10.4103/2230-8229.94010 es_ES
dc.description.references Shaik, S. A., Almarzuqi, A., Almogheer, R., Alharbi, O., Jalal, A., & Alorainy, M. (2017). Assessing Saudi medical students learning approach using the revised two-factor study process questionnaire. International Journal of Medical Education, 8, 292-296. doi:10.5116/ijme.5974.7a06 es_ES
dc.description.references Watkins, D. (1986). The Approaches to Learning of Australian Tertiary Students: A Replication. Higher Education Research & Development, 5(2), 185-190. doi:10.1080/0729436860050207 es_ES
dc.description.references Jeong, J. S., González-Gómez, D., & Cañada-Cañada, F. (2019). How does a flipped classroom course affect the affective domain toward science course? Interactive Learning Environments, 29(5), 707-719. doi:10.1080/10494820.2019.1636079 es_ES
dc.description.references Wolf, E. J., Harrington, K. M., Clark, S. L., & Miller, M. W. (2013). Sample Size Requirements for Structural Equation Models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(6), 913-934. doi:10.1177/0013164413495237 es_ES
dc.description.references Moulaye M’Hamed Taher, A., Chen, J., & Yao, W. (2011). Key predictors of creative MBA students’ performance. Journal of Technology Management in China, 6(1), 43-68. doi:10.1108/17468771111105659 es_ES
dc.description.references Dong, N., Bai, M., Zhang, H., & Zhang, J. (2019). Approaches to learning IFRS by Chinese accounting students. Journal of Accounting Education, 48, 1-11. doi:10.1016/j.jaccedu.2019.04.002 es_ES
dc.description.references Selectividad 2018: Estas Son las Carreras Con las Notas de Corte Más Altas https://www.abc.es/sociedad/abci-selectividad-2018-estas-diez-carreras-notas-corte-mas-altas-201806041503_noticia.html es_ES
dc.description.references Universitat Politècnica de València. Notas de Corte Curso 2018-19 http://www.upv.es/pls/oalu/sic_futuroalumno.notascorte?p_idioma=c es_ES
dc.description.references Notas de Corte 2018 https://elpais.com/especiales/universidades/titulacion/notas/biotecnologia/36 es_ES
dc.description.references Fryer, L. K., & Vermunt, J. D. (2017). Regulating approaches to learning: Testing learning strategy convergences across a year at university. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 21-41. doi:10.1111/bjep.12169 es_ES
dc.description.references Mujeres Matriculadas y Egresadas en Enseñanza de Grado y de Primer y segundo Ciclo por Rama de Enseñanza https://www.ine.es/jaxiT3/Datos.htm?t=12722 es_ES
dc.description.references Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Relations between student learning patterns and personal and contextual factors and academic performance. Higher Education, 49(3), 205-234. doi:10.1007/s10734-004-6664-2 es_ES
dc.description.references Chan, Y.-K., & Kan, A. C. N. (2017). The Interplay between Gender, Learning Approaches and Academic Performance in Chinese Sub-Degree and Degree Students. Global Journal of Educational Studies, 3(1), 10. doi:10.5296/gjes.v3i1.10781 es_ES
dc.description.references Scouller, K. (1998). Higher Education, 35(4), 453-472. doi:10.1023/a:1003196224280 es_ES
dc.description.references Bobe, B. J., & Cooper, B. J. (2017). The effect of language proficiency on approaches to learning and satisfaction of undergraduate accounting students. Accounting Education, 28(2), 149-171. doi:10.1080/09639284.2017.1396481 es_ES
dc.description.references Hundleby, J. D., & Nunnally, J. (1968). Psychometric Theory. American Educational Research Journal, 5(3), 431. doi:10.2307/1161962 es_ES
dc.description.references Vergara-Hernández, C., Simancas-Pallares, M., & Carbonell-Muñoz, Z. (2019). Psychometric properties of the revised two-factor study process questionnaire r-spq-2f - spanish version. Duazary, 16(2), 205-218. doi:10.21676/2389783x.2744 es_ES
dc.description.references Vaughan, B. (2018). A Rasch analysis of the Revised Study Process Questionnaire in an Australian osteopathy student cohort. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 56, 144-153. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.12.003 es_ES
dc.description.references Martyn, J., Terwijn, R., Kek, M. Y. C. A., & Huijser, H. (2014). Exploring the relationships between teaching, approaches to learning and critical thinking in a problem-based learning foundation nursing course. Nurse Education Today, 34(5), 829-835. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.023 es_ES
dc.description.references López-Aguado, M., & Gutiérrez-Provecho, L. (2018). Checking the underlying structure of R-SPQ-2F using covariance structure analysis / Comprobación de la estructura subyacente del R-SPQ-2F mediante análisis de estructura de covarianza. Cultura y Educación, 30(1), 105-141. doi:10.1080/11356405.2017.1416787 es_ES
dc.description.references Merino Soto, C., & Kumar Pradhan, R. (2013). VALIDACIÓN ESTRUCTURAL DEL R-SPQ-2F: UN ANÁLISIS FACTORIAL CONFIRMATORIO. Revista Digital de Investigación en Docencia Universitaria, (1), 111. doi:10.19083/ridu.7.190 es_ES


Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem