Learning strategies of Alberta college students

by Rita Charlene Kolody

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education
Montana State University
© Copyright by Rita Charlene Kolody (1997)
Abstract:
Increasingly adult educators are turning to the concept of learning strategies as a means of exploring
individual differences in learning. Learners use various strategies to accomplish their learning needs.
Using the Self-Knowledge Inventory of Lifelong Learning Strategies (SKILLS), researchers have
found that various groups of learners can be distinguished by learning strategies. This study expanded
the learning strategies investigation to adult learners at five two-year colleges in Alberta. The purpose
of the study was to identify the learning strategies used by students at these colleges, to investigate the
relationship between learning strategies and demographic variables, and to explore patterns of learning
of distinct groups that existed in the sample.
The sample included 1,143 learners. Differences in the use of learning strategies were found when the
participants were grouped according to gender, type of program, age, and grade point level. Several
multivariate analyses using discriminant analysis failed to produce any powerful functions although
weak differences were found in the areas of grades, gender, program, and age.
The multivariate technique of cluster analysis, however, did produce a solution with five clear and
distinct clusters. Navigators use successful role models to develop their formula for success and are
focused learners who chart a course and follow it. Monitors are comparative learners who measure their
success according to others' standards. Networkers are learners who constantly adjust their learning
strategies and make heavy use of external aids and human resources. Critical Thinkers are the learners
who make heavy use of all critical thinking strategies and of memory applications. Engagers are the
passionate learners who love to learn and learn with feeling.
The two major conclusions from this study are that distinct groups of learners exist in adult learning
situations and that learning strategies are not linked to various demographic variables. Imposing sense
upon the data through preconceived groupings with discriminant analysis was not the best way to
uncover differences in uses of learning strategies. Instead, cluster analysis and supportive qualitative
techniques which allow the data to expose its own patterns were more productive. Based upon the
groups found in this way, recommendations were made for teachers, students, and researchers.
 LEARNING STRATEGIES OF ALBERTA

COLLEGE STUDENTS

by

Rita Charlene Kolody

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree

of

Doctor of Education

MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY— BOZEMAN

Bozeman, Montana
April 1997
3)
ii

APPROVAL

of a thesis submitted by

Rita Charlene Kolody

This thesis has been read by each member of the

graduate committee and has been found to be satisfactory
regarding content, English usage, format, citations,
bibliographic style, and consistency, and is ready for
submission to the College of Graduate Studies.

Il-cIl
Date
Chairperson, Graduate Committee

Approved for the Major Department

Date

Approved for the College of Graduate Studies

Dr. Robert L. Brown Date

Graduate Dean
 iii

STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO USE

In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for a doctoral degree at Montana State
University— Bozeman, I agree that the Library shall make it
available to borrowers under rules of the Library. I

further agree that copying of this thesis is allowable only

for scholarly purposes, consistent with "fair use" as
prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Requests for

extensive copying or reproduction of this thesis should be

referred to University Microfilms International, 300 North

Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106, to whom I have

granted "the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute my

dissertation for sale in and from microform or electronic
format, along with the right to reproduce and distribute my
abstract in any format in whole or in part."

Signature

Date
 IL I I I

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My utmost appreciation to Dr. Gary Conti, my graduate

chair, for his expert guidance and encouragement from the
inception of this project through its completion. His

wisdom, friendship, and regard for professional development

were fundamental to my success. I also wish to thank my "

graduate committee. Dr. R. Fellenz,. Dr. D. Herbster, Dr. W.

Lieshoff, Dr. N . Millikin, and Ray Babcock, for their [
insight and valued direction.

A special note of gratitude to my husband, Gary, and

children, Christopher, Sara, and Jameson, for their

treasured love, patience, and support. Love also to my

parents, Neil and June Judkins, whose precious lessons in

life initiated a quest for discovery.

Thank you to Linda for technical support, to the

research assistants at Grande Prairie College, Keyano

College, Mount Royal College, and Red Deer College for

coordinating the study at their sites, and to the many

faculty and students at each of the five colleges who

participated in the study. Also, much appreciation to my

colleagues at Medicine Hat College and. in the MSU Adult

Education Program for their support of my research.

 V

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF T A B L E S ...................................... viii
ABSTRACT . ......................................... ix

1. INTRODUCTION .............. ..................... x

Adult Learning .................................... I
Learning Strategies . . . . . .......... 4
Reflective Practice and Canadian Colleges . . . . ! ! 7
Statement of the Problem .......................... ..
purpose .............................. 11
Research Questions ........................ . . . . 12
Limitations of the Study . ............ * . . . ! ! 13
Definition of Terms ........................... . ! ! 13
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .......................... ..
Adult Learning .......................................
Four Orientations to L e a r n i n g .............. 18
Principles of Effective Practice ................ 21
Learning Strategies ................................ 24
Metacognition Strategies ........................ 27
Planning....................................... 28
Monitoring.......................... 28
A d j u s t i n g .............. 29
Metamotivation Strategies .............. . . . . 30
A t t e n t i o n ..................................... 3 1
Reward/Enjoyment .............................. 32
Confidence.................................... ..
Memory Strategies .............................. 34
Organization .................... . 35
External A i d s ......... 36
Memory Application 37
Critical Thinking Strategies . . . . . .......... 37
Testing Assumptions .............. . . . . . 38
Generating Alternatives ...................... 38
Conditional Acceptance ........................ 39
Resource Management Strategies ........ 39
Identification . . . . . .................. . . 41
Critical U s e ............. .41
Human R e s o u r c e s .............. 41
Canadian Community Colleges ................ . . . . 42
 vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continued

Page
3. METHODS AND PROCEDURES ........................ 47
Introduction . . . .......... .................... 47
Population ....................................... . 49
Sampling .........................................! 50
Instrument ........ ................................ 51
V a l i d i t y ............... 52
R e l i a b i l i t y ..................................... 5 5
Procedures for Data Collection .................. | 55
Overview of Data A n a l y s i s .................. 57

4. QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS .............................. 61

Statistical Profile of the Learners ................ 63
Discriminant Analysis . . . . ...................... 68
G r a d e s ........................... 71
G e n d e r ........... 77
Program .................. 80
A g e .......... 83
Summary ........................ 37

5. IDENTIFYING GROUPS OF LEARNERS .................. .89

Cluster Analysis ................ ...........; . . 89
ANOVA of the C l u s t e r s .............. 91
Interview Data .................................... ..
Navigators ........................................ ..
Monitors .............. 103
Critical Thinkers ........ 109
Engagers . . . . . . . . . ................ 114
Networkers ............ 120
Discriminant Analysis on Clusters .......... 123
Function I . . . . . . . ................ 124
Function 2. . . . . . . . . . ..................... 126
Function 3 128
Function 4 . . . ................................. 129
 1 1 Ii

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continued

Page
6 . CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS.......... 132
Summary <........................................... 1 3 2
Profiles of Learners .......................... 133
Discriminant Analysis ........................ 134
Grades ......................................... 134
G e n d e r ........................................ 135
P r o g r a m .................................... ...
A g e ................ 136
Cluster A n a l y s i s ................ 136
C o n c l u s i o n s ................ 137
Implications and Recommendations ................ 140
T e a c h i n g .................... 140
Teaching Navigators ...................... 142
Teaching Monitors ' . ........................... 143
Teaching Critical Thinkers .................. 143
Teaching Engagers . . . .................... 144
Teaching Networkers ........................ 144
Students . . . ....................................
R e s e a r c h ...................................... ...
Epilogue . ..........................................

R E F E R E N C E S .......................................... ...
 v iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1. Number of Respondents from Each
Participating Col l e g e ............ ............ 51

2. Age Frequency of Participants......... 64

3. Program Frequency of Participants . ........... 65

4. Distribution of Grade Point Averages . . . . . 65

5. Ethnicity of Participants . . . . . . . . . . . 66

6. Means of Learning Strategies Areas of

SKILLS Used by Participants ............. 67

7. Means of Individual Learning Strategies

of SKILLS Used by P a r t i c i p a n t s .............. 68
*

8. Cluster Frequency Distribution .............. 91

9. ANOVA of Significantly Different

Learning Strategies in Clusters .............. 92

10. ANOVA of Demographic Variables among

Clusters . . . ............................... 93

11. Means of cluster Groupings on Learning

Strategies and Demographic Variables ........ 95

12. Participants of Qualitative Interviews .... .97

 it

ix

ABSTRACT

Increasingly adult educators are turning to the concept

of learning strategies as a means of exploring individual
differences in learning. Learners use various strategies to
accomplish their learning needs. Using the Self-Knowledge
Inventory of Lifelong Learning Strategies (SKILLS),
researchers have found that various groups of learners can
be distinguished by learning strategies. This study expanded
the learning strategies investigation to adult learners at
five two-year colleges in Alberta. The purpose of the study
was to identify the learning strategies used by students at
these colleges, to investigate the relationship between
learning strategies and demographic variables, and to
explore patterns of learning of distinct groups that existed
in the sample.
The sample included 1,143 learners. Differences in the
use of learning strategies were found when the participants
were grouped according to gender, type of program, age, and
grade point level. Several multivariate analyses using
discriminant analysis failed to produce any powerful
functions although weak differences were found in the areas
of grades, gender, program, and age.
The multivariate technique of cluster analysis,
however, did produce a solution with five clear and distinct
clusters. Navigators use successful role models to develop
their formula for success and are focused learners who chart
a course and follow it. Monitors are comparative learners
who measure their success according to others' standards.
Networkers are learners who constantly adjust their learning
strategies and make heavy use of external aids and human
resources. Critical Thinkers are the learners who make heavy
use of all critical thinking strategies and of memory
applications. Engagers are the passionate learners who love
to learn and learn with feeling.
The two major conclusions from this study are that
distinct groups of learners exist in adult learning
situations and that learning strategies are not linked to
various demographic variables. Imposing sense upon the data
through preconceived groupings with discriminant analysis
was not the best way to uncover differences in uses of
learning strategies. Instead, cluster analysis and
supportive qualitative techniques which allow the data to
expose its own patterns were more productive. Based upon the
groups found in this way, recommendations were made for
teachers, students, and researchers.
 I

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Adult Learning

Despite great efforts made by an instructor to create a

stimulating classroom environment with varied teaching

strategies, the educator has remarkably little control over

the learning. Although Knowles (1970) asserts that "the

behavior of the teacher probably influences the character of

the learning climate more than any other single factor"
(p. 42), it is ultimately the learner who determines the

level of acquisition, interpretation, or assimilation of

material. "Without taking away from the important role
played by the teacher, . . . what the student does is

actually more important in determining what is learned than

what the teacher does" (ShuelI, 1986, p. 429). Contributing

factors that govern this learning may be the student's past

experiences, content meaningful to the individual learner,

willingness to become involved with the subject matter, and

the set of "tools" that the student possesses to enhance

learning. Therefore, to facilitate a truly successful adult

learning experience, a teacher must skillfully direct the

 2

focus away from the role of the instructor and toward that
of the learner.

This learner-centered approach has been the locus of

change as the field of adult education has evolved over the
past 15 years to focus on adult learning rather than on
adult education. J . Roby Kidd (1973) viewed this new

emphasis on learning as the implication that adult education

was finally moving from a field of practice toward a field
of study.

As a field of practice, the emphasis in research

and conceptual development had been on providing
services, with learning viewed simply as one
component of educational programs. But a shift to
a field of study with the individual learner as
the central concern opened whole new realms, such
as self-directedness and individual development,
to the field. (Fellenz & Conti, 1989, p. I)

The very term, adult education, suggests a focus on the

educator; however, adult learning implies that the emphasis

be directed to the learner. In 1983, Peter Jarvis recognized

the beginning of this change and affirmed that "the aims of

the educational process are about the learners rather than

about the profession or the wider society" (p. 41).

Adult learning theories often reflect the philosophy of

Thomas Paine, an 18th century political writer who is

recognized as a leading influence on the Age of Revolution.,

His works exhibit his belief in natural reason and natural

rights, political equality, tolerance, civil liberties, and

the dignity of man (Aldridge, 1984). Although these ideals

 3

were considered revolutionary at the end of the 18th

century, they are the very ideals being applied today in

adult education. The empowerment of today's adult learners
to become knowledgeable and involved with their own learning
is the vision that Paine saw for all people. "It is only by
tracing things to their origin that we can gain rightful
ideas of them, and it is by gaining such ideas that we

discover the boundary that divides right from wrong, and

teaches every man to know his own" (cited in Adams, 1975,
p. 215).

Malcolm Knowles has further developed this

learner-centered concept, which has gained much acceptance
in the field of adult education. He coined the term
"andragogy" for this practice.

It has come to mean an educational mode in which

the teacher is viewed as a facilitator of
learning. Students are perceived to be
self-directed. The relationship between teacher
and student is personal and trusting. The climate
for learning is informal and collaborative.
Teaching . . . can be described as dialogical.
(Grubbs, 1981, pp. 5-6)

A major part of the definition of andragogy stresses the

growth of self-direction in learning and the use of

experiences of the learner in the educational process

(Davenport, 1987, p. 6 ; Knowles, 1968).

Andragogy is based upon studentrcentered, self-directed

methodologies. As students better understand their own

learning strategies, the more empowered they are to enhance

 4

their personal learning. "Trends in adult education and

cognitive psychology that advance the understanding of the

individuality of learning experiences and that promote
learner self-knowledge and control of personal perceptions
and judgements provide for potential empowerment of the
individual" (Fellenz & Conti, 1989, p. 23).

Smith (1982) explored the concept of learning how to

learn and concluded that:

A central task of learning how to learn is

developing awareness of oneself as a learner . . .
Self understanding links directly to learning how
to learn when learners become sensitive to, and
in other words, more aware of themselves as
learners. . . .Learning how to learn involves a
set of processes in which the individual learner
acts at least partially as his own manager of
change, and his focus of change is his own
self-concept and learning processes, (p. 57)
This requires that the learner be able to conceptualize his
own learning process, be able to pay some attention to how

he goes about learning, and thrust himself into managing the

process (p. 30). To become successful in this process,

learners must also recognize distinct strategies, which are

specific to their individual learning patterns and

behaviors.

Learning Strategies

Educators have long searched for a definitive

explanation for the distinctions between individual

learners. Intelligence, cognition, teaching theories, and

 5

learning styles have all been examined, yet none has

accounted for the various approaches learners take to

accomplish their specific learning needs. Consequently,

adult educators are increasingly turning to the concept of

learning strategies as a means of exploring these individual

differences.

Regardless of the type of setting, learners use various

strategies to accomplish their learning needs. Learning
strategies are those techniques or specialized skills that

the learner has developed to use in both formal and informal

learning situations (McKeachie, 1980). While learning styles

refer to the inherent ways that people process information,

learning strategies deal with the way people approach
/ 1
specific learning situations (Conti & Kolody, 1995).

"Recent research on teaching and learning has focused

on the active role of the learner in student achievement"

(McKeachie, 1980, p. 23). Techniques, tactics, and methods

which enhance effective learning have been called learning

strategies. The strategies are external behaviours developed

by an individual through experience with learning which the

learner "elects to use in order to accomplish a learning

task" (Fellenz & Conti, 1989, p. 7). The learning strategies

a student uses can have an effect upon their academic
achievement (Mayer, 1987).

Researchers in the fields of education and psychology

have noted the importance of the concept of learning
 6

strategies. McKeachie (1980) and Weinstein, Zimmerman, and

Palmer (1988) have advocated an approach to learning which
incorporates teaching a variety of skills thought to be
linked to academic performance. McKeachie (1980) has
investigated links between types of attention or

concentration; memory aids such as grouping, automatization,

and visualizing; the use of elaboration as a memory aid; and
the vital role of motivation in learning. Weinstein et al.
(1988) and Mayer (1987) have researched how students process
information and other behaviours learners engage in during
learning. Other researchers have focused on the role of

learning strategies used in real-life learning situations

(Fellenz & Conti, 1989).

Learning strategies can be divided into five component

areas (Conti 5= Fellenz, 1991; Fellenz & Conti, 1989). These

are Metacognition, Metamotivation, Memory, Critical

Thinking, and Management of Resources. Metacognition can be

thought of as the executive control of learning. It is

composed of planning how to go about learning, monitoring

how well the plan is being carried out, and adjusting the

plan depending on progress toward the learning goal.

Metamotivation deals with how individuals build and maintain

internal motivation to complete learning tasks. Memory as it
relates to learning strategies involves (a) how a learner

organizes new information into knowledge already known,

(b) the use of external memory aids such as item lists, and
 I

(c) self-knowledge about personal memory and knowledge of

strategies that are useful in remembering (Fellenz, 1993,
PP- 5-8). Critical thinking involves how one discriminates
and reflects upon learning material. Management of learning
resources relates to how learners identify and critically
use appropriate sources of information. All of these aspects

of learning strategies are thought to play an integral part

in how much and how well students achieve in learning

situations (McKeachie, 1980).

Since the recent development of the Self-Knowledge

Inventory of Lifelong Learning Strategies (SKILLS),
researchers such as Hill (1992), Yabui (1993), Hays (1995),
Conti and Kolody (1995), Kolody and Conti (1996), and

Lockwood (1997) have found that various groups of learners

can be distinguished by the learning strategies which they

use. The metamorphosis experienced in the field of adult

learning over the past 15 years not only has provided the

basis that allows the identification of these distinct

groups, but it has also provided the foundation and the need

for further study to determine the reasons for these

differences between groups of learners.

Reflective Practice and Canadian Colleges

To date, the majority of the research using SKILLS has

been conducted in the United States. Many of these studies

have involved various college environments (Hays 1995; Hill,

 8

1992). However, demographic populations of the American

college differ from those found in Canada. Can one assume

that these findings of those studies conducted at an

American college are generalizable to two-year Canadian

college students? Too often, decisions made in Canada are
dependent upon information generated from research
conducted in America. Schon (1987) suggests that
professionals no longer need to rely upon others' research

findings. As "reflective practitioners," they should be

creating their own knowledge in their specific fields of
expertise.

Schon7S model of professional knowledge emanates from

"the reflective practitioner"— one whose practice is based
upon two processes that he has coined as "knowing—in—action"

and "reflection-in-action." His model of knowing-in-action

assumes that knowing is in the actions of professionals, and

he describes it as "the characteristic mode of ordinary

practical knowledge" (Schon, 1983, p. 54). Based on Houle7S

(1980) work in adult education in various professions,

Cervero (1988) supports Schon7S opinion that the research

generated by universities is an important source of

information for knowing-in-action but that it must be

incorporated with reflection-in-action. Otherwise, it has

little chance of becoming part of a practitioner's

repertoire (p. 45). Schon7S (1983) suggestion for "bridging

the two worlds" of applied science and reflection-in-action

 f

is to create a setting in which "practitioners learn to

reflect on their own tacit theories of the phenomena of
practice, in the presence of representatives of those

disciplines" (p. 32). The ideal arrangement would then be to

have practitioners in the field conducting their own
research and creating their own knowledge in cooperation

with experts in that discipline. "The two kinds of theories

should be made to engage each other, not only to help

academicians exploit practice as material for basic research

but also to encourage researchers in academy and practice to
learn from each other" (p. 321).

As the literature base on SKILLS increases, reflective

practitioners in Canada should, therefore, generate their
own knowledge base. This can be done by looking at what

makes the two-year Canadian colleges unique, by conducting

studies of Canadian college students that identify various

groups of learners, and by examining the reasons for these

differences (Conti & Kolody, 1995).

Despite their diversity, the academic curricula of

Canadian colleges are organized into five basic functions;

collegiate, career, general, compensatory or remedial, and

community education. Although institutions vary in emphasis,

most colleges offer some form of each function. As

vocational education is intended to develop skills and

related knowledge to prepare for employment, general

education emphasizes critical thinking, developing values.

 10

understanding traditions, respecting diverse cultures, and

applying acquired knowledge throughout life.
As the faculty emphasis of Canadian colleges is upon
teaching, institutions are committed to professional
■
development that will help staff improve instruction and
student learning. The Alberta College and Institute Faculty

Association (ACIFA) is an association of autonomous faculty

associations of the 13 public colleges and technical

institutes throughout Alberta, and ACIFA represents over

4,000 faculty members. Through a cooperative venture between
ACIFA and the research resources of Montana State University

and by building upon a learning strategies study initiated

at the Medicine Hat College (Conti & Kolody, 1995),

reflective practitioners from five colleges throughout the

province are engaged in "creating new knowledge" by

participating in a province^wide, field-based study

examining the learning strategies used specifically by
college students in Alberta (Kolody & Conti, 1996).

Statement of the Problem

The goal of adult educators is to optimize the level of

their students' learning. As the learning process is better

understood, adult educators can be more successful at

unlocking the mystery of how individuals learn. If teachers

can help learners understand their personal learning

process, learners are then empowered to take this knowledge

 11

of their learning and apply, it to lifelong learning

experiences. "An appreciation of one's learning style, the
development of strategies that promote learning^ and an
insight into metacognitive processes enable people to exert
control over learning processes and outcomes" (Fellenz &
Conti, 1989, p. 23).

The examination of learning strategies provides

teachers with a means to increase their effectiveness in the

teaching-learning process. Learning strategies are "the
technigues and skills that an individual elects to use in
order to accomplish a specific learning task. . . . Such

strategies vary by individual and by learning objective"

(Fellenz & Conti, 1989, pp. 7-8).

Prior to this study, most of the research on learning

strategies has been conducted in the United States. However,

as Schon suggests, Canadian educators no longer need to rely

on a generic profile of students and the strategies which

they use. Reflective practitioners in Canada can create

their own knowledge base by examining the specific learning

strategies of their own students.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was (a) to identify the

learning strategies of adult learners at two-year colleges

, in Alberta; (b) to investigate the relationship of these

learning strategies to academic success, gender, age, and

I
 12

program of study; and (c) to explore patterns of learning of

distinctive groups of learners that may exist. Once distinct

groups of learners were identified, the reasons for these
differences were then investigated by qualitative and
quantitative means to describe these groups.

Research Questions

This study investigated the learning strategies used in

real-life learning situations by Canadian college students.

The use of specific learning strategies was measured with
SKILLS. To accomplish this, the following research questions
were asked.

1. What is the learning strategies profile of

students in the Canadian two-year colleges?

2. Among Canadian college students, is it possible

to use learning strategies scores as measured
with SKILLS to discriminate between the most
successful learners and least successful
learners as measured by their grade point
average?

3. Among Canadian college students, is it possible

to use learning strategies scores as measured
with SKILLS to discriminate between groups
formulated by the following demographic
variables: gender, age, and program of study?

4. Is it possible to identify distinct clusters of

learners in Canadian colleges using SKILLS?

5. If distinct groups of learners exist, how can

these clusters be described?

6 . If distinct groups of learners exist, what

differentiates one group from another?
 I

13
Limitations of the Study

Because of the confidentiality of the study due to the

release of the students' GPA by the respective registrar,
individual institutions were reluctant to release the names
students for the qualitative phase of the study, even
when it was assured there was no wish to tie the student's
name to the GPA. Therefore, it was only possible to secure
participants for the qualitative phase of the study at

Medicine Hat College (MHC). Further, since programs at

Medicine Hat College are only one or two years in duration,

many of those students who had participated in the

quantitative study at MHC were no longer students and were

difficult to locate when the qualitative phase was conducted
the following year.

Definition of Terms

ACIFA: Acronym for Alberta Colleges and Institutes Faculty

Association. This is the collective organization at a
provincial level with an appointed representative from
each of the individual college and faculty
associations.

Community Colleges and Institutes of Technology: Non-degree­

granting institutions that offer a variety of one, two,
or three year training programs. Most community
colleges are public institutions stressing the "open
door policy" and financially supported largely by
governments. Programs range from adult basic education
to university transfer courses, and they include
vocational technical training and specialized training
for semi-professional jobs in such fields as
agriculture, industry and engineering, health services,
business, and public service.
 14

Critical Thinkers: Those learners described in this study as

those who rely heavily on a variety of traditional
critical thinking skills.

Critical Thinking: "Identifying and challenging assumptions,

challenging importance of context, imagining and
exploring alternatives, and reflective scepticism"
(Brookfield, 1987, p. 12 ).

Engagers: Those learners described in this study as

passionate learners who involve all five senses in
their learning and learn best when they are actively
engaged in a meaningful manner with the learning task.
GPA (Grade Point Average): The term commonly used in schools
which refers to the overall average of all of the
grades that a student has received.

Learning Strategies: "The techniques and skills that an

individual elects to use in order to accomplish a
specific learning task. Such strategies vary by
individual and by learning objective. Often they are so
customary to learners that they are given little
thought; at other times much deliberation occurs before
a learning strategy is selected for a specific learning
task" (Fellenz & Conti, 1988, p. I).

Memory: Learning strategies which help adults in remembering

in real-life learning situations. These include
rehearsal of information, organization and elaboration
of information, use of external aids, and the
application of self-knowledge about memory and use of
mnemonic techniques (Fellenz, 1990, p. 5-9).

Metacognition: "Thinking about the process of learning an

emphasizing self-regulatory tactics to insure success
in the learning endeavor" (Fellenz & Conti, 1988,
P- 2) .

Metamotivation: "Tactics and techniques used by the learner

to provide internal impetus in accomplishing learning
tasks." These are based on a model developed by Keller
(1987) which emphasizes focusing attention,
anticipating reward, fostering confidence, and enjoying
learning activities.

Monitors: Those learners described in this study as being

cognizant of their learning progress, who closely
monitor their learning, and who learn best from
example.
 15

Navigators: Those learners described in this study as

focused learners who chart a course for learning and
follow it. These learners rely heavily on the learning
strategy of planning.

Networkers: Those learners described in this study as

learners who make frequent use of human resources and
integrate others into the social and political process
of learning.

Post-secondary Institutions: A wide range of institutions

including universities, public and private colleges,
and institutes of technology that offer programs to
those having completed grade 12 or its equivalency.
Resource Management: The "identification of appropriate
resources, critical use of such sources, and the use of
human resources in learning" (Fellenz & Conti, 1993,
P- 3) .

SKILLS: An acronym for the Self-Knowledge Inventory of

Lifelong Learning Strategies. This is a learning
strategies inventory with established validity and
reliability which asks respondents to rate 15 learning
strategies in scenarios commonly found in everyday life
and which call for a learning effort on the part of the
respondent. Participants in this study responded to
four scenarios.

Technical Training: Instruction that "combines development

of skills with scientific and technological studies"
(Campbell, 1971) . For the purpose of this study,
"technical training" is used interchangeably with the
terms "technological" and "vocational."

Tertiary: Post-secondary institutions possessing either

degree-granting or non-degree-granting status
(Campbell, 1971).

Transfer: Studies that provide credits toward a

baccalaureate degree.
 16

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Adult Learning

The learning process has captivated the interest of

scholars, social scientists, psychologists, and educators
for centuries. Yet with centuries of research and study on
the process of learning, the definition of the concept still

remains nebulous. Gagne (1970) offers a simplistic yet

somewhat inadequate definition of learning as "a change in

human disposition or capability, which can be retained, and
which is not simply ascribable to the process of growth."
Mezirow (1990) more comprehensively defines learning as the
process of making a new or revised interpretation of the

meaning of an experience, which guides subsequent

understanding, appreciation, and action. Rather than attempt

to define learning, it may be more practical to look at the

results or the outcomes of learning. Gagne (1970) recognizes

the five kinds of learning outcomes as intellectual skills,

verbal information, cognitive strategies, motor skills, and

attitudes. Even more consequential than the outcomes,

however, is the process of learning. Basic assumptions in

the process include the passage of information through the

 17

senses into either short- or long-term memory by the level

of attention and the perception of the learner. Yet, it is

also recognized that the learning process is dynamic,
intricate, and individualized.

The fact that learning cannot be clearly defined

perhaps creates an even greater need for discourse and

theory. Some knowledge of learning theories is essential for

every practitioner t o .understand why certain methods or
techniques can be applied and to understand, apply, or
reject new proposals that are presented (Kidd, 1973). Some
knowledge of theory always aids practice. It also may

stimulate new forms of practice. Kidd further postulates

that a research worker also ought to be guided by theory.

Theory provides a set of assumptions as a starting point to

guide what is done to be tested by experiment or to serve as

a check on observations and insights. Until agreement is

reached about what constitutes learning, it can be expected

that there will be more than one theory to explain all that

is meant by the term. Yet each theory is grounded in not

only one's philosophy of education but also on one's
philosophy of life.

Although there is not one absolute definition of

learning or its theory, there is a general consensus of

three components that constitute the concept of learning how

to learn— learner needs, learning style, and training. Smith

defines learning how to learn as possessing or acquiring the

 11 I

18
knowledge and skill to learn effectively in whatever
learning situation one encounters (1982).

Four Orientations to Learning

Merriam and Caffarella (1991) have categorized the

dozens of learning theories into four orientations to

learning— the behaviourist, cognitivist, humanist, and

social learning. The behaviourist orientation includes

learning theorists such as Skinner, Pavlov, Thorndike,

Watson and Guthrie who view the learning process as a change
in behaviour caused by stimuli in an external environment.
The purpose of education for the behaviourist is to produce
behavioural change in desired direction. They view the

teacher's role as one of arranging the environment to elicit,

the desired response. Behaviourists evaluate learning by

measuring the degree to which behavioural objectives Were

reached. These objectives seek to overtly define learning

competencies, skill development, and training.

Although behaviourists insist that all learning

requires reinforcement, the cognitive orientation holds that

reinforcement does not actually produce learning but rather

that it provides a signal about what to do or a reason for

doing it. Learning theorists included in the cognitivist

orientation are Piaget, Koffka, Ausubel, Gagne, and Bruner.

These theorists view learning as an internal mental process

such as insight, information processing, memory, and

 19

perception. The degree of learning is determined by the

learner's level of internal cognitive structuring

(intelligence). The purpose of education is to develop the

capacity and skills to learn better, and it is the role of
the teacher to structure the content of the learning
activity and to develop in the learner a conscious awareness
of learning how to learn.

Ausubel (1968) refers to the learning process as

acquiring particular meanings from the potential meanings

presented in the learning material and of making them more

available.

When an individual learns logically meaningful

propositions, he does not learn their logical
meaning per se but the meaning they have for him.
. . . The cumulative residue of what is
meaningfully learned, retained, and forgotten,
determines how knowledge is psychologically
organized . . . and the traces of the learning
task by an established system provides anchorage
for the new material, and thus constitutes the
most orderly, efficient, and stable way of
retaining it for future availability, (p. 222 )

Cognitivists also agree that insight is another facet

of the learning process and is a result of reorganization of

perceptions into newly discovered structures. This was

demonstrated by Kohler, a Gestalt theorist, in experiments

with the great apes in which problem solving was achieved by

the process of insight learning.

Humanists such as Maslow (1954) and Rogers (1983) view

the learning process as a personal act to fulfil the

learner's potential. The level of learning is greatly

 20

determined by the learner's affective and cognitive needs.

The purpose of education is for the learner to become self-
actualized and autonomous, and it is the teacher's role to
facilitate the development of the learner as a whole person.
The principles of adult education fall under the humanist

orientation with tenets such as andragogy and self-directed

learning (Knowles, 1970). The humanistic approach to the
delivery and purpose of adult education is to "provide a
warm, accepting environment and to give learners frequent
opportunities to direct their own learning."

Keefe (1982) provides a brief summary of the

development of the humanist theory with:

Socrates, in utilizing what is known today as the

Socratic method, sought to foster individual
development. Rousseau, in Emile, addressed the
needs of the individual. John Dewey, in his
monumental work at the beginning of the twentieth
century, focused on the learner as an individual.
(p. 43)

However, Maslow (1954) describes the humanist theory of

adult education best when he states that the purpose of

adult education is to facilitate the development of the

learner into a whole person— a self-actualized, autonomous

human being.

The fourth orientation is that of social learning and

is developed by theorists such as Freire (1970), Bandura

(1977), and Rotter (1954). They view the learning process as

interaction with and observation of others in a social or

political context. Learning occurs through interaction.

 21

behaviour, and environment. The purpose of education is

social action, and the teacher's role is to model and guide

new roles and behaviour. The outcomes of the social learning
orientation are socialization, social roles, and mentoring.

Principles of Effective Practice

As Brookfield (1986) has observed, a distinct but

similar set of adult learning principles has been devised by

each of Gibb, Miller, Kidd, Knox, Brundage and Mackeracher,
Smith, and Darkenwald and Merriam (p. 31). From these,
Brookfield compiled a list of principles of effective
practice for the educator to consider when planning and

facilitating the teacher-learner transaction. These

principles include mutual respect, a learner-centered

approach, active participation, meaningful content with

immediate use, self-direction and climate building of both

the physical and emotional environment (pp. 9-20 ).

One of the major characteristics of adult learning is

that it is often undertaken for immediate application in

real-life situations. Thus the phrase "real-life learning"

has been used to distinguish typical adult learning from the

academic learning of formal situations that is usually
spoken of as studying or educating (Fellenz & Conti, 1989).
Sternberg (1986) describes eight differences between real-

life learning and the learning typical in academic or test­

taking situations.
 22

Ideas on ways in which learning is shaped by forces

and/or outside the learner vary with each learning
theorist and include such aspects as emotional development,
physiological functioning, age trends, social class level,
personality, attention, reinforcement, and motivation. In
his theory regarding how adults learn, J. R. Kidd .(1973)
pointed out the importance of the affective domain.

The, interests, needs and motivations of any

learner, are primarily a matter of emotions, not
intellect. . . . It is also worth noting not only
that emotions influence learning, but that there
are many similarities between the "field of
emotion" and the "field of learning." Both
learning and emotion are aspects of the Same
process of adjustment to environmental situations
which the person must make continuously, (p. 95 )

Knox (1977) analyzed the relationships among learning

and a variety of aspects of education— personality traits

and abilities, intelligence, environmental factors affecting

intellectual, social and emotional development, and age
trends.

Physiological functioning has some association

with learning ability. This is reflected in the
decline in later life in performance on learning
tasks that are fast paced, involve physical skill,
and are grouped in the category of fluid
intelligence. . . . Another factor associated with
learning ability and age is social class level and
especially extent of education. As each generation
has attained higher levels of formal and informal
education, performance on tests of learning
ability has been higher in young adulthood and has
maintained the relative advantage at successive
ages (Schaie, 1 9 7 4 ) . . . . A third factor
associated with learning ability is personality
(Schaie and Strother, 1968). An individual's
outlook can greatly affect the. approach taken to a
 23

task, including a test of learning

ability. Feelings of alienation, hopelessness, and
defensiveness can discourage an individual from
trying something new. (pp. 422-423)

Merriam and Caffarella (1991) consider three

subconcepts to increase competency in learning: learners'

needs, a person's learning style, and training, which is
organized activity, or instruction. The teacher or learning
facilitator in adult education, must understand both the
characteristics and motivations of adult learners in order

to select teaching techniques that suit the learner's needs

(Seaman & Fellenz, 1989).

Malcolm Knowles (1950), reflecting the increasingly

popular thinking of Carl Rogers, writes:

Teaching is a process of guided interaction

between the teacher, the student, and the
materials of instruction. . . . Teaching, like
medical practice, is mostly a matter of
cooperation with nature. The function of the
teacher is to guide the student into the kind of
experiences that will enable him to develop his
own natural potentialities, (pp. 31-33)

Thus, Knowles redefined the term andragogy as "an emerging

technology for adult learning" involving the following seven
step process:

1. Set a cooperative learning environment.

2. Create mechanisms for mutual learning.
3. Arrange for a diagnosis of learner needs and
interests.
4. Enable the formulation of learning objectives
based on the diagnosed needs and interests.
5. Design sequential activities for achieving the
objectives.
6. Execute the design by selecting methods,
materials, and resources.
 24

7. Evaluate the quality of learning experience

while rediagnosing needs for further learning.
(P- 54)

Practitioners can help adults understand age trends in

IG^rriing abilities and recognize the other factors that are
also associated with learning ability (Knox, 1977). Such
understanding is also useful to practitioners themselves as
they plan educational activities for various categories of
adults.

Learning Strategies

Educators have long searched for a definitive

explanation for the distinctions between individual
learners. Intelligence, cognition, teaching theories, and
learning styles have all been examined, yet none has

accounted for the various approaches learners take to

accomplish their learning tasks. Consequently, adult

educators have begun to examine the concept of learning

strategies as a means of exploring these individual

differences.

In any given setting, learners use various strategies

to achieve their learning tasks. Learning strategies are

those techniques or specialized skills that the learner has

developed to use in both formal and informal learning

situations (McKeachie,, 1980). While learning styles refer to

the inherent ways that people process information and are

not easily changed or are slow to change, learning

 25

strategies deal with the ways people approach specific

learning situations. The strategies are external behaviours

developed by an individual through experience with learning
which the learner "elects to use in order to accomplish a
learning task" (Fellenz & Conti, 1989, p. 7). Learning
strategies are "more a matter of preference; they are
developed throughout life and vary by task. While the
effectiveness of a particular style relates to the

individual, the success of strategies depends more on the

situation" (Fellenz & Conti, 1993, p. 4).

"Recent research on teaching and learning has focused

on the active role of the learner in student achievement"
(McKeachie, 1980, p. 23) and includes those techniques,
tactics, and methods which enhance effective learning. The
learning strategies a student uses can have an effect upon

their academic achievement (Mayer, 1987), and a learner's

effective choice of learning strategies "usually results in

greater learning" (McKeachie, 1980, p. 3). "The skills or

techniques selected to accomplish the task often have a

great influence on the success of that learning activity.

Adeptness and insight in the use of learning strategies

appears to be a significant part of one's ability to learn

how to learn (Fellenz & Conti, 1993, p. 3). The learner's

ability to select the appropriate learning strategies for a

specific task may then well prove a fundamental educational

tool to enhance mastery of material.
 26

Although researchers in the fields of education and

psychology have concentrated on various aspects of the term,
all have noted the importance of the concept of learning

strategies. McKeachie (1980) and Weinstein et al. (1988)

support an approach to learning which involves teaching a

variety of skills believed to be linked to academic
performance. Accordingly, McKeachie (1980) has investigated
links between types of attention or concentration; memory
aids such as grouping, automatization, and visualizing; the
use of elaboration as a memory aid; and the vital role of
motivation in learning.

Weinstein et al. (1988) and Mayer (1987) have

researched how students process information and other

behaviours learners engage in during learning. Weinstein

et al. (1988) defines learning strategies as "behaviors and
thought that a learner engages in during learning and that

are intended to influence the learner's encoding process"

(p. 315) and furthers suggests that such strategies may be

designed to affect the motivational state or the manner in

which one acquires, organizes, or integrates new information

(Fellenz & Conti, 1993, p. 3).

Fellenz and Conti have focused on the role of learning

strategies used in real-life learning situations by adults.

As such, they have identified five areas of learning

strategies upon which to center their investigation. "The

phrase real-life learning has been used to distinguish
r
 27

typical adult learning from the academic learning of formal

situations that is usually spoken of as studying or

educating" (Fellenz & Conti, 1993, p. 4). This approach to

learning strategies can be measured with the Self-Knowledge

Inventory of Lifelong Learning Strategies (SKILLS) (Conti &

Fellenz, 1991). This valid and reliable instrument consists

of real-life learning scenarios with responses drawn from
the areas of metacognition, metamotivation, memory, critical ’
thinking, and resource management. Each of these five
constructs consists of three learning strategies (Conti &
Fellenz, 1991; Fellenz & Conti, 1989).

Metacoqnition Strategies

Metacognition is defined as the knowledge and control

over one's thinking and learning (Brown, 1985). It is a

conscious, reflective endeavour; it is one that requires the

learner to analyze, assess, and manage learning activities.

With the development of the concept of metacognition by

Flavell (1979) and Brown (1985)/ the importance of the

learner's self-understanding became apparent in academic

success. Smith (1982) concluded that "a central task of

learning how to learn is developing awareness of oneself as

a learner" (p. 57). In his theory of intelligence, Sternberg

(1986) concludes that important to practical intelligence is

the ability of the learner to capitalize on strengths and

minimize or compensate for weaknesses. Consistent with

 28

Sternberg's metacomponents of cognition, the three learning

strategies involved in the area of metacognition in the
SKILLS instrument are Planning/ Monitoring, and Adjusting. '
Flavell (1979), Brown (1985), and Sternberg (1986) all

contend these processes are interactive and dependent on

each other (Counter & Fellenz, 1993, p. 9).

Planning. Planning a learning activity assumes that

learners have accepted responsibility and have taken control
over their learning experience. They know how to elicit
purpose from both themselves and the situations and how to
organize and identify the steps essential to the learning
process (Yussen, 1985). "Important elements of the learning

situations are noted and strategies are previewed to

determine how best to proceed with the situation" (Counter &

Fellenz, 1993, p. 9). Ways to implement metacognitive

planning include overviewing, focusing on purpose> and

acknowledging one's learning style. Specifications are

created in the process of planning with a unique

prescription being developed for each learning activity

(Scribner, 1986). Planning builds in flexibility so

strategies can be chosen to meet precisely the right

conditions on the least effort criterion.

Monitoring. During the process of learning, various

things can happen to interfere with attention or

understanding, so monitoring becomes an important part of

 29

metacognition as one goes through the learning process. By

monitoring, learners assess their progress through a

learning project. In this process, they are cognizant of

their learning progress and closely monitor their learning
by checking to see if they are on task and by comparing
their progress to accepted standards or models. Some
strategies that can be used in monitoring include self­

testing, comparing progress from previous learning

situations, asking for feedback, checking new resources for

information, and keeping track of diverse steps in learning

(Fellenz & Conti, 1989). Others include the practice of
questioning (a) the value of the knowledge to one's self,

(b) potential applications of the material, or (c) the

relationship of what is being studied to other material.

Comprehension monitoring is another factor in this strategy

and "involves establishing learning goals, assessing the

degree to which these goals are being met, and, if

necessary, modifying the strategies being used to facilitate

goal attainment" (Weinstein et al., 1988, p. 294).

Adjusting. Metacognitive adjusting involves the learner

modifying and revising learning plans in relationship to the

evaluation of the learning progress. Successful learning

occasionally requires modification in order to respond to

changing learning situations. Strategies used to adjust

learning activities include revising one's learning plan,

 30

changing learning strategies, restructuring learning to

satisfy one's knowledge level, and developing techniques to

help match the learning task to one's own personal learning

characteristics (Fellenz & Conti, 1989).

Metamotivation Strategies

Just as metacognition addresses the concept of one's

knowing and understanding one's own learning patterns,
metamotivation deals with one's knowing and understanding
how or why one is motivated to participate or remain in a

learning activity. Metamotivation is the awareness of and

control over factors that energize and direct one's learning

(Fellenz, 1993, p. 12). Deci and Ryan (1985) describe

energization as a response to needs that are innate to the

organism as well as to those that are acquired through

interactions with the environment (p. 3). Direction is the

behavior taken to do something or to reach some goal.

Focusing on the internal processes involved in adult

learning, motivation in real-life learning situations has

been called "metambtivation.11 The prefix "meta" is used to

differentiate the concept from external motivation prevalent
in traditional education institutions (Fellenz & Conti,
1989).

When discussing these motivational forces, both

Rubenson (1977) and Boshier (1973) believe that motivation

for learning is a function of the interaction between

 31

internal psychological factors and external environmental

variables, or at least the participant's perception and
interpretation of environmental factors. This "perceived"
situation may or may not be the "real" situation.

Motivation is regarded as an aspect that shapes adult

learning. "An important functional role of motivation is to

contribute to the maintenance of positive self—views and
perceptions of self-efficacy and personal control that

underlie the ability to change negative attitudes toward

learning" (McCombs, 1988, p. 142). The students' sense of

competence is also important to learning (McKeachie, 1980).

Adult educators tend to use the term "participation"
rather than motivation when referring to why adults engage
in formal educational programs (Cross, 1982). This is
because adult learning is a voluntary activity. Boshier
(1973) further adds that:

Both adult education participation and dropout can

be understood to occur as a function of the
magnitude of the discrepancy between the
participant's self concept and the key aspects
(largely people) of the educational environment.
Nonparticipants manifest self/institution
incongruence and do not enroll, (p. 260)

Attention. One of the three learning strategies of

motivation identified in SKILLS is attention. This is
focusing on the material to be learned. Kidd (1973) notes

that a high attention level, which he calls engagement, is

crucial to successful learning. The key to learning is

 32

engagement— a relationship between the learner, the task or

subject matter, the environment and the teacher (p. 266).
One of the factors of learning is attention.
If students are going to learn, they typically
have to be paying attention. However, there is
also learning without conscious attention, but
generally speaking you are going to learn more if
you try to pay attention. . . . Attention is a
capacity in which certain things are in focus.
(McKeachie, 1980)

From Keller's (1987) ARCS model of strategies,

"attention involves the arousal of interest in learners, the

stimulation of an attitude or inquiry, and the maintenance

of attention" (Fellenz, 1993, p. 15). It can be influenced

by curiosity, interest created from previous experience, or

a deliberate recognition of a need to learn (Fellenz, 1993,

p. 15). Important to attention is the dedication of time and

the creating a suitable environment that allows for a

minimum of distractions. Researchers such as Dunn and Dunn

(1978) and Farley (1988) conclude that factors that

influence learning include light, sound, temperature, the

time of day, and biological rhythms.

Reward/Eniovment. A second component of the

metamotivational learning strategies is reward or enjoyment.

This is anticipating or recognizing the value to oneself of
learning specific material, having fun, or experiencing
satisfaction with the learning activity (Fellenz & Conti,

1989). Consistent with all metamotivational strategies, the

V
 33
affective domain is once again the dominant factor in
learning with this component. The reward for learning can
result from very specific, goal-oriented activities or from
a feeling of increased competence or control over an
environment. Motivation results from people's attempts to

achieve and maintain order in their lives (Conti, 1991).

Enjoyment "appears to be a more important motivational

factor in real-life learning than in formal learning
situations where external motivators such as grades or
certificates often dominate" (Fellenz & Conti, 1993, p. 16).
Personal growth, increase in self-esteem, helping others,
working as part of a team for a worthwhile project, feeling

good about accomplishments, or pride in the results of an

activity are all recognized as strategies that motivate

learners to embark upon and to sustain a learning

experience.

Confidence. Confidence in one's ability to learn is one

of the essential elements in motivation (Keller, 1987). One

of the very important factors in educational participation

is the self-esteem of the individual. Those who evaluate

themselves negatively are less likely to expect success

(Rubenson, 1977), and poor success is likely to be due to

the learner's perceived incongruence with the educational
environment (Boshier, 1973). "It is clear that continuing

motivation to learn is in large part a function of the

 34

learner's perceptions of self-efficacy and self-control in

learning situations" (McCombs, 1988, p. 142). The
examination of learning style factors confirms that
"expectancy scores consistently correlated with achievement
of adult students. . . . Belief that one can complete the
learning task successfully is an important factor in
motivation to learn" (Fellenz & Conti, 1993, p. 16).

Memory Strategies

Memory is "the capacity of humans to retain

information, to recall it when needed and recognize its

familiarity when they later see it or hear it again"
(Wingfield & Byrnes, 1981, p. 4).

The process of learning and memory are so closely

related and interdependent that it is often
difficult to determine whether we are concerned
with one phenomenon or two . . . one who does not
learn has nothing to remember, and without memory
there is no evidence of learning. (Long, 1983,
P- 58)

Memory is "viewed in its relationship to adult learning and

the influence it can have on decision making and consequent

human behavior" (Paul & Fellenz, 1993, p. 24). "The intended

application of the material to be remembered also affects

the degree of attention given a topic. Selective attention

is the process of allocating attentional resources to one

object or event over another" (pp. 21-22). Thus, meaningful

material is retained longer than that which is not.
 35

"Metamemory is practical knowledge acquired about our

own memory capacities and what we must do to remember; or
simply, what people know about how they remember" (p. 22).
Learners can improve their memory performance and the
efficiency of their learning by developing metamemory
skills; thus, difficulties encountered in learning may not
be due to the inabilities of the learner but rather may be
the result of not using the appropriate memory strategy for
the learning task (Wingfield & Byrnes, 1981).

The mental activities used to store, retain, and

retrieve knowledge are called memory processes. These

processes are accomplished either through internal or

external memory strategies. Internal memory aids are

strategies in which all efforts to remember are completed by

the individual within their own thought processes. External

memory techniques rely on the interaction of the mental

processes of the individual and the manipulation of the

environment to insure recall (Paul & Fellenz, 1993, p. 23).

The memory strategies used in the SKILLS model include

Organization, External Aids, and Memory Application.

Organization. Organization refers to the manner in

which the memory reorders of restructures information from

that in which it was originally presented (Seamon, 1980).

Successful strategies entail arranging the material to be

learned in patterns that direct the retrieval process.

 36

Norman (1982) identifies relationships among concepts and

events as semantic networks and states that a major property
of memory is the richness in relationships that can be
depicted from these networks.

Organization strategies used in the SKILLS model

include several activities used to process information so

that material will be better stored, retained, and
retrieved. While mnemonics is one internal memory device
used to enhance memory, visualization, imagery, and the

forming of associations and connections are others often

used to form stable memories from experiences and to enhance
recall (Zechmeister & Nyberg, 1982). Chunking is the

organization of information into sets, thereby reducing the

overall number of categories to be remembered (Paul &
Fellenz, 1993, p. 23). When information is chunked,

individuals seem to be able to remember and deal with larger

amounts of data (Miller, 1987). Such grouping definitely

improves the total amount of information that is retrievable

(McKeachie, 1980; Zechmeister & Nyberg, 1982).

External Aids. The SKILLS model uses several external

aids that involve the learner controlling the environment in

some manner to enhance recall. External aids include the

reviewing of material (Zechmeister & Nyberg, 1982), the use

of appointment books, making lists of things to do, placing

 37

visual items on display, and asking others to provide

reminders at relevant times.

Memory Application. Strategies related to application

of memory involve the use of those internal strategies

involved in memory organization for the purpose of planning,

completing, and evaluating learning. In adult real-life
learning, memory application is used for self-improvement,
problem solving, and critical thinking; such applications

range from acquiring a new physical skill to developing the

knowledge and political skills necessary for community
action (Paul & Fellenz, 1993, p. 25).

Critical Thinking Strategies

Critical Thinking is a reflective thinking process

utilizing higher order thinking skills in order to improve
learning. Although problem-solving and decision-making

skills are at times included as part of higher-order

thinking processes, critical thinking has a more general and

more important goal; it is improving individual and societal

learning (Fellenz, 1993, p. 30). "As our society has entered

more deeply into an information age, our appreciation for

the value of higher order thinking skills has increased"

(p. 30). Moreover, adult educators such as Horton (1990) and

Freire (1970) deem critical thinking skills and praxis to be

the catalyst of social change and democratic justice.

 38

The SKILLS model of Critical Thinking strategies is

based on Brookfield's (1985) four components outlined in

Developing Critical Thinkers. Brookfield's approach to

critical thinking is applied to real-life situations and is
composed of (a)identifying and challenging assumptions,
(b) challenging the importance of concepts, (c) imagining
and exploring alternatives, and (d) reflective skepticism.
The SKILLS Critical Thinking strategies, based on these
components include Testing Assumptions, Generating
Alternatives, and Conditional Acceptance of General
Knowledge.

Testing Assumptions. "The process of challenging

assumptions presumes the ability to identify these

assumptions and the willingness to examine them. Because

they have often been taken for granted over long periods of
time, their limitations are not readily noticed" (Fellenz,

1993, p. 31). The SKILLS model uses a number of specific

activities to measure the challenging of assumptions in

real-life learning situations. These "invite respondents to

examine the accuracy or the acceptance uncritically given to

an assumption while others prompt them to identify

relationships, spot inconsistencies, or question value sets"

(p. 32).

Generating Alternatives. Exploring alternatives when

engaged in critical thinking or problem solving is vital in

 39

the complex, multiple-solutioned situations common to real

(P* 32) . The SKILLS instrument measures the learner's

preference to hypothesize while grounding options within a
given situation and include strategies such as brainstorming
or envisioning the future, ranking the order of

alternatives, and identifying alternate solutions (p. 33).

Conditional Acceptance. Advocating reflective

skepticism to avoid absolutes or over simplifications,

Brookfield (1987) claims that "considering and imaging
alternatives leads to the development of a particularly
critical cast of mind, especially where any claims for

universal truth or validity of an idea or practice are

concerned" (pp. 20-21). As monitoring results and evaluating

consequences are evidence of critical thinking, the SKILLS
model uses these strategies to measure Conditional

Acceptance along with other activities such as questioning

simplistic answers and predicting consequences.

Resource Management Strategies 1

Learning strategies that lead to effective use of

resources can have a positive effect on the learning process

(Fellenz, 1993, p. 37), and management of these resources is
an important aspect in finding solutions to real-life,

everyday problems. The number and variety of sources

available imply a need to choose wisely so the teaching of

learning strategies should include "techniques for

 40

identifying and acquiring appropriate learning resources55,

(Fellenz & Conti, 1989, pp. 4-5) .

The location and selection of materials involves a

variety of processes that are specific to personal
preference. Although one may begin a search at a local
library using newspapers, magazines, or books, fewer than
25% of American adults use the library with regularity

(Shirk, 1983). While some adults prefer electronic sources

of information such as the television or computer, others

feel the best sources of information in real-life learning

situations are other people.

Environmental, factors may also influence the learner's

preference for locating materials. The learner's

environment, how much time is available, how difficult it is

to procure the materials, and the learner's ability to tell

what are good information sources will also impact resource

management (Hill, 1992, p. 46). Many adults do not perform

the task of locating materials very well (Shadden & Raiford,

1984). Some materials may be too difficult to understand or

may enter into too much detail. Occasionally, there are so

many printed or audiovisual materials available that it is

difficult to choose the most relevant (Smith, 1982; Tough,

1971). The SKILLS model measures the learner's preference to

identify, evaluate, and use resources relevant to the

learning task.
 41

Identification. Using effective strategies for resource

management involves the identification and location of the

best possible source of information which may include modern

information sources, print sources, people, models,

professionals, or agencies (Fellenz, 1993, p. 36). A concern

of the learner at this point can include the learner's
willingness to use a particular source. The learner must
judge whether obtaining the resource is equal in value to

the time, energy, and expense in gathering it (Tough, 1971).

Critical Use. A second strategy addressing effective

use of resources involves critical reflection about the

material and selection of the most appropriate resource
rather than simply those that are readily available.
Considerations in evaluating the resources may include the

timeliness of the material or the potential bias of the

source. This can involve the critical evaluation of

information presented by an organization seeking support

(Fellenz & Conti, 1989). Strategies used in the SKILLS

instrument to measure the critical evaluation of resources

include contacting an expert or an outsider, checking the

information with a second source, and observing or asking

questions to check for bias.

Human Resources. The third resource management strategy

used in the SKILLS model is integrating others into the

social and political processes of learning. This involves
 X

42

more than simply using others in learning situations. Xt

entails "dialogue that involves listening to people with
different opinions or insights into issues as well as the

use of discussion to think through or study problems. In

some situations, the support provided by human resources may

be as important as the information they contribute"

(Fellenz, 1993, p. 37). This support and networking are
strategies considered important in the measurement of a
learner's preference in incorporating the use of human
resources in their learning process.

Canadian Community Colleges

Prior to the 1950s, Canadian education consisted of

four components: elementary and secondary schooling; higher
education (universities); trade and vocational training

provided in specialized institutions; and adult education,

which was often provided informally by volunteers without

public funding. The inception of the Canadian community

college into the Canadian education system arose out of the

failure of the university curriculum to meet the needs of

young people who wanted a vocational education rather than

one to develop intellectual capacities (Dennison &
Gallagher, 1986).

As new institutions were established during the 1960s,

the term "post-secondary education" or sometimes "tertiary

education" became popular as a collective label to include

 43

all formal education after secondary school, which included

both degree and non-degree programs (Cohen & Brower, 1987) .
The community college differentiates from the university in
that it is a non-degree-granting public or private

institution that offers vocational or university transfer

studies in programs of varying lengths. A one—year program

usually offers a certificate; a two-year program leads to a

diploma. Some colleges also offer university transfer
courses that may include one, two, or three years of study.

Canadian colleges operated in contrast to a far more

democratic educational tradition in the United States. In

America, public education was viewed as the route to

material success and the evidence of social responsibility

that provided equal opportunity for the populace (Gleazer,

1980). However, Canadian education has remained primarily

under the influence of the British school system with its

sharp distinction between the secondary schools and the

universities. Over the years, Canadian educators have tended

to totally accept the assumption that subject matter is

distributed along an hierarchical scale of values. For

example, certain studies such as English literature or

mathematics are acceptable and appropriate to college

curricula; others such as carpentry or cosmetology are not.

By tradition, certain subjects belong in the university;
others do not.
 44

However, research and positive experiences in America

caused the Canadian system to re—evaluate the purpose and
function of post-secondary education in Canada, and America
became a major influence on the ways in which the Canadian
college system developed to respond to newly identified

needs. However, change is slow, and although many Canadians

subscribe to the American approach, elitist British roots
still reside in an institutional emphasis on university

transfer and in content-driven, teacher-centered curricula

(Dennison, 1995). One area of stark contrast between the two
systems, however, is the public funding in Canada for adult
education programs such as literacy and Adult Basic
Education (ABE).

Similar to the American system are the principles and

traditions of the public community college which is being

modelled after the public school system and guided by the

same axioms. In both countries, the three prevalent

foundations are universal opportunity for a free public

education, local control and support of the educational

institution, and a relevant curriculum to meet the needs of

the individual and of the nation.

Monroe (1972) describes the objectives and functions of

the community college shared by both nations. The first

objective is to offer a comprehensive curricula that

includes liberal arts, occupational fields, adult and

continuing education, remedial education, and professional

 45

,education. The second objective is to maintain an open-door

principle to admit all high school graduates or those over

the age of 18. The third objective is to respond to the
community orientation. This involves serving the specific
needs of a geographic area, meeting the vocational needs of
the community, providing an educational opportunity for

students from middle- and upper-lower class families, and

providing leadership and research services to the community.

There are many similarities in the functions of the
community college in both in America an Canada (Monroe,
1972, p p . 32-35). These include:

Transfer Curricula. The transfer curriculum is a

basic part of all community colleges. Colleges
which primarily began as technical institutes or
vocational schools have found that they must
eventually add liberal arts to their curriculum.
Citizenship and General Education. General
education courses designed to meet citizenship
needs have become a requirement to provide the
students with leadership training and an awareness
for social responsibility.

Occupational Training. The community college is

increasingly becoming the agency to train students
for entry-level positions that require
sophisticated, technical knowledge. The community
college must also retrain employees for new jobs
as old ones become obsolete.

General Studies. These courses have a liberal arts

content and for many students offer more prestige
than the vocational courses and may be recognized
with an associate degree.

Adult and Continuing Education. The adult

education function is predicted to greatly expand
as jobs require more training and the general
level of education increases.
 46

Remedial Programs. Most community colleges now

offer remedial work in language, reading, and
mathematics to prepare students for college or
university programs.

Counselling and Guidance. There is an increasing

need for guidance services to assist students in
dealing with both personal and academic problems
while attending school.

Similar issues are shared by community colleges in both

the Canadian and American college systems. Both will require
increased funding to keep up with the rapid pace of
technological change. Both will need to expand their

international context by developing an edge in international

trade, global markets, and technological competition.
Unemployment and new employment issues will have to be

addressed to provide training for Changing employment

patterns such as entrepreneurship, home-based offices, and
cottage industries. In addition, as the population ages and
as multicultural and regional diversity increases, the

community college will be a major source of training and

leadership in each society.
 47

CHAPTER 3

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Introduction

This research project consisted of two parts* The first

phase was causal-comparative in nature to investigate the
relationship of learning strategies to a variety of

educational and demographic variables. Causal-comparative

research attempts "to determine the cause, or reason, for

existing differences in the behavior or status of groups of

individuals" (Gay, 1996, p. 321). Phase 2 of the project
involved identifying and describing clusters of learners
that existed in the sample. After the clusters were

identified by their learning strategy characteristics,

qualitative focus groups and personal interviews with

learners from each cluster were conducted to discuss their

learning patterns and preferences and to determine why and

how the groups differ. A discriminant analysis of the

clusters was then conducted to determine the process that

separates the groups (Conti, 1996, p. 71).

This inquiry into adult learning strategies arose out

of a workshop conducted for faculty at a two-year college in

Medicine Hat, Alberta. As the initial purpose of the seminar

 48

was to look at teaching styles and their effects on student

learning, a professor of adult education from an American

university was invited to share his expertise on the topic.

Participants of the workshop expressed an interest in

further exploring the learning patterns of their students,
so the presenter was invited back to assist the faculty in

this investigation. In following Schon's recommendation to

create one's own knowledge base, a study was then initiated
to examine the learning strategies of the students at
Medicine Hat College (Conti & Kolody, 1995). This study
expanded on the Medicine Hat College study and sought to

replicate a previous study that used the SKILLS instrument

to explore the learning strategies of students in tribal

colleges in Montana.

This original study using SKILLS in a college setting,

which was conducted by Hill (1992), was an investigation

into adult learning strategies at seven tribal colleges in

Montana. The purpose of the study was to determine if

learning strategies could be used to differentiate between

the most successful and the least successful learners at the
colleges as measured by grade point average. Hill's study
determined that a student's preference of learning

strategies could be used to distinguish between the groups.

The discriminant function that explained the differences

between the two groups of learners was. Uncritical

Acceptance. Those who received the highest grades

 49

uncritically accepted elements in the learning environment

while those who critically questioned factors related to
learning received the lower grades.

When this study was then replicated at the Medicine Hat

College, the findings were not consistent with those of the
tribal colleges in Montana. When the students were grouped
similarly according to grade point average, discriminant

analysis failed to produce any significant differences

between the two groups based on their preference of learning

strategies (Conti & Kolody, 1995).

Through information sharing within the Alberta Colleges

and Institutes Faculty Association (ACIFA), other colleges
in Alberta became interested in the results of the Medicine

Hat College study. This interest initiated the idea that

this study should be conducted on a province-wide basis.

Population

According to Statistics Canada (1995), the province of

Alberta had a total population of 2,716,200 in 1994. Full-

and part-time students attending college during the 1994

totalled 41,947 (p. 47). The province of Alberta has 13 two-

year colleges and institutes. To arrange Phase I of this

study, the researcher met with the professional development

coordinators of these colleges and institutes to propose

that the Medicine Hat College study be replicated at those

institutions interested and able to participate. As a

 50

result, five colleges agreed to participate in the province­

wide study and to provide a representative sample of
students from each institution. The population from these
five colleges totalled 13,486 students. In addition to
Medicine Hat College, these schools included Grande Prairie
College, Keyano College, Mt. Royal College, and Red Deer
College.

The five colleges in the study provided representation

from north, south, and central Alberta as well as from both

urban and rural settings. Medicine Hat College is located in

a southern, rural farming community of fewer than 50,000
residents. Grande Prairie College and Keyano College are
both located in rural communities of fewer than 50,000 in

the north-of the province. Red Deer College is centrally

located in a city of 75,000, and Mt. Royal College is

located in Calgary, a city of 800,000 situated in the center

of the province.

Sampling

The sample was drawn from the five participating two-

year colleges in the province of Alberta, and included 1,143

learners. In order to secure a representative sample, data

were gathered from various programs within each college.

Table I summarizes the number of respondents from each

college. Participants ranged in age from 17 to 71; females

represented 70.5% of the sample, and 29.5% was male.
 51

Table I . Number of Respondents from Each Participating

College.

College Frequency Percent

Red Deer 390 34.1

Medicine Hat 324 28.3
Grande Prairie 217 19.0
M t . Royal 137 12.0
Keyano 75 6.6

Based on a formula for sample size originally developed

by the United States Office of.Education, Krejcie and Morgan

(1970) generated a table with recommended sample sizes for

random sampling (pp. 607-610). For a population of 50,000,
the recommended sample size is 381. Roscoe (1975) recommends

that when using a multivariate statistical technique "the

sample size should be several times (preferably 10 or more

times) as large as the numbers of variables" (p. 184). As

this study used a total of 18 variables with 15 variables

from SKILLS and 3 demographic variables, a required sample

size would be 180. Using either guideline, a sample size of
1,143 well satisfies the minimum sample size required.

Instrument

As Phase I of this study involved the examination of

adult learning strategies, the Self-Knowledge Inventory of

Lifelong Learning Strategies (SKILLS) was used. This

instrument was developed at the Center for Adult Learning

 52

Research at Montana State University. This valid and

reliable instrument consists of six real-life learning
scenarios based on Shirk's (1983) learning categories.

Within each scenario, a series of questions is asked that

correspond with each of the learning strategies being

measured. The respondent is asked to select four scenarios

and to identify five strategies for each category labelled
"Definitely Use," "Possibly Use," and "Not Likely Use." The
responses are drawn from the areas of metacognition,

metamotivation, memory, critical thinking, and resource

management (Conti & Fellenz, 1991). Each of the five areas

consists of three specific learning strategies:
Metacognition: Planning, Monitoring, and Adjusting;

Metamotivation: Attention, Reward/Enjoyment, and Confidence;

Memory: Organization, External Aids, and Memory Application;

Critical Thinking: Testing Assumptions, Generating

Alternatives, and Conditional Acceptance; Resource

Management: Identification of Resources, Critical Use of

Resources, and Use of Human Resources. SKILLS has two forms

of six scenarios; both forms were used in this study.

Validity

Validity of an instrument refers to the degree to which

an instrument measures what it is actually supposed to

measure (Cates, 1985; Gay, 1996). In research dealing with

education, the three most important types are construct,

 53

content, and criterion-related validity (Kerlinger7 1973, p.

457). The two types which are relevant to SKILLS are
construct and content validity (Conti & Fellenz, 1991).
Construct validity is the degree to which the
instrument assesses a particular aspect of human behaviour
(Borg & Gallz 1983). It is the extent to which the

instrument measures the hypothetical construct which is used

to explain behaviour (p. 281). Construct validity for SKILLS
was established through literature reviews and obtaining

judgment from a number of adult education professors and

educational psychologists (Conti & Fellenz, 1991). Extensive

literature reviews were also done for each of the five
constructs. The findings from the review by the adult

education professors and educational psychologists and from

the literature review were then categorized into real-life

learning areas which were developed by Shirk (1983). A group

of adult education professors reviewed the instrument and

the theory underlying its constructs. Educational

psychologists who reviewed the instrument included Wilbert

McKeachie and Robert Sternberg. The conclusions reached by

the reviewers indicated that the instrument effectively

addressed the five theoretical constructs of metacognition,

metamotivation, memory, critical thinking, and resource

management (Conti & Fellenz, 1991).

Content validity is the degree to which an instrument

measures an intended content area. It requires both item
 54

validity and sampling validity (Gay, 1996). Item validity

for SKILLS was established by field testing the instrument
with diverse groups of adult learners in various learning
situations throughout the United States; these settings

included adult basic education programs, undergraduate and

Cfra^uate university courses, museums, health-care providers,
continuing education programs, and elderhostel programs
(Conti & Fellenz, 1991). This field testing involved 253
respondents and gathered responses to both sets of six
scenarios. The groups who participated in the field testing
ranged from 17 to 73 years of age. The mean age of the

adults in the field test group was approximately 37 years of

age. Almost two-thirds (62.8%) of the group were female. The
group was well educated with approximately three-fourths
having graduated from high school.

The participants in the field tests were from a number

of locations in the United States. They represented varying

population levels: large cities of over 250,000— 29.8%;

cities of 100,000 to 250,000— 5.3%; towns of 1,000 to

20,000— 21.8%; and rural areas under 1,000— 9.6%. These

cities, towns, and homes were located in the west,

southwest, and midwest regions of the United States. English

was the main language spoken by 91% of the respondents. A

wide variety of occupations were represented by the field

test groups. These included educators, students, clerical

workers, farmers, blue-collar workers, and homemakers. The

 55

responses of the field-test group confirmed the findings of

the expert reviewers (Conti & Fellenz, 1991).

Reliability

Reliability of an instrument is the degree to which a

test consistently measures what it is supposed to measure.
"Reliability is expressed numerically, usual as a

coefficient; a high coefficient indicates high reliability"

(Gay, 1996, p. 162). Reliability for SKILLS was addressed by
calculating a coefficient based on two equivalent forms,

administered to the same group (Conti & Fellenz, 1991). This

is the "most acceptable and most commonly used estimate of

reliability for most test used in research" (Gay, 1996,

p. 165). The coefficient of the scores was .71; the

Spearman-Brown and Guttman split-half analyses each produced

a correlation of .83 and are an accurate indicator of the

reliability of SKILLS (Conti & Fellenz, 1991). Since these

scores were above the .7 level, SKILLS was judged as a

"reliable instrument for assessing adult learning strategies

in real-life situations" (Conti & Fellenz, 1991).

Procedures for Data Collection

Data were collected in Phase I of the study by

administering SKILLS to a representative sample of students

at each of the five participating colleges in Alberta.

Permission to conduct the survey was obtained from each
 56

college president once it was assured that the study would

include only volunteer and anonymous participants. One
instructor from each college acted as the research assistant
for that location and was responsible for choosing those
classes that provided a representative sample of their
college. A general solicitation was distributed to all

instructors that encouraged them to involve their class in

this study to examine the learning strategies of the

students in their institution. The research assistant then

gathered the volunteer instructor names and checked their

Classes to a list of programs offered at that college. No

instructors interested in participating were refused.

However, if a program area had no representation, then the
research assistant contacted instructors in that area to be
solicited for such. With the sample complete for each

college, classes were randomly assigned one form of SKILLS.

To help standardize the completion of SKILLS, the

instructions for completing SKILLS were included at the top

of the answer sheet. In addition to being printed, these
instructions were also read to the students by the

instructor administering the inventory before the student

completed SKILLS. The students were informed that there were

six scenarios to be examined. They were asked to select four

scenarios that had the most relevance for them. They were

then asked to rate the 15 questions provided for each

scenario.
 57

Demographic and educational information was gathered

from the students prior to the completion of the SKILLS

instrument to further analyze the relationship between

^-earn-*-n9 strategies and student achievement. The demographic

information solicited included a student identification
number to ensure anonymity, program of study, program major,
ethnicity, and age. Once the research assistants had
forwarded the completed survey data sheets to the

researcher, the registrar from each college then provided

further information that matched student identification
numbers with gender and grade point average.

Overview of Data Analysis

Data analysis was conducted in two phases. Phase I used

the multivariate analysis techniques of discriminate

analysis. Data were collected from SKILLS and from the

demographic data sheets and entered into Dbase III Plus, a

data management software program used for data organization

and analysis. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences

(SPSS/PC+) computer statistics program was used to analyze
the statistical data.

Discriminant analysis is used because:

[It] is concerned with the grouping of people and

with analyzing the interrelationship of multiple
variables to determine if they can explain a
person's placement in a specific group. Unlike
univariate analyses which examine individual
variables separately and allow them to be
disassociated from the total person who is a
 58

synergistic composition of these various

variables, discriminant analysis examines people
on a set of variables to determine if any of them
interact in a combination that can explain the
person's placement in the group. (Conti, 1993,
p. 91)

As in Hill's (1992) study, students were grouped by GPA, and

the individual learning strategies of SKILLS were used as

the discriminating variables. The two groups used in the

analysis were those who were in the highest and lowest 15%
of the group; 15% corresponds with one standard deviation
from the mean (Conti & Kolody, 1995).

In Phase 2, cluster analysis was then used to further

explore the use of learning strategies (Conti & Fellenz,

1989; Hays, 1995; Strakal, 1995; Yabui, 1993). "Cluster

analysis is a powerful multivariate tool available to adult

educators for inductively identifying groups which

inherently exist in the data. Its power lies in its ability

to examine the person in a holistic manner rather than as a

set of unrelated variables" (Conti, 1996, p. 67). Once

clusters were identified, other qualitative and quantitative

techniques were used to help name and describe the clusters

(p. 67). Analysis of variance is a useful tool for

determining which variables are related to each cluster and

for determining how the variables are associated with the

cluster. After the five-cluster solution was selected, means

for each of the 15 learning strategies in SKILLS were

calculated for each cluster group. A one-way analysis of

 59

variance was conducted for each of the 15 variables to

<^e^erm^-ne if there were significant differences among the

five clusters (Hays, 199.5; Yabui, 1993) . Variables on which
the groups differed significantly were retained in the
analysis to characterize and assist in naming the groups.
Finally, a discriminant analysis was conducted with the

clusters as the grouping variable to determine the process

that distinguished the clusters from each other.

Unfortunately, this statistical process only provides

insights into the numeric data and does not provide

additional material for a rich description of the clusters.

To achieve this, supplementary data was needed. These data

were secured through individual focus groups with

representative learners from the various clusters. Insights

from the quantitative data analysis were used as a guide for
planning the protocol for the interviewing sessions

(Strakal, 1995, pp. 189-197). The qualitative data gathered

through this process was combined with the quantitative

data, and together this expanded data source provided a more

comprehensive and accurate description of the clusters.

Through a series of learning strategies studies in Montana

(Conti & Fellenz, 1989; Conti & Kolody, 1995; Hays, 1995;
Kolody & Conti, 1996; Strakal, 1995; Yabui, 1993), a

triangulation process has been developed for interpreting

cluster compositions. Triangulation is defined by Cuba

(1978) as testing one source against another to satisfy
 i

60
validity of interpretation. This process involves using the
existing quantitative data and gathering additional
qualitative data (Conti, 1996, p. 70).

Thus, Phase 2 of the study involved identifying

clusters in the data and describing them through a
combination of quantitative analyses and by collecting
qualitative data through focus groups and personal

interviews that helped to describe and name the clusters.

Since five distinct groups of learners were identified in
the quantitative process, group and individual interviews of

learners within each cluster were conducted. The purpose of

these interviews was to elicit responses from the

participants that described their learning patterns and

preferences to determine why and how the clusters differ

(Kolody & Conti, 1996, p. 200). As Strakal (1995)

recommends, discussion questions were specifically designed

for each cluster to ensure relevancy to the groups'
preferred learning patterns.
 61

CHAPTER 4

QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS

Educational research involves the human power of

reason. This reasoning can take either a deductive approach,
an inductive approach, or a combination of the two.

Deductive reasoning is processing a generalization down into

a specific application. Inductive reasoning is forming
generalizations based on observations. Using deductive or
inductive reasoning exclusively is of limited value, but

using deductive and inductive reasoning together as integral

components of the scientific method of research is very
effective (Gay, 1996).

The goal from educational research follows from

the goal of all science, namely, to explain,
predict, or control educational phenomena. The
major difference between education research and
other scientific research is the nature of the
phenomena studied. It is considerably more
difficult to explain, predict, and control
situations involving human beings, by far the most
complex organisms. There are so many variables,
known and unknown, operating in any educational
environment that it is extremely difficult to
generalize or replicate findings, (p. 7)

Quantitative research is clearly deductive. The

quantitative researcher isolates the variables to be

studied, formulates in advance a specific statement of a

problem and a specific hypothesis to be tested, collects

 62

standardized data from all participants, analyzes the data

and states conclusions related to generalizability (p. 212)
With the deductive approach, researchers impose
sense on the data by asking questions of the data
that are meaningful to. the researcher and which
the researchers bring to the study based upon
their knowledge, experience, and intuition.
Multivariate statistical procedures such as
discriminant analysis (Conti, 1993; Klecka, 1990)
allow the researcher to function in the
psychological mode by dividing learners into
predetermined groups to examine if this
categorization produces the differences which were
hypothesized. (Conti, 1996, p. 67)

Qualitative research is inductive. The qualitative

researcher seeks to derive and describe findings that

promote greater understanding of how and why people behave

the way they do (Gay, 1996, p. 211).

With the inductive approach to research,

researchers function more in a sociological mode.
Here the issue is how to tease sense out of the
data. Rather than imposing sense upon the data,
the goal is to have meaning and understanding
emanate from the data itself. (Conti, 1996^ p. 67)
Both methods of inquiry were used in this study to

determine if learners differed in their use of learning

strategies and if distinctive groups of learners could be

identified based on SKILLS learning strategy scores. This

research project consisted of two parts. The first part was

causal-comparative in nature to deductively investigate the

relationship of learning strategies to a variety of

educational and demographic variables. Causal—comparative

research is that in which the researcher attempts to

determine the cause or reason for differences between groups
 63

of individuals— in effect, the major variable that has led

this difference. "Such research is referred to as 7ex

post facto (Latin— 'after the fact') since both effect and

the alleged cause have already occurred and are studied by

the researcher in retrospect" (Gay, 1996, p. 322).

The second part of the study was descriptive and was

approached inductively, cluster analysis was used to
identify the groups which inherently existed in the data
(Conti, 1996). To help name and describe these clusters,

analysis of variance and discriminant analysis were

conducted. Since five distinct groups of learners were

identified by this quantitative process, personal interviews

were conducted to collect supplementary qualitative data to

further assist in describing the clusters. The purpose of
these interviews was to elicit responses from the

participants that described their learning patterns and

preferences to determine why and how the clusters differ.

Statistical Profile of the Learners

The sample for the study included representation from

all program areas at five Canadian two-year colleges. It was

selected to ensure a representative sample from each

college. The Self-Knowledge Inventory of Lifelong Learning

Strategies (SKILLS) was used to measure learning strategies.

There are two sets of scenarios for SKILLS. Both have

established reliability and validity. Each class was

 64

randomly assigned one form of SKILLS. Set I was completed by

401 students, and 742 students answered Set 2.

A total of 1,143 college students participated in this

study. The group ranged in ages from 17 to 71 with a mean

age of 23i8. Two-thirds of the respondents were in the 17-23

year age group. The remaining one-third ranged in age from

24-71 (see Table 2). The gender distribution in this study
was 781 (68.3%) females and 362 (31.7%) males; since the
provincial distribution is 59.1% females 40.9% males

(Statistics Canada, 1995), the portion of females in this

study was slightly higher than the average..

Table 2. Age Frequency of Participants.

Cumulative
Age Groupings Frequency Percent Percent

17 2 0 0
18 181 16 16
19 217 19 36
20 144 13 48
21 97 9 57
22 70 6 63
23 47 4 67
24-30 175 16 83
31-40 148 13 96
41-71 42 4 100

Since the majority of courses offered at two-year

colleges are certificate and diploma programs, it was not

 65

surprising that almost 65% of the participants were in

certificate and diploma programs (see Table 3).

Table 3. Program Frequency of Participants.

Program Frequency Percent

Certificate/Diploma 721 63.1

University Transfer 398 34.8
Undeclared 24 2.1

The overall grade point average on a four-point scale

for the group ranged from .33 to 4.0 with a mean of 2.84

(see Table 4). As in Hill's study (1993), least successful

students were those in the lower 15 percentile and the most

successful students were those in the highest 15 percentile.

Table 4. Distribution of Grade Point Averages.

Cumulative
Value Frequency Percent Percent

0.00 -1.97 127 13 13

1.98 -3.68 810 69 82
3.69 -4.00 206 18 100

Overwhelmingly, 90% of the respondents were Caucasian

(see Table 5). This Caucasian predominance is representative
of the general population of the province of Alberta.
 66

Table 5. Ethnicity of Participants.

Ethnicity Frequency Percent

Caucasian 1,003 87.8

Asian 36 3.1
Aboriginal 31 2.7
Hispanic 10 .9
Black 5 .4
Undeclared 58 5.1

The overall profile for two-year college students

throughout the province revealed a divergent group of
learners; no single learning strategy area or specific

learning strategy was predominant. In scoring SKILLS,

respondents receive three points for each item that they

would Definitely Use, two points for one that they might

Possibly Use, and one point for an item that they would Not
Likely Use. Since there are four scenarios which each have

one learning strategy item in them, the range of the total

possible score for each learning strategy is 4 to 12.
Similarly, since there are three learning strategies in each

learning strategy area, the range of possible scores for the

learning strategies areas is 12 to 36. All the group means

were near the middle of the range (see Table 6). Resource

Management was the learning strategy area most preferred by

the participants, while Metamotivation was the least common
learning strategy area relied upon by the students.
 67

Table 6. Means of Learning Strategies Areas of SKILLS Used

by Participants.

Areas Mean SD Range

Resource Management 25.48 3.27 15-34

Memory 24.12 2.97 15-34
Critical Thinking 23.88 . 3.01 15-33
Metacognition 23.16 2.83 14-32
Metamotivation 22.92 3.38 14-33

The 5 learning strategies areas are composed of 15

individual learning strategies. Each area has three learning

strategies. The distribution of scores revealed that Testing
Assumptions, which is a Critical Thinking learning strategy,
and Critical Use of Resources, which is a Resource

Management learning strategy, were the two learning

strategies most commonly preferred by the participants. The

Metamotivation learning strategy of Reward/Enjoyment was the

strategy least relied upon by the students. Although the

strategies had individuals who scored at the extremes, the

overall group means were near the middle of the group. With

a possible range of 8, the divergence between the highest

and the lowest mean was 1.81; this represents 22.6% of the

possible range. Collectively, these scores show little

divergence in learning strategies when the participants are

viewed as a group (see Table 7).
 68

Table 7. Means of Individual Learning Strategies of SKILLS

Used by Participants.

Learning Strategies Mean SD Range

Testing Assumptions 8.85 1.64 4 -12

Use of External Aids 8.85 1.78 4 -12
Identification of Resources 8.79 1.70 4 -12
Planning 8.72 1.80 4 -12
Use of Human Resources 8.67 1.69 4 -12
Attention 8.48 1.87 4 -12
Critical Use of Resources 8.02 1.74 4 -12
Organization 7.95 1.76 4 -12
Generating Alternatives 7.75 1.64 4 -12
Confidence 7.40 1.94 4 -12
Memory Application 7.32 1.74 4 -12
Critical Acceptance 7.28 1.74 4 -12
Monitoring 7.23 1.57 4 -12
Adjusting 7.21 1.71 4 -12
Reward 7.04 1.78 4 -12

Discriminant Analysis

Discriminant analysis is a statistical technique which

allows the investigation of the differences between two or

more groups in relationship to several variables

simultaneously (Klecka, 1990, p. 7). In discriminant

analysis as with other multivariate techniques, the emphasis

is upon analyzing the variables together rather than singly;

the purpose of. multivariate procedures is to examine the

interaction of the multiple variables (Conti, 1993).

"Discriminant analysis requires the researcher to make

 69

meaningful decisions about the data and to impose sense upon

it" (p. 90).

Discriminant analysis can be used either to describe

the way groups differ or to predict membership in a group.

In this study, discriminant analysis was used to investigate

if learning strategies could be used to identify the ways
groups differed. For these analyses, the 1,143 participants
were grouped according to success in college as measured by
grade point average, gender, program of study, and age. In

addition, discriminant analysis was used to identify the

process that separated the clusters which were found in the

cluster analysis (Conti, 1996, p. 71).

Two criteria were used for judging if it was possible

to discriminate between those in the group using the

discriminating variables related to learning strategies. The

first criterion was that the discriminant function produced
by the analysis had to be describable using the structure

coefficients with a value of .3 or greater (Conti, 1993,

P- 93). The second criterion was that the discriminant

function had to correctly classify at least one-half of the

cases beyond the chance placement than might occur in the
group.

Discriminant analysis produces a discriminant function

regardless of the meaning or the statistical significance of

the function. Therefore, the researcher has to have

established criteria for determining if the function can be

 70

"judged as good and useful" (p. 93). The first criterion

accomplished this by examining the structure matrix produced
in the analysis. The structure matrix shows the correlation
between the individual discriminating variables and the

overall discriminant function (Klecka, 1990, p. 31). If

several of the variables do not have a coefficient of at

least .3, it is impossible to discern the meaning of the
function. In analyses which use a large number of variables,
it is possible to get functions which have high predictive
ability but which correlate with so many of the variables
that it is impossible to decipher the meaning of the

function (Hill, 1992). Thus, this criterion requires that

the discriminant function must have clarity in order to be

judged good and useful.

The second criterion requires the discriminant function

to account for a significant amount of variance before it
can be judged good and useful. "The percentage of cases

classified correctly is often taken as an index of the

effectiveness of the discriminant function. When evaluating

this measure it is important to compare the observed

misclassification rate to that expected by chance alone"

(Norusis, 1988b, p. B-13). Chance simply refers to the
probability of the person randomly being placed in the

group. "The probability of occurrence of any one of a set of

equally likely events is one divided by the number of

events" (Roscoe, 1975, p. 140). This probability is

 71

expressed in percentages when referring to the

classification rate for a discriminant function. The

criterion that was used in this study was that in order for

the discriminant function to be judged as useful, it had to

correctly classify not only those possible by chance but

also an additional 50% of that number. For example, in a

two-group analysis, the discriminant function had to
correctly classify 75% of the cases; this represents the 50%
due to chance place and an additional 25% which is one-half
of the 50% chance placement.

Together these two criteria require that the results of

a discriminant analysis be good and useful before being
accepted to describe the differences in the groups. These

criteria were necessary because analyses which use a large

number of variables can produce functions which have high

classification percentages but which offer no clear

descriptive power. Other analyses produce functions which

can be clearly described but which have low classification

power. Therefore, the combination of these two criteria

requires that the function be both clearly descriptive and

highly accurate in order to be used.

Grades

Discriminant analysis was used to describe the

combination of variables that could be used to distinguish

the most successful learners from the least successful

 72

learners as determined by their grade point average (GPA)

based on a 4^point scale. Thus, for purposes of analysis,
,the 1,143 respondents were placed in three groups (see
Table 4). One group of 127 contained individuals who had a
GPA lower than 1.98. The other group of 206 was made up of
those students with a GPA higher than 3.68. Those students
whose GPA fell between the range of 1.98 -3.68 were placed
in the middle group. This group totalled 810 cases and was

not used in this analysis. Like in Hill's (1992) study, this

constituted groups composed of the 15% with the highest and

lowest grades. Thus, these are the students who are
approximately one standard deviation from the mean. By

looking at groups that are distinctly different from the

classification variable and by having a buffer zone between

them, chances of finding meaningful differences are
increased (Yabui, 1993).

The set of discriminating variables used to predict

placement in these groups consisted of the learning

strategies found in SKILLS. The 15 separate variables in

this set were as follows: Metacognition— Planning,

Monitoring, and Adjusting; Metamotivation— Attention,

Reward/Enjoyment, and Confidence; Memory— Organization,

Using External Aids, and Memory Application; Critical

Thinking— Testing Assumptions, Generating Alternatives, and

Conditional Acceptance; and Resource Management—
 73 1

Identification of Resources, Critical Use of Resources, and

Use of Human Resource.

The pooled within-groups correlations are the

correlations for the variables with the respondents placed

in their groups of either most successful or least
successful learners. The pooled within-groups correlation
matrix of discriminating variables was examined because
interdependencies among variables is important in most
multivariate analyses. That is, in order for multiple

variables to be included in an analysis, they should not be

sharing variance; a high correlation indicates that

variables are indeed accounting for the same variance. The

within-groups matrix reveals how the discriminant function

is related to the variables within each group in the

analysis. The examination of the 105 coefficients in this

analysis showed that all were at a sufficiently weak level

to retain the variables in the analysis. Only 11

coefficients were at the .2 level; and the remaining 94 were

all below the .2 level. Thus, the variables in this

discriminant analysis were not related to each other and

consequently were not sharing a common variance.

Stepwise selection was used to determine which

variables added most to the discrimination between the most

successful and the least successful learners. Stepwise

procedures produce an optimal set of discriminating

variables. Although there are various methods of selecting

 74

variables for inclusion in the discriminant analysis,

Wilks's lambda was chosen for this analysis because it takes

into consideration both the differences between the groups

and the cohesiveness within the groups. Because of its

approach to variable selection, Wilks's lambda is commonly

used in discriminant analysis studies in education. As a
result of this stepwise procedure, 5 variables were included
in the discriminant function. The following discriminating
variables and their corresponding Wilks's lambda values were
selected: Reward/Enjoyment— .98; Planning— .95; Adjusting—
.95; Critical Acceptance— .95; and Using External Aids— .95.

The other 10 variables included in the analysis did not

account for enough variance to be included in the
discriminant function.

Standardized discriminant function coefficients are

used to determine which variables contribute most to the

discrimination between the groups. By examining the

standardized coefficients, the relative importance of each

variable to the overall discriminant function can be

determined. The standardized coefficients for this function

which discriminated the most successful from the least

successful learners were as follows: Reward/Enjoyment (.82);

Planning (.41); Critical Acceptance (.39); Using External
Aids (-.31); and Adjusting (.25). Thus, Reward/Enjoyment

contributed about twice as much as Planning, Critical

Acceptance, and Using External Aids and about four times as

 75

much as Adjusting in discriminating between most successful

and least successful learners.

The percentage of cases correctly classified, shows how

accurate the discriminant.function was in grouping the

respondents. This discriminant function was 61.6% accurate

in classifying cases. It correctly placed 78 (61.4%) in the
least successful learning group and 127 (61.7%) in the most
successful learning group. Thus, the discriminant function
is an 11.6% improvement over chance in predicting group

placement. Consequently, it demonstrates that least

successful and most successful learners cannot be

distinguished on the basis of their preference for learning

strategies.

The discriminant function which was used to classify

the cases into these groups was as follows:

D = .23 (Planning) + .15 (Adjusting) + .48

(Reward/Enjoyment) -.17 (Using External Aids) +
.23 (Critical Acceptance) -6.64.

The group centroid for the least successful learning group

was .306, and it was -.189 for the dropout group. The

canonical correlation is a measure of the degree of

association between the discriminant scores and the groups

and was .24 for this Studyi When this is squared, it

indicates that the groups explain only 5% of the variation

in the discriminant function.

The structure matrix contains the coefficients which

show the similarity between each individual variable and the

 76

total discriminate function. The variables with the highest

coefficients have the strongest relationship to the

discriminant function. These coefficients are used to name

the discriminant function because they show how closely the
variable and the overall discriminant function are related.
In a study such as this in which the discriminant analysis
is used for descriptive purposes, this is the most important
information related to discriminant functions which satisfy
the acceptance criteria. This elevated importance stems from
the fact that interpreting the structure matrix results in
naming the process that distinguishes the groups from each

other. Since the overall purpose of discriminant analysis is

to describe the phenomenon that discriminates the groups

from each other, this logical process of giving meaning to

the discriminant function by interpreting the structure

matrix is central and critical to the whole process. In this

interpreting process, variables with coefficients of

approximately .3 and above are generally included in the

interpretation.

Two variables had sufficient coefficients to be

included in the interpretation of the meaning of the

discriminant function. They were Reward/Enjoyment (.75) and

Using External Aids (-.40). However, because of the low

percentage of variance explained by the discriminant

function and because of its lack of accuracy in placing

 77

people into the correct group, the discriminant function was

not named.

Thus, a discriminant analysis was calculated to

investigate the research question that it was possible to
use a variety of variables related to learning strategies to
discriminate between most successful and least successful
learners at the two-year colleges. Based on the low

percentage of variance explained by the discriminant

function between groups and the low percentage of accuracy

of prediction into the groups by the discriminant function,
it was determined that it is not possible to use learning
strategies to discriminate between groups categorized by
grade point average.

Gender

An analysis was conducted to investigate if two-year

college students in Canada differed in their learning

strategy usage. For purposes of this discriminant analysis,

the respondents were grouped according to gender. The set of

discriminating variables used to predict placement in these

groups consisted of the 15 learning strategies found in

SKILLS.

The pooled within-groups correlations are the

correlations for the variables with the respondents placed

in their groups of either gender. The examination of the 105

coefficients in the pooled within-groups. correlations in

 78

this analysis showed that all were at a sufficiently weak

level to retain the variables in the analysis. Only eight

coefficients were at the .2 level; and the remaining 97 were

all below the .2 level. Thus, the variables in this
discriminant analysis were not related to each other and
consequently were not sharing a comirton variance.

Stepwise selection was used to determine which

variables added most to the discrimination between the

genders. As a result of this Wilks' lambda stepwise

procedure, nine variables were included in the discriminant

function. The following discriminating variables and their
corresponding Wilks's lambda values were selected: Use of
External Aids— .97; Monitoring— .96; Confidence— .96;

Critical Use of Resources-— .96; Memory Application— .96;

Reward/Enjoyment— .96; Use of Human Resources— .96;

Attention— .96 and Testing Assumptions— .96. The other six

variables included in the analysis did not account for

enough variance to be included in the discriminant function.

The standardized coefficients for this function which

discriminated between the genders were as follows: Use of

External Aids (.67); Monitoring (.46); Confidence (.41);

Identification of Resources (.37); Memory Application (.34);

Reward/Enjoyraent (.33) ; Use of Human Resources (.25);

Attention (.21); and Testing Assumptions (.15). Thus, Use of

External Aids, Monitoring, and Confidence contributed about

 79

twice as much as Use of Human Resources, Attention, and

Testing Assumptions in discriminating between genders.

The percentage of cases correctly classified was
60.28%. The classification correctly placed 219 (60.5%) in
the male group and 311 (39.8%) in the female group. Thus,
the discriminant function is a 10.3% improvement over chance
predicting group placement. Consequently, it demonstrates
that gender cannot be distinguished on the basis of

learners' preference for learning strategies.

The discriminant function which was used to classify

the cases into these groups was as follows:

D = .11 (Attention) -.29 (Monitoring) + .18

(Reward/Enjoyment) + .21 (Confidence) + .38 (Use
of External Aids) -.20 (Memory Application) + .93
(Testing Assumptions) + .21 (Identification of
Resources) + .15 (Use of Human Resources) -7.35.

The group centroid for the male group was -.318, and it was

.147 for the female group. The canonical correlation was .21

for this study. When this is squared, it indicates that the

groups explain only 4% of the variation in the discriminant

function.

Three variables in the structure matrix had sufficient

coefficients to be included in the interpretation of the

meaning of the discriminant function. They were as follows:

Use of External Aids (.48); Monitoring (.46); and Memory

Application (.41). Because of the low percentage of variance

explained by the discriminant function and the lack of

 80

accuracy in classification, the discriminant function was

not named.

Thus, a discriminant analysis was calculated to

investigate the research question that it was possible to
use a variety of variables related to learning strategies to
discriminate between genders. Based on the low percentage of
variance explained by the discriminant function between
groups and the low percentage of accuracy of prediction into
the groups by the discriminant function, it was determined
that it is hot possible to use learning strategies to
discriminate between groups categorized by gender.

Program

For purposes of the discriminant analysis, the

respondents were divided according to program of study. The

program areas were University Transfer program and the

Certificate/Diploma program. The set of discriminating

variables used to predict placement in these groups

consisted of the 15 learning strategies found in SKILLS.

The pooled within-groups correlations are the

correlations for the variables with the respondents placed

in their groups of either University Transfer or
Certificate/Diploma program. The examination of the 105

coefficients in the pooled within-groups correlations in

this analysis showed that all were at a sufficiently weak

level to retain the variables in the analysis. Only eight

 81

coefficients were at the .2 level, and the remaining 97 were

all below the .2 level. Thus, the variables in this
discriminant analysis were not related to each other and
consequently were not sharing a common variance.
Stepwise selection was used to determine Which
variables added most to the discrimination between the
programs. As a result of this Wilks' lambda stepwise

procedure, five variables were included in the discriminant

function. The following discriminating variables and their

corresponding Wilks's lambda values were selected: Memory

Application-^.98; Reward/Enjoyment— -.98; Use of External
Aids— .98; Generating Alternatives— .98; and Organization—
.98. The other 10 variables included in the analysis did not
account for enough variance to be included in the
discriminant function.

The standardized coefficients for this function which

discriminated between the programs were as follows: Memory

Application (.51); Reward/Enjoyment (.49); Use of External

Aids (.48) ; Generating Alternatives (.29); and Organization

(.27). Thus, Memory Application, Reward/Enjoyment, and Use

of External Aids contributed almost twice as much as

Generating Alternatives and Organization in discriminating

between programs.

The percentage of cases correctly classified was

55.14%. The classification correctly placed 223 (56.0%) in

the University Transfer group and 327 (45.4%) in the

 82

Certificate/Diploma group. Thus, the discriminant function

is a 5.14% improvement over chance in predicting group
placement. Consequently, it demonstrates that program of
study cannot be distinguished on the basis of learners'
preference for learning strategies.

The discriminant function which was used to classify

the cases:

D = .15 (Organization) -.27 (Reward/Enjoyment)

+ .27 (Use of External Aids) + .29 (Memory
Application) + .18 (Generating Alternatives)
-5.17.

The group centroid for the University Transfer group was

.203, and it was -.112 for the Certificate/Diploma group.
The canonical correlation was .15 for this study. When this
is squared, it indicates that the groups explain only 2% of
the variation in the discriminant function.

Four variables in the structure matrix had sufficient

coefficients to be included in the interpretation of the

meaning of the discriminant function. They were as follows:

Reward/Enjoyment (.62); Use of External Aids (.52); Memory
Application (.52); and Generating Alternatives (.38).

Because of the low percentage of variance explained by the

discriminant function and the lack of accuracy in

classification, the discriminant function was not named.

Thus, a discriminant analysis was calculated to

investigate the research question that it was possible to

use a variety of variables related to learning strategies to
 83

discriminate between program of study. Based on the low

percentage of variance explained by the discriminant

function between groups and the low percentage of accuracy
of prediction into the groups by the discriminant function,
it was determined that it is not possible to use learning
strategies to discriminate between groups categorized by
program areas.

Age

For purposes Of the discriminant analysis, the

respondents were divided according to age (see Table 2). The
following age groupings were used: groups of students under
the age of 20, those 20 through 23 years of age, and those

over 23 years old. The set of discriminating variables used

to predict placement in these groups consisted of the 15

learning strategies found in SKILLS.

The pooled within-groups correlations are the

correlations for the variables with the respondents placed

in their groups of students under the age of 20, those 20
through 23 years of age, and those over 23 years old. The

examination of the 105 coefficients in the pooled within-

groups correlations in this analysis showed that all were at

a sufficiently weak level to retain the variables in the

analysis. Only 8 coefficients were at the .2 level; and the

remaining 97 were all below the .2 level. Thus, the

variables in this discriminant analysis were not related to

 84

each other and consequently were not sharing a common

variance.

Stepwise selection was used to determine which

variables added most to the discrimination between the three

age groups. As a result of this Wilks' lambda stepwise
procedure, eight variables were included in the discriminant

function. The following discriminating variables and their

corresponding Wilks's lambda values were selected:

Reward/Enjoyment— .97; Generating Alternatives— .96; Use of

Human Resources— .96; Adjusting— .96; Critical Acceptance—

.96; Memory Application— .96; Critical Use of Resources—

.96; and Planning— .96. The other seven variables included
in the analysis did not account for enough variance to be
included in the discriminant function.

Two canonical discriminant functions were produced in

the analysis. The standardized coefficients for the first

function were as follows: Reward/Enjoyment (.68); Use of

Human Resources (.46); Adjusting (.39); Critical Acceptance

(.39); Generating Alternatives (.37); Memory Application

(.35); Critical Use of Resources (.18); and Planning (-.04).

Thus, Use of Human Resources contributes about two-thirds as

much as Reward/Enjoyment in discriminating between age

groups, and Reward/Enjoyment contributes twice as much as

Adjusting, Critical Acceptance, and Generating Alternatives.

Reward/Enjoyment also contributes four times as much as
 85

Critical Use of Resources and twenty times as much as

Planning in discriminating between age groups.
Two discriminant functions which were used to classify
the cases. The first discriminant function was:

D = + .23 (Adjusting) -.23 (Planning) + .38

(Reward/Enjoyment) + .20 (Memory Application)
+ .23 (Generating Alternatives + .22 (Critical
Acceptance) + .10 (Critical Use of Resources)
+ .27 (Use of Human Resources) -12.16.

The group centroids for the first function were as follows:

.171 for the Under 20 age group; .068 for the Age 20-23

group, and -.264 for the Over 23 age group. The canonical

correlation was .18 for the first function relating to age.

When this is squared, it indicates that the groups explain
only 3% of the variation in this discriminant function.

Nine variables in the structure matrix had sufficient

coefficients to be included in the interpretation of the

meaning of the first discriminant function related to age.

They were as follows: Reward/Enjoyment (.47); Planning

(-.41); Attention (-.40); Memory Application (.39); Critical

Acceptance (.38); Monitoring (-.34); Use of Human Resources

(.31); Generating Alternatives (.34); and Adjusting (.34).

Because of the low percentage of variance explained by the

discriminant function and the lack of accuracy in

classification, this discriminant function was not named.

The standardized coefficients for the second function

which discriminated between age groups were as follows:

Critical Use of Resources (.69); Planning (.59); Generating

 I

86

Alternatives (.55); Memory Application (.35); Adjusting

(-.20); Critical Acceptance (.16); Reward/Enjoyment (.03);
and Use of Human Resources (-.02). Thus, Critical Use of

Resources, Planning, and Generating Alternatives contribute

about twice as much as Memory Application, Adjusting, and
Critical Acceptance. They contributed about 25 times as much
in discriminating between age groups than Reward/Enjoyment
and Use of Human Resources.

The second discriminant function which was used to

classify the cases was as follows:

D = .37 (Planning) -.12 (Adjusting) + .19

(Reward/Enjoyment) + .20 (Memory Application)
+ .33 (Generating Alternatives) + .92 (Critical
Acceptance) + .40 (Critical Use of Resources) -.96
(Use of Human Resources) -9.97.

The group centroids for the second function were as follows:

.092 for the Under 20 age group; -.142 for the Age 20-23

group, and .033 for the Over 23 age group. The canonical
correlation was .0987 for the second function relating to

age in this study. When this is squared, it indicates that

the groups explain less than 1% of the variation in this

discriminant function.

Four variables in the structure matrix had sufficient

coefficients to be included in the interpretation of the

meaning of the second discriminant function related to age.

They were as follows: Critical Use of Resources (.58);

Generating Alternatives (.45); Planning (.39); and Adjusting

(.38). Because of the low percentage of variance explained

 87

by the discriminant function and the lack of accuracy in

classification, this discriminant function was not named.
The percentage of cases correctly classified was
41.29%. The classification correctly placed 170 (40.5%) in
the Under 20 age group, 122 (34.1%) in the Age 20-23 group,
and 180 (49.3%) in the Over 23 age group. Thus, the

discriminant functions are a 7.96% improvement over chance

in predicting group placement. Consequently, it demonstrates

that age cannot be distinguished on the basis of learners'

preference for learning strategies.

Thus, a discriminant analysis was calculated to

investigate the research question that it was possible to

use a variety of variables related to learning strategies to
discriminate between age groups. Based on the low percentage

of variance explained by the discriminant function between

groups and the low percentage of accuracy of prediction into

the groups by the discriminant function, it was determined

that it is not possible to use.learning strategies to

discriminate between groups categorized by age.

Summary

In this study, discriminant analysis was used to

analyze the relationship between learning strategies and

various demographic and educational variables. Using the

deductive approach of inquiry, groupings believed to have an

influence upon how people used learning strategies were

 88

imposed upon the data. However, learning strategies as

measured by SKILLS were not useful in discriminating similar

groups of learners in the Canadian two-year colleges.,

Likewise, only weak differences were found when the learners

were grouped in the. areas of gender, program, and age.
Consistently, each of these analyses explained only about
10% of the variance that could be explained beyond mere
chance.
 89

CHAPTER 5

IDENTIFYING GROUPS OF LEARNERS

Cluster Analysis

Once the discriminant analysis had been conducted on

the quantitative data gathered from the 1,143 participants
during Phase I of this research project, Phase 2 was

initiated to determine if groups of learners could be

• e ' \
identified based on SKILLS learning strategies. Phase 2
involved the use of cluster analysis, one-way analysis of

variance, and interviewing techniques to help describe the

clusters. Cluster analysis is a "useful statistical

procedure to discover structure in data that is not readily

apparent by visual inspection or by appeal to other

authority" (Aldenderfer & Blashfield, 1984, p. 16). With

this inductive approach to rationalistic inquiry,

"researchers function more in a sociological mode. Here the

issue is how to tease sense out of the data. Rather than

imposing sense upon the data, the goal is to have meaning

and understanding emanate from the data itself (Conti, 1996,

p. 67).

Cluster analysis is a multivariate statistical

procedure that seeks to identify homogeneous groups or
 90

clusters (Aldenderfer & Blashfield, 1984, Chapter I;

Norusis, 1988a, p. B-71). There are several methods for

determining how cases will be combined into clusters. The

Ward's method has been widely used in the social sciences

and was chosen in this study because "it is designed to

optimize the minimum variance within clusters and tends to
create clusters of relatively equal size" (Aldenderfer &
Blashfield, 1984, p. 43).

Because of the large capacity of computer memory

required, to conduct a cluster analysis of a large sample

size, SPSS has developed a procedure called Quick Cluster

that allows the researcher "to cluster a large number of
cases efficiently without requiring substantial computer
resources" (Norusis, 1988b, p. B-91). Several potential

cluster solutions were considered for this study. Using the

two-through-seven quick cluster procedure in SPSS-PC, the

five cluster solution was determined to be the most

appropriate for this data set based on the distribution of

participants in each group.

The five clusters of adult learners were named

Navigators, Monitors, Critical Thinkers, Engagers, and

Networkers. The participants were distributed fairly equally

among the clusters (see Table 8). The names for the clusters

were derived from both a statistical profile of each group

based on the 15 variables in SKILLS and from follow-up

 91

analysis of qualitative interviews with participants from

the various groups.

Table 8. Cluster Frequency Distribution.

Cluster Name Frequency Percent

Navigators 259 22.7

Engagers 236 20.7
Monitors 226 19.8
Critical Thinkers 223 19.5
Networkers 199 17.4

ANOVA of the Clusters

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a useful tool for

determining which variables are related to each cluster and

for determining how the variables are associated with the

cluster (Conti, 1996, p. 70). Means for each of the 15

learning strategies in SKILLS were calculated for each of

the five cluster groups. A one-way analysis of variance was

conducted on each of these 15 variables to determine if

there were significant differences among the five cluster

groups (Hays, 1995; Strakal, 1995; Yabui, 1993). Significant

differences existed in all of the 15 learning strategies

(see Table 9). Therefore, all 15 variables were retained in

the analysis to characterize and assist in naming the
groups.
 92

Table 9. ANOVA of Significantly Different Learning

Strategies in Clusters.

Strategy df . SS MS Z E
Planning
Between 4 671.50 167.88 63.17 .0001
Within 1138 3024.22 2.66
Monitoring
Between 4 329.95 82.49 36.84 .0001
Within 1138 2480.91 2.18
Adjusting
Between 4 414.88 103.72 40.18 .0001
Within 1138 2937.61 2.58
Attention
Between 4 1041.64 260.41 100.88 .0001
Within 1138 2937.62 2.58
Reward
Between 4 925.24 231.31 97.57 .0001
Within 1138 2697.98 2.37
Confidence
Between 4 1938.40 484.60 232.90 .0001
Within 1138 2367.88 2.08
Organization
Between ■4 481.58 120.40 44.72 .0001
Within 1138 3063.48 2.69
Use of External Aids
Between 4 969.54 242.39 103.47 .0001
Within 1138 2665.97 2.34
Memory Application
Between 4 828.16 207.04 89.48 .0001
Within 1138 2633.19 2.31
Testing Assumptions
Between 4 263.96 65.99 26.63 .0001
Within 1138 2820.06 2.48
Generating Alternatives
Between 4 264.67 66.42 27.04 .0001
Within 1138 2795.26 2.46
Conditional Acceptance
Between 4 457.02 114.26 43.12 .0001
Within 1138 3015.62 2.65
Identification of Res.
Between 4 479.65 119.91 48.41 .0001
Within 1138 2818.83 2.48
Critical Use of Res.
Between 4 870.52 217.63 95.62 .0001
Within 1138 2590.02 2.28
Use of Human Resources
Between 4 363.93 90.98 35.73 .0001
Within 1138 2897.73 2.55
 93

A one-way analysis of variance was also conducted on

each of the eight demographic variables to determine if

there were significant differences among the five cluster
groups (see Table 10). There existed a significant

difference of each of the five demographic variables of

program, age, college, and GPA. Therefore, these significant
variables were retained to assist in analyzing and naming
the groups. The one-way analysis also determined that there

Table 10. ANOVA of Demographic Variables among Clusters.

Variable df SS MS F E

Variables with Significant Difference

College
Between 4 185.70 46.43 17.48 .0001
Within 1138 2937.62 2.58
Program
Between 4 3.39 .85 3 ;73 .0051
Within 1118 253.06 .23
GPA
Between 4 9.14 2.28 3.04 .0165
Within 1138 854.06 .75
Age
Between 4 498.25 124.56 2.49 .0420
Within 1118 56035.35 50.12
Variables With No Significant Difference
English At Home
Between 4 84.02 21.01 .13 .9721
Within 1125 184104.35 163.65
Gender
Between 4 .72 .18 .83 .5036
Within 1138 246.63 .22
Ethnicity
Between 4 1.48 .37 1.12 .3451
Within 1080 355.52 .33
 94

were no significant differences among the five clusters

regarding the demographic variables of ethnicity, the amount

of English spoken at home, and gender. Since these variables
showed no significant differences, they were not considered
characteristic of any of the clusters and were not useful in
classifying and naming the five groups determined in the
cluster analysis.

The means of the 15 learning strategies along with the

three demographic variables of Age, GPA, and Program for
each cluster were used to help identify the important

characteristics of each group. Following the one-way

analysis of variance, Tukey post hoc tests were also used to

identify the groupings for each of the significant

variables. The means for the 15 learning strategies and

3 demographic variables are displayed in Table 11.

The multivariate technique of Cluster analysis

produced a solution with five clear and distinct clusters

of learners. Thus, this analysis, which investigated the

research question related to clusters of learners existing

in the data, demonstrated that it was possible to identify

distinct clusters of learners in Canadian colleges based on

student scores of the 15 learning strategies of SKILLS.

 95

Table 11. Means of Cluster Groupings on Learning Strategies

and Demographic Variables.
Variable Nav. Mon. C.T. Eng. Net.
Planning 9.6 9.3 7.4 8.7 8.4
Monitoring 7.4 7.9 6.6 7.6 6.6
Adjusting 6.9 6.2 8.0 7.7 7.3
Attention 9.1 9.8 7.3 8.6 7.4
Reward 5.6 7.2 6.4 8.1 7.9
Confidence 5.9 7.7 6.0 9.0 8.6
Organization 8.9 7.4 7.5 7.3 8.6
External Aids 9.6 7.6 9.3 9.6 7.7
Application 6.6 6.4 8.4 7.1 8.4
Test Assumptions 8.3 9.3 9.5 8.3 9.0
Gen. Alternatives 7.8 7.0 8.5 7.9 7.6
Conditional Acceptance 7.1 6.3 8.3 7.4 7.3
Identify Resources 9.4 9.1 9.3 7.9 8.1
Use Resources 8.5 9.1 8.3 6.8 7.2
Human Resources 8.8 8.8 8.9 7.6 9.3
Age 24.1 24.6 22.9 24.1 23.0
GPA 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.8
Transfer 107 58 87 82 64
Certificate 147 162 134 149 129
Size of Group 259 266 223 236 199

Interview Data

Interviews were conducted with learners from each

cluster to gather data to assist in naming and describing

the groups. These interviews provided additional material to

the quantitative analysis for a rich description of the

clusters. These interviews were conducted both individually

and in focus group settings with representative learners

from the various clusters. Upon recommendation from Strakal

(1995) "insights from the quantitative data analysis can be
 96

used as a guide for planning the protocol for the

interviewing sessions" (pp. 189-197). The qualitative data

gathered through this process was combined with the

quantitative data, and together this expanded data source

provided a more comprehensive an accurate description of the

clusters (Conti, 1996, p. 71).

The design for this stage of data gathering has evolved

from a series of learning strategies studies in Montana

(Conti & Fellenz, 1989; Conti & Kolody, 1995; Hays, 1995;

Kolody & Conti, 1996; Lockwood, 1997; Strakal, 1995; Yabui,

1993). In these studies, "a triangulation process has been
developed for interpreting cluster compositions. This
process involves using the existing quantitative data and
gathering additional qualitative data" (Conti, 1996, p. 70)
through personal interviews and focus groups.

In this study, personal interviews and focus groups

were conducted to add clarification to the differences

between distinct groups of learners through insights of the

participants. "In case study research of contemporary
education, some and occasionally all of the data are

collected through interviews" (Merriam, 1988, p. 71).

Because not all participants were able to arrange their

schedules to meet in focus groups and in order to ensure a

broad representation of participants, data were also

collected through individual interviews.

 97

Participation in a focus group was determined by

placement within a cluster. The format of group interviews
can be useful in bringing the researcher into the domain of
the participants of interest. In such a situation, a number
of individuals are brought together and encouraged to talk
about the subject of interest. The power of the interview

often comes from the interaction within the group based on

topics provided by the researcher (Morgan, 1988).

A total of 51 students participated in the interviewing

process (see Table 12). There were nearly an equal division

between those who participated in the individual interviews

and the focus groups. Also, approximately equal numbers were
included from each cluster.

Table 12. Participants of Qualitative Interviews.

Focus Group Individual

Clusters Participants Interviewees

Navigators 7 5
Monitors 5 3
Critical Thinkers 5 4
Engagers 6 7
Networkers 5 4
Total 28 23

Thus, through quantitative and qualitative means, five

distinct groups of learners were identified and described.

The combination of these techniques allowed the research
 98

questions which asked about the. description of these groups

to be answered. The following descriptions of the five
groups of learners are the results of the cluster analysis,
the analysis of variance conducted with each variable when

the participants were grouped by clusters, and comments from

learners within each cluster that was collected during focus
groups and personal interviews.

Navigators

Navigators are focused learners who chart a course for

learning and follow it. They are conscientious, results-

oriented high achievers who rely heavily on the learning

strategies of Planning, Memory Organization, Use of External

Aids, and Identification of Resources. This was the largest

group of the five types of learners (see Table 8), and this
group also contained the largest percentage of university
transfer students.

Planning involves knowing "how to elicit purpose from

both themselves and the situations and how to organize and
identify the steps essential to the learning process"

(Yussen, 1985, p. 280). Because of the great importance of

Planning to Navigators, schedules are important to them, and

they reportedly become stressed if their schedules or plans

are disrupted. Navigators like to be presented with the "big

picture" first, so they know what is expected. Then they

plan their learning schedule according to deadlines and the
 99

final expected result. Group work is often difficult for

Navigators because if they are teamed with members less
focused than themselves, they have "a tendency to take over
and dominate the group" to ensure that the schedule and
plans are adhered to.

Group work is fine if you have a leader that keeps

things on track. Again, I hate wasting time. I
like things done yesterday, and if they can't be.
I'll do them myself.

"For this reason, distance learning is the perfect course

for me. I work at my own speed without any time-wasting."
Navigators "get really impatient with inefficiency and have

little tolerance for slackers, whiners, and time-wasters."

Equally irritating to navigators are "hyper-social
butterflies" and "people who won't take initiative."

Navigators are said to be those who "don't suffer fools

easily."

Memory Organization is also important to Navigators,

which is described as structuring information so that the

material can be better stored and retrieved from memory

(Fellenz & Conti, 1989). Through this process. Navigators

"restructure information from that form in which it was

originally presented (Seamon, 1980). Navigators "summarize

information and group it into subsets"; this is otherwise

known as chunking. Another common memory technique used by

Navigators is to "connect one piece of information to

 100

another— kind of attach it so something we are already

familiar with." As Norman (1982) suggests:

The best organizational strategies involve putting

the material to be learned into frameworks that
naturally guide the retrieval process. This comes
from understanding the material to be acquired so
well that it fits naturally into an existing
framework of knowledge. As a result, the new
material is understood, fits into previous
knowledge, and is made retrievable with little
effort. (Paul & Fellenz, 1993, p. 21)

Not only is structure important to the Navigator's

memory process, but it is also important to their physical

environment. A Navigator's slogan in life could be "a place

for everything and everything in its place." These learners
like to be in control of their surroundings and to work with
others who value the same clean, organized setting. "Things
are to be done a certain way and in a certain order to keep

things running smoothly." During the focus group, one

student made the following comments concerning classroom

environment.

It really bothers me when a teacher doesn't keep

strict control in the classroom. Background noises
drive me crazy. I hate someone talking, typing,
playing music, or opening a candy bar while I'm
trying to listen. I guess this sounds kind of
anal-retentive, but these things really bother me.

Another focus group participant joined in with the

following:

We aren't all that hard-nosed— I think that you're

on the extreme edge of maybe what we're like, but
I can relate to what you're saying. I'm a little
more tolerant of others, but I see the noise thing
in the classroom as a sign of respect. I want the
other students to be quiet as a sign of respect
 101

for the instructor and for the other students in

the classroom.

Navigators also rely heavily on the learning strategy

of Using External Memory Aids.

Memory strategies can be categorized as either

external or internal aids. External memory
techniques rely on the interaction of the mental
processes of the individual and the manipulation
of the environment to insure recall (Counter &
Fellenz, 1993, p. 23)

Although Navigators consider themselves to "have pretty good

memories," they find useful external aids such as to-do

lists, daily planners, and schedulers to reinforce their

memory.

I'm always making lists and planning out what I'm

going to do— sometimes two weeks in advance. Then
when I get to cross things off my list, it makes
me feel good—rlike I'm accomplishing things and
that I'm doing them when I'm supposed to. I also
make lists for other people in my house— you know,
like schedules for cleaning and music lessons and
things. Then I get upset when someone else doesn't
follow my schedule. My husband calls me "Hitler."
He thinks that this is a "control thing," but I
just like things to be organized.

Not surprisingly, in graded situations this group of

students has the highest grade point average.

Navigators also rely heavily on the learning strategy

of Use of Resources, which is knowing how to locate and use

the best information (Fellenz & Conti, 1989). "When I want

to find out about something, I want the facts; not other

people's opinions. So I go to the library or ask a

professional." Navigators report feeling "pretty

comfortable" in a library setting. "Once I learned the

 102

system, I can get around in there pretty good, get what I

need, and get out again."

Through personal interviews and focus groups,

Navigators were asked to provide comments regarding teaching

methods that best facilitated their learning. These learners
indicated a preference for teachers who maintain a
structured learning environment by providing schedules and
deadlines, by outlining objectives and expectations, by
concluding each session with a summarization of the main
points, and by preparing the class for the subsequent
lesson.

I don't like a teacher to waste time. I want to

hear what is to be learned. If this can be taught
in 15 minutes, do it rather than waste the whole
class. Then I like a recap at the end of class,
and I want to know what to prepare for the next
class.

I don't like big changes. If a schedule is laid

out, then stick to it. Don't change deadlines. If
an assignment is due on a certain date, and then
that date gets extended because slackers weren't
organized enough to get it done, then don't cave
into them. It isn't fair to the rest of us who
worked hard and made sacrifices to get it done on
time.

Since formal evaluation such as grades is important to

Navigators, these learners also value prompt feedback. It

helps them to "keep on track" and to know that they are not
wasting their time doing a certain task incorrectly.

To assist in memory organization and retrieval,

material which is presented and patterned in a logical

sequence also enhances their learning process. Navigators

 103

become easily frustrated and impatient with a casual

approach to teaching and can perceive a relaxed, spontaneous
atmosphere as an ill-designed time waster which is lacking
in purpose.

It really drives me crazy when a teacher is

unorganized. I took an English class once where
the instructor had us read a book and do an
assignment on one of the chapters. Then he forgot
that he had assigned it, and we had to remind him
to collect it. I couldn't believe itI I hate that.
It took all of the meaning out of doing that
exercise. Obviously it wasn't important to him!
That's just incompetence.

Emotions have little to do with learning for Navigators.

Unlike the Engagers, the Navigators are able to separate the

message from the messenger. Although it is preferable to be

involved in an atmosphere in which they are comfortable and
which fosters their learning, they are able to rise above it
and complete the learning task regardless of external
factors.

Whether or not we like a subject or teacher has

little bearing on [our] learning. We look at
learning or an assignment simply as a job to do,
and we then do it to the best of their ability. .
Sometimes people can assist us best by simply
getting out of our way and letting us do our
thing.

Monitors

The Monitors are a group of learners who are cognizant

of their learning progress and closely monitor their

learning. This group of learners has the highest mean age

and uses the widest variety of learning strategies. Their

 104

learning activities include metacognition, metamotivation,

critical thinking, and resource management strategies, but

they have little preference for memory strategies.
I've changed since I've come to college. I've
learned to look back and see where I started from.
I moved from Edmonton to down here to give college
a shot. It took me applying twice to get accepted.
My portfolio wasn't good enough the first time.
But I take my education more seriously now than
when I was in high school. This is costing me a
lot of money. It's my money now. I've moved; I'd
better get on track and get with it. A lot of it
has to do with my parents as well. They've always
been really supportive of my art, and I don't want
to let them down. So, I make sure that every day
counts. I don't skip classes, I do my studying in
the library where it's quiet, and it's working. I
know that as long as I keep on track, I'm going to
do okay. I don't know. . . . Maybe I'm just
growing up and becoming more responsible. . . . My
parents would be so proud.

Similar to the Navigators, Monitors rely heavily on the

learning strategy of Planning to analyze the purpose of the

learning exercise prior to initiating the learning activity

and to identify the steps essential for successfully

completing the learning task. Monitors differ from

Navigators, however, in that they more often incorporate

monitoring in the execution of the learning task as they

review plans, check to see if they are on task, and compare

their progress to accepted standards or models.

Operationally, comprehension monitoring involves

establishing learning goals, assessing the degree
to which these goals are being met, and, if
necessary, modifying the strategies being used to
facilitate goal attainment. (Weinstein et al.,
1988, p. 294).
 10.5

During the focus group interviews, the learners were

asked how they would tackle learning something new with

which they had no prior experience or knowledge. All agreed

that the following step-by-step answer was typical of their

learning pattern. Not surprisingly, these steps encapsulate

the essence of the Monitor.

The first thing that I would have to do is to find

somebody with some experience. Then I would find
out how they went about doing it [the learning
task], what problems they came up with, and what
techniques they used to approach this task. Then
I'd begin it and see how it goes. If I needed
extra help, I would then go into a library for
information and look for books or records or
something.

Monitors are cautious learners. Their motto in life

would be "a stitch in time saves nine." These learners learn

best by observation and although they had difficulty

defining or even agreeing upon what their "comfort zone" is,

they all agreed that they learn and perform better in it. It

is important to a Monitor to see a procedure modeled before

they try it.

Some people like to fiddle around with something

and try to figure it out on their own. If they
have trouble, as a last resort they'll go to
someone and ask. Not me! I hate wasting time on
that, I want to go to someone first, or see it
done once, and. then I have a clear idea what needs
to be done. I hate experimenting.

These are the people who often sit quietly observing the

situation while others are busy experimenting, and then they

offer a practical and well-thought-out solution.
 106

Flavell (1979) sees monitoring as useful to check

or test the interaction among cognitive knowledge,
tasks, goals, and strategies in relationship to
one's own abilities and with respect to the
learning enterprise. Some strategies that can be
used in such monitoring include self-testing,
comparing progress from previous learning
situations, asking for feedback, checking new
resources for information, and keeping track of
diverse steps in learning. (Counter & Fellenz,
1993, p. 9)

These learners consider themselves practical and

conservative in most every facet of their lives; especially

in those areas of finance and personal relationships.

Monitors are not risk takers. They like guarantees and
stable environments with few surprises.

I like to know what to expect so I can prepare for

the future and anticipate problems before they
occur. Then I visualize how I would handle the
situation. I guess you could say I'm a worry-wart.

Critical Thinking is a reflective thinking process

utilizing higher order thinking skills, and Monitors make

heavy use of the critical thinking strategy of Testing

Assumptions. This is the ability to recognize and evaluate

specifics and generalizations in relation to learning

situations (Fellenz & Conti, 1989). They are slow to commit

to an idea and want to "weigh out" or test the assumptions.

I don't like to be pressured into making a rash

decision. I want to take my time and think through
all the angles. Just because something worked for
me before or it worked for someone else doesn't
mean it's right for me in every situation.

Monitors also rely heavily on the Metamotivation

learning strategy of Attention which involves the arousal of

 107

interest in learners, the stimulation of an attitude of

inquiry, and the maintenance of attention. This group of
learners systematically and purposefully creates an

environment that facilitates learning. This often will

include a specific location for studying which is free from

distractions "with all my pencils, erasers, and materials
neatly in place." Monitors all agreed that studying at a
particular and consistent time of day also helped them to
stay focused on their learning.

The caution that seems pervasive throughout the

Monitor's personality is also evident in their use of

Resource Management learning strategies. Identifying

Resources refers to "the learner's awareness of appropriate

resources and willingness to use such sources" (Fellenz,

1993, p. 36). Critical Use of Resources involves "using
appropriate rather than available resources while

recognizing their limitations" (p. 36). Monitors concur that

they often check several sources before making a decision

and scrutinize the sources for applicability to their
personal situation.

If I had to do something that I didn't know

anything about like buying life insurance, I'd
probably go to my dad. He's smart in that area. Or
[I'd go] to someone that I think could give good
advice.

Being product oriented, Monitors typically compare

their work to that of others. However, when asked if grades

 108

were the product that they used to monitor their learning,

grades took second place to personal achievements.
I guess I am product oriented, but that doesn't
necessarily mean grades. There's a lot of emphasis
on grades in school, but they don't matter as much
to me. I'm ready to graduate now. Getting an 'A'—
when I get out of college, what does that mean?
What's more important is what I can do when I get
out.

Teachers who provide visual models with schedules of

expectations or outcomes, therefore, provide the required
basis for comparison.

I like class discussions and hearing what other

people think in comparison to what I think
(compare— hmmm, there's that word again) but I do
like to see something rather than just read about

This allows Monitors to measure their present level of

learning in relationship to their final learning objective,

to consider the standard simply as a starting point, and to

challenge themselves to then exceed that standard. Thus,

they appreciate an atmosphere that allows for differences of

opinion and interpretation.

I have trouble following a really structured class

where the teacher just goes through notes. It's so
- boring; my mind wanders. But I really learn a lot
when the students get to be involved like in your
Advertising class when you'd show us commercials
and we'd critique them. Then, when it came time to
create our own commercials, we knew what was
important. That was great. We could never have
learned that stuff from a book.

But when we do use a text in class, I want the

teacher to follow along with the organization of
the book— not jump around all over the place.
 109

Monitors also enjoy tried-and-true learning activities with

the opportunity to interact and compare options before
making decisions. However, they have a strong dislike of

brainstorming and experimenting in the classroom setting. As

a final footnote, one Monitor added, "This is really

interesting. I've never thought about my learning skills

before. I never knew how much I compare things, but I sure

do."

Critical Thinkers

Critical Thinkers rely on a reflective thinking process

which utilizes higher order thinking skills (Brookfield,
1987). They test assumptions to evaluate the specifics and

generalizability within a learning situation; they generate

alternatives to create additional learning options; and they

are open to conditional acceptance of learning outcomes

while keeping an open mind to other learning possibilities.

I get frustrated with people who make blanket

statements and stereotype people. You can't
categorize people. They change in different
situations.

Their critical thinking skills are sustained by the ongoing

modification and revision of their learning plans in

relationship to their evaluation of their own learning

process.

I think I was a late bloomer in being able to hold

knowledge and understand things. I go through lots
of different ways of studying for an exam; it's
not just one. Then I have to figure out which one
 HO

works best for that exam. I had to teach myself

how to remember. Nobody ever taught me how to
learn, so I think that's why I was such a late
bloomer. I also find that at the start of a
program, I'm a little slow to catch on because it
takes me a while to decide what's going to work
best, but usually by the end of the semester, I'm
getting perfect grades.

When I'm reading the text, I need to have my lips

moving and sound coming out. Otherwise I have a
really tough time concentrating. If I don't
consciously focus on only one thing, I find my
mind wanders, and I can't remember what I just
read.

Critical Thinkers make heavy use of the Memory

strategies of Memory Application, using mental images or
other memories to facilitate problem solving, and the Use of
External Aids such as lists and appointment books. Group

members agreed that they do not memorize material. Rather,

visualization was a more common memory technique used by

most participants of this group, and many identified

themselves as either visual or kinaesthetic learners.

I highlight my text an awful lot and then re-read

the chapter three or four times. Then I visualize
the page during the exam. It stays in my mind
better that way. I don't know of any other way to
remember.

Unlike Monitors, Critical Thinkers thrive in a learning

environment that promotes experimentation through practical

experience and hands-on activities. Many agreed that the

classroom was a difficult place for them to actually learn.

Although the classroom was needed to set the direction for

learning, the learners then require time alone to "think

things through" and to experiment. Because they recognize

 Ill

their need to sometimes learn at a different pace than

others, group work can be difficult for Critical Thinkers

unless they are the group leaders and can set the learning
pace. Participants conveyed that it was often difficult for
them to grasp abstract, concepts until they had a practical
application for the concept.

Sometimes in computer class when we're supposed to

be working on something. I'll just do busy work to
look occupied, but then I'll take the work home
where I have the space to be creative and do it my
way.

Although the group participants were divided when asked

whether they preferred human or physical resources in their

learning, all displayed an ability to know how to locate and

use the best information for them.

In photography, there's a lot of numbers that you

have to remember. It's not as easy as everyone
thinks. There's so much information. I got the
instructor to lecture about the chapter before we
read it to help focus and to explain the important
things about the chapter. That worked for me. I
did well in that course.

Critical Thinkers are "bent on reinventing the world."

Their motto in life would be "there's got to be a better

way." They are easily bored with the mundane and are often

identifiable by their attire. Their creativity is often

evident in their appearance as they enjoy their

individuality and are proud of their "quirky way of viewing

the world."

I think I was born in the wrong century. I should

have been wearing long funny dresses and bustles
and high-buckle shoes.
 112

In this study of college students, this group had the

lowest mean age. These learners are vivacious and thrive on
spontaneity and creativity. Critical Thinkers do not usually
respond well to rigidity or didactic orders; they want the
space to be able to do things in a way that makes sense to
them. For this reason, critical thinkers are often

misinterpreted as the "rebel rousers"— those who hate or

refuse to conform. "We don't care if your opinion differs
from ours, just don't try to change our minds."

If someone doesn't think the same way I do and

they think I should do something their way, I
usually don't say anything, but I think to myself
that I'll let them go along in their own miserable
way. I'm more enlightened. I find the better way
myself.

Sometimes if someone insists on my doing something

a certain way, I'll do a lousy job so next time
they either won't ask me or they'll let me do it
my way!

When in a situation where we're under the

supervision of a control freak— this could be a
teacher or a boss, we'll do it their way when
they're watching, and then when they're not, we'll
take it and do it our way.

Although curious, inventive, and intuitive, the

Critical Thinker's ability to generate alternatives and

consider various solutions can also tend to result in
increased difficulty in making decisions.

I tend to drag it [the decision] out for as long

as I possibly can and wait until the very last
minute before I do it. For some reason it all
pulls together. When I'm dragging it out, I'm
thinking about a whole bunch of different things
and even when I sleep, it comes into my dreams.
I'm totally consumed with it until I make a
 113

decision. I think about so many things all the

time. It's a wonder I can get anywhere.

I have a problem with exams though too because I

think too much about the question and all the
different answers that could be right. I'm told
that I analyze everything to death.
I have a hard time making my mind up too. When I
go to a restaurant, it takes me half an hour just
to decide what I want to eat.

Thus, Critical Thinkers do not generally do well on

multiple-choice exams and are better assessed with

open-ended questions and problem-solving activities.
When asked what teaching methods and techniques a

teacher could use to help them learn, the responses varied.

We like deadlines. Tell us when something is due

and then let us do it our own way.

We like someone who uses examples and doesn't

lecture straight from the text.

Long boring lectures don't work for me. I liked

how casual you were with us. You talked to us
rather than have us write a lot of notes from the
board or overhead. . . . You did things in
order. . . . You led us from one thing to another
and made it easy to follow.

When brainstorming for a name for this group, the

researcher defined the term critical thinking as a higher

order of thinking skills and that the term critical was not

to be confused with the act of criticizing. Still the term

sat uneasily with the group, and true to form, they

generated other alternatives.

I still think that the term critical thinking

sounds a little negative (it reminds me of my
mother). I prefer the term creative thinking.
 114

Encraaers

The Engagers are passionate learners who love to learn,

learn with feeling, and learn best when they are actively
engaged in a meaningful manner with the learning task; "the
key to learning is engagement— a relationship between the

learner, the task or subject matter, the environment, and

the teacher" (Kidd, 1973, p. 266). Engagers seek out
learning activities that provide the greatest opportunity
for this engagement; the interaction and collaboration are
major motivators for entering into the learning task.

I get bored with things very quickly, and then I

don't want to do them anymore. So, if I'm going to
stick with something, it has to mean something. It
has to make a difference. I guess I kind of feed
off the feeling I get when I connect with someone.
But if I don't connect, then there's no meaning,
so what's the point?

Although competent in completing short-term learning

activities, these hold no emotional value to the Engager who

finds superficiality and details to be painfully tedious.

Rather the Engager pursues long-term learning activities

that will result in self-development and will aid in a

permanent personal change and growth. Their motto would be

"life's a journey, not a destination."

Although the Engagers were not aware of the term

"transformational learning" coined by Mezirow (1990), they

described this concept as part of their learning in their
 115

constant pursuit of learning activities that enhanced

understanding of themselves and their world around them.

Perspective transformation is the process of
becoming critically aware of how and why our
presuppositions have come to constrain the way we
perceive, understand, and feel about our world;
. . . and of making decisions or otherwise acting
upon these new understandings. Critically
reflecting upon our lives, becoming aware of "Why
we attach the meanings we do to reality,
especially to our roles and relationships . . .
may be the most significant distinguishing
characteristics of adult learning." (Merriam &
Caffarella, 1991, p. 260).

Besides the Engager's resolve to learn, other factors

concerning attention also contribute to a successful
learning experience. Because Engagers are aware of the
importance of motivation in their learning, they will

purposefully and systematically create a learning

environment that is ergonomically and aesthetically pleasing

to their individuality. Factors such as colour and style of

furniture can all factor into the Engager's learning

process. As all of the senses are involved in the Engager's

learning, devices might also include a favourite beverage or

auditory sounds that can be associated with pleasantness. If

all of the senses are positively aroused and the physical

learning conditions have been satisfied, then there are no

distractions, so the Engager can then focus on and engage

completely in the learning activity. However, if one of the

senses is negatively affected, then this serves as a
 116

distraction for the Engager, and learning is impeded.

Engagers are easily distracted by sensory factors.
I work best downstairs in my den between
10:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. The house is quiet, the
kids are asleep, and I can concentrate without any
distractions. I make myself a pot of tea and
sometimes put on my favourite music. I'll make it
[studying] enjoyable. I actually look forward to
it.

Engagers also scored high in the metamotivational

learning strategy of Reward/Enjoyment, which is anticipating

or recognizing the value to oneself of learning specific

material and having fun or experiencing satisfaction with

the learning activity (Fellenz & Conti, 1989). In this
strategy, the affective domain is the dominant factor in
learning. Engagers monitor the value of the learning

experience and the level of motivation on an economy of

scale to determine if the expected reward is worth the

effort. If the learning activity is not perceived or

expected to be a worthwhile or enjoyable experience.

Engagers will seek out another activity that they find more

meaningful. If institutional needs or other reasons require

the Engager to participate in a task that the learner views

as unpleasant or even in a neutral vain, Engagers will again

make a conscious decision to store this activity in either

the short-term and long-term memory and decide the level of

attention to be given the activity.

I think I can learn almost anything if I have to,

but as soon as I don't need it anymore, it's gone.
I think that's why I didn't do so great in high
 117

school. I had to take courses that I had no

interest inz and I just scraped by. It wasn't that
I couldn't do it, I just didn't have the
motivation or maybe the discipline to do it. But I
do better in college because I've decided what
program and courses I want to be in.

Because of the great emotional investment in their

learning, Engagers take great pride in their work and often
their self-worth is determined or validated by their
accomplishments.

I really take it personally when I get a poor

grade in an essay or something I've created. I
have a tough time separating myself from my work.
If I get a poor grade, then I feel like a failure.
I think that's why I'm a perfectionist. My work is
a reflection of me, and I want to be proud of what
I do. So I try to make sure that everything I do
is perfect. Maybe I'm a little too picky, but it
really means a lot to me.

Personal growth, increase in self-esteem, helping others,

and working as part of a team for a worthwhile project are

also emotionally rewarding to an Engager and will motivate

them to embark upon and to sustain a learning experience.

Confidence is another metamotivationaI learning

strategy in which Engagers scored high. However, the group

participants pointed out that their confidence is not

dependent so much on the students believing that they can

complete the learning task successfully as it is on Whether

they are confident that the learning task will keep them

interested enough to complete the learning task.

Nobody likes a quitter, but if I don't like doing

something, it's really painful. All I can think
about is quitting. So rather than start something
and have to quit because I hate it, I'm really
 118

careful about what I choose to sign up for. I want

to be confident that I'll enjoy it enough to
finish it, and I want to get something out of it
in the end.

When an Engager makes a decision to enter into a

learning activity, it is usually well contemplated and a

commitment is made to achieve the goal originally intended.

If Engagers have begun a learning activity that they find
rewarding or enjoyable, they will completely immerse

themselves in the activity to be able to fully experience

the joy or satisfaction of a job well done. If Engagers are

lukewarm about a subject, they know that it is going to take

much more effort to complete the task. However, the economy

of scale enters in again. This extra amount of work and
effort to stay on track will not pay off with any feelings

of satisfaction, but instead there will only be a record of

a job that they survived. This "getting by" attitude does

not spark any great emotional appeal or evoke any positive

feelings in the affective domain or provide any reward or

enjoyment, so the learning task looks ominous and

formidable. Therefore, it is often avoided. One of the very

important factors in educational participation is the self­

esteem of the individual. Those who evaluate themselves

negatively are less likely to expect success (Rubenson,

1977) and less likely to experience congruence with the

educational environment (Boshier, 1973).

 119

Engagers' passion for learning is combined with

cognitive processes. In addition to reflecting on the joy of
learning, they review learning plans, check to see if they
are on task, and compare their progress to accepted
standards or models. When necessary, they adjust their

learning plans in relationship to their evaluation of their

own learning. Thus, they not only constantly interact with
the learning task in the affective domain concerning their

motivation for being involved in the learning task but also

in the cognitive domain of monitoring and adjusting it to

keep it a meaningful learning activity.

In formally evaluated situations, the Engagers have the

lowest grade point average of all the groups. This may be a
result of their focus on learning being on their internal

needs rather than on external standards. However, like the

Navigators, who had the highest grade point average, the

Engagers also make use of external aids such as appointment

books and lists to reinforce memory.

Although every learner uses metamotivation to some

degree in their learning, the Engager's level of learning is

directly dependent on the satisfaction of these strategies.

Until these strategies have been satisfied, learning will be

restricted.

Since the Engagers' learning is governed by emotional

commitment and their ability to internalize the content

which they must find personally valuable or rewarding, they
 120

succeed best with teachers who focus on learning rather than

on formal evaluation and who encourage involvement in
projects based on individual interests. Engagers consider
work as an extension of themselves and are motivated by
feelings of satisfaction or pride. Therefore, they respond
best to a teacher who displays a personal interest in them

and with whom they can develop an emotional affinity. Since

the environment is also a consideration in the Engager's
level of learning, a teacher can enhance the emotional

involvement with the content by promoting groupwork to

provide greater opportunities for interaction.

Networkers

The Networkers are proficient at using human resources.

This includes dialogues, discussions, and networking which

is often with experts and professionals to integrate others

into the social and political processes of learning. For
this group,

Listening to people with different opinions or

insights into issues is suggested as well as the
use of discussion to think through or study
problems. In some situations, the support provided
by human resources may be as important as the
information they contribute. (FelIenz, 1993, p.
37)

People are more important than things or processes.

Networkers are masters at small talk; they remember people's

names and can easily talk about projects, family members,

 121

and interests of the person with which they are in

conversation.

Networkers are those who can easily make others feel at

ease and can initiate and maintain meaningful conversations.
Often they can elicit information that others cannot.
People always seem to be coming to me with their
problems and their life stories even when I don't
know them very well. I've been told I'm a good
listener.

Networkers are extremely intuitive, have sophisticated

interpersonal skills, and have an uncanny understanding of
human nature and can easily "figure people out pretty
quickly."

Back in high school, people always thought I would

make a good investigative reporter because I could
always get people to tell me their deep, dark
secrets.

Networkers are wonderful motivators because of their

understanding of human nature. If there is a problem, the

networkers want to "talk it out to reach a solution rather

than brood about it and arrive at a solution by themselves."

These people like group decisions and show great respect for

others' opinions, values, and ideas; however, sometimes this

can be a fault:

People are important, and what they think is

important. What they think of me is important to
me. Maybe I'm too sensitive, but it matters to me
what people think. I see others with thick skins
where other people's opinions don't seem to bother
them. I wish I could be more like that, but I'm
not. I'm really easily hurt.
 122

Networkers use several other learning strategies to

support their concern for interacting with others. They
structure information for mental processing so that the
material can be better stored and retrieved, and they use
mental images or other memories to facilitate problem
solving. Like the Engagers, the Networkers also rely heavily
on anticipating the value to oneself for learning or having
fun with the learning activity. Yet, this can also work
adversely:

Yeah, when I get hurt or embarrassed that's all I

can think about so I'm not learning. I had a
teacher put me down in high school once. I
supposed I deserved it, but I never got over it
and never really forgave him. I totally shut
myself off from him, I wouldn't ask him any
questions, and wouldn't make eye contact with him
for the rest of the semester. That really made a
difference in my learning. I just barely scraped
by.

Networkers succeed best with teachers who promote

interaction and discussion in the classroom.Not only do

Networkers enjoy brainstorming and a trial-and-error method

of discovery, but they prefer problem-solving and

researching new ideas rather than learning already

established material. The process of learning is more

important to them than the output or the final grade. Since

Networkers rely heavily on human resources and prefer expert

advice to manuals, they value a teacher who shares

experiences through storytelling and who makes learning fun

but practical.
 123

Discriminant Analysis on Clusters

Discriminant analysis was conducted on the five learning

clusters as a confirmatory measure to gain insight into the
process that separates the groups of learners. The set of
discriminating variables used to predict placement in the
five clusters consisted of the 15 learning strategies found
in SKILLS. Here the discriminant analysis was used as a
tool for identifying the process that separates
the clusters and therefore for helping to describe
the clusters. By using the various clusters as the
groups and by using the variables from the cluster
analysis as the set of discriminating variables,
an analysis can be generated which produces a
structure matrix which describes the process that
separates the various clusters into distinct
groups and which yields a discriminant function
that is a formula that can be used for predicting
placement in the various clusters. (Conti, 1996,
P- 71)
The pooled within-groups correlations are the

correlations for the variables with the respondents placed

in their clusters. The examination of the 105 coefficients

in the pooled within-groups correlations in this analysis

showed that all were at a sufficiently weak level to retain
the variables in the analysis. Only I coefficient was at the

.2 level, and the remaining 104 were all below the .2 level.

Thus, the variables in this discriminant analysis were not

related to each other and consequently were not sharing a

common variance.

Stepwise selection was used to determine which

variables added most to the discrimination between the

 124

programs. As a result of this Wilks' lambda stepwise

procedure, all 15 variables were included in the

discriminant function and with their Wilks' lambda values

are as follows: Confidence— .10, External Memory Aids— .10,

Memory Application-— .09, Attention— .09, Organization— .09,

Use of Resources— .09, Reward— .09, Planning— .09, Critical
Acceptance— .09, Identification of Resources— .08,
Adjusting— .08, Testing Assumptions— .08, Use of Human
Resources— .08, Generating Alternatives— .08, and
Monitoring— .08.

Four canonical discriminant functions were identified

in the analysis and two functions were determined to be

relevant descriptors of the discrimination.process.

Function I

The standardized coefficients for the first function

which discriminated between clusters were as follows:

Confidence (.66), Reward/Enjoyment (-.41), Identification of

Resources (.34), Use of Resources (.34), Organization (.24),

External Memory Aids (.23), Memory Application (-.17),

Planning (.16), Attention (.15), Generating Alternatives
(.11), Use of Human Resources (.07)> Monitoring (.06),

Testing Assumptions (-.05), Critical Acceptance (.03), and

Adjusting (-.004). Thus, the two Metamotivation strategies

of Confidence and Reward/Enjoyment contributed most to this

function. The two Resource Management strategies of

 125

Identification of Resources and Use of Resources contributed

about half as much as Confidence. The other strategies made
much weaker contributions to discriminating between the
clusters.

The discriminant function which was used to classify

the cases and which can serve as guide for predicting future
placement of respondents into these groups was as follows:
D = .96 (Planning) +.38 (Monitoring) -.25
(Adjusting) + .97 (Attention) -.27 (Reward) -.46
(Confidence) + .15 (Organization) + .15 (External
Memory Aids) -.11 (Application) -.32 (Testing
Assumptions) + .70 (Generating Alternatives) +.19
(Critical Acceptance) + .21 (Identification of
Resources) + .23 (Use of Resources) + .47 (Use of
Human Resources) -2.82.

The group centroids for this first function for the clusters

were as follows: Cluster I (1.79), Cluster 2 (.11), Cluster

3 (.66), Cluster 4 (-1.45) and Cluster 5 (-1.48). The

canonical correlation was .79 for this function. When this

is squared, it indicates that the groups explain 62% of the

variation in the discriminant function.

Four variables in the structure matrix had sufficient

coefficients to be included in the interpretation of the

meaning of the first discriminant function. They were as

follows: Confidence (-.67), Reward (-.45), Use of Resources

(.35), and Identification of Resources (.31). The first

discriminant function was named Locus of Control for

Learning.
 126

The process that discriminated the groups from each

other in the first function was an internal versus external
view of the process by the learner. In this function, the

Metamotivational strategies of Confidence in learning and

Reward/Enjoyment with learning were contrasted with the
Resource Management strategy of identification of the best

learning sources. While some learners emphasized their own

motivational factors for learning, others gained their

security in learning by having the proper learning resources
(Kolody & Conti, 1996).

Function 2

The standardized coefficients for the second function

which discriminated between clusters were as follows:

Attention (-.46), Memory Application (.44), Critical

Acceptance (.40), Adjusting (.34), External Memory Aids

(.27), Planning (-.25), Monitoring (-.23), Generating
Alternatives (.21), Confidence (-.19), Use of Resources

(-.13), Testing Assumptions (.12), Use of Human Resources

(.10), Organization (.10), Identification of Resources

(.08), and Reward (-.03). Thus, two Memory area learning

strategies contributed most to determining the scores on the

function. Critical Acceptance and Adjusting contributed

almost as much with the other strategies contributing from

half as much to very little to determining the scores.

 127

The discriminant function which was used to classify

the cases and which can serve as a guide for predicting
future placement of respondents into these groups was as
follows:

. D = .21 (Adjusting) -.16 (Planning) -.15

(Monitoring) -.29 (Attention) -.22 (Reward) -.13
Confidence + .59 (Organization) + .18 (External
Memory Aids) + .29 (Memory Application) + .79
Testing Assumptions + .14 (Generating
Alternatives) + .24 (Critical Acceptance) + .51
(Identification of Resources) -.85 (Use of
Resources) + .63 (Use of Human Resources -3.57.
The group centroids for this second function for the

clusters were as follows: Cluster I (-.263), Cluster 2 (-

1.73), Cluster 3 (1.77), Cluster 4 (-.168) and Cluster 5
(.520). The canonical correlation was .75 for this function.

When this is squared, it indicates that the groups explain

56.1% of the variation in the discriminant function.

Four variables in the structure matrix had sufficient

coefficients to be included in the interpretation of the

meaning of the second discriminant function. They were as

follows: Attention (-.49), Memory Application (.43),
Planning (-.35), and Critical Acceptance (.33). The second

discriminant function was named Structure for Learning.

The second function used to describe another process to

discriminate the groups from each other paired Attention by

focusing on the learning materials and Planning the best way

to learn against the strategies of Memory Application by

using techniques such as mental images and Conditional
 128

Acceptance of learning outcomes. Thus, this discriminant

function distinguishes between those with a preoccupation

with what needs to be learned and how this is going to be
accomplished and those who have mental flexibility with the
learning process (Kolody & Conti, 1996).

Function 3

The standardized coefficients for the third function

which discriminated between clusters were as follows:

External Memory Aids (.69), Testing Assumptions (-.35), Use

of Human Resources (-.35), Memory Application (-.32), Use of
Resources (-.24), Generating Alternatives (.23), Attention
(.20), Critical Acceptance (.17), Adjusting (.16),

Organization (-.14), Monitoring (.13), Identification of

Resources (-.10), Confidence (.06), Planning (.05), and

Reward (-.02). Thus, External Memory Aids dominated in

contributing to the scores for this function. While some

other learning strategies contributed about half as much as

External Memory Aids, most others made little contribution.

The discriminant function which was used to classify

the cases and which can serve as guide for predicting future

placement of respondents into these groups was as follows:

D = .33 (Planning) + .85 (Monitoring) + .99

(Adjusting) + .12 (Attention) -.10 (Reward) + .40
Confidence -.86 (Organization) + .45 (External
Memory Aids) -.21 (Memory Application) -.22
Testing Assumptions + .14 (Generating
Alternatives) + .10 (Critical Acceptance) -.62
(Identification of Resources) -.16 (Use of
Resources) -.22 (Use of Human Resources -.89.
 129

The group centroids for this third function for the clusters
were as follows: Cluster I (.416), Cluster 2 (-.692),
Cluster 3 (-.234), Cluster 4 (1.243), and Cluster 5 (-.967).
The canonical correlation was .6214 for this function. When
this is squared, it indicates that the groups explain 38.6%
of the variation in the discriminant function.

Four variables in the structure matrix had sufficient

coefficients to be included in the interpretation of the

meaning of the third discriminant function. They were as

follows: External Memory Aids (.65), Use of Human Resources.

(.40), Use of Resources (.31), and Testing Assumptions

(.30). Because of an eigenvalue (.63) of less than one and

because the amount of variance accounted for by this
function was much less than accounted for by the first two
functions, this discriminant function was not named.

Function 4

The standardized coefficients for the fourth function

which discriminated between clusters were as follows:

Organization (.69), Planning (.48), Testing Assumptions (-

.25), Use of Human Resources (.24), Monitoring (-.21),

Attention (-.15), Identification of Resources (-.11), Reward

(-.10), Generating Alternatives (-.08), Confidence (.04),

Adjusting (-.04), Critical Acceptance (-.04), Memory

Application (.02), and External Memory Aids (-.01). Thus,

Organization was by far the most powerful learning strategy

 130

in contributing to determining the scores for this function.

While Planning also was an important element in determining
the scores, the other learning strategies were far less
influencial.

The discriminant function which was used to classify

the cases and which can serve as guide for predicting future
placement of respondents into these groups was as follows:
D = .29 (Planning) -.14 (Monitoring) -.23
(Adjusting) -.94 (Attention) -.63 (Reward) + .30
Confidence + .42 (Organization) -.51 (External
Memory Aids) + .13 (Memory Application) -.16
Testing Assumptions -.50 (Generating Alternatives)
-.22 (Critical Acceptance) -.69 (Identification of
Resources) -.21 (Use of Resources) + .15 (Use of
Human Resources -.84.

The group centroids for this fourth function for the

clusters were as follows: Cluster I (549), Cluster 2 (-

.502), Cluster 3 (-.592), Cluster 4 (-.132) and Cluster 5

(.676). The canonical Correlation was .47 for this function.

When this is squared, it indicates that the groups explain

21.3% of the variation in the discriminant function.

Four variables in the structure matrix had sufficient

coefficients to be included in the interpretation of the

meaning of the fourth discriminant function. They were as

follows: Organization (.68), Planning (.40), Use of

Resources (-.36), and Testing Assumptions (-.33). Because of

an eigenvalue (.27) of less than one and because the amount

of variance accounted for by this function was much less

 131

than accounted for by the first two functions, this

discriminant function was not named.

The percentage of cases correctly classified was

95.45%. The classification correctly placed 249 (96.1%) in
Cluster I, 218 (96.5%) in Cluster 2, 211 (94.6%) in
Cluster 3, 223 (94.5%) in Cluster 4, and 190 (95.5%) in

Cluster 5. Thus, the discriminant function is a 75.45%

improvement over chance in predicting group placement.

Consequently, it demonstrates that clusters can be
distinguished on the basis of learners' preference for
learning strategies.

Thus, a discriminant analysis was calculated to

investigate the final research question concerning what

process differentiates one cluster from another. Because the

discriminant analysis was being performed on clusters that

had been produced by a cluster analysis, it was anticipated

that the amount of variance accounted for by the functions

and the correct classification rate would be high; the

results from both of these were very high indicating that

the discriminant functions were good and useful for

describing the process that separates the clusters from each

other. Thus, five distinct groups of learners exist and the

processes that distinguish them from each other are Locus of

Control for Learning and Structure for Learning.
 132

CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

Educators have long searched for ways to address the

individual differences that they know exist in learners *
While various areas such as intelligence, cognition,
teaching theories, and learning styles have been examined,

none satisfactorily accounts for the various approaches

learners take to accomplish their learning tasks.

Consequently, adult educators have begun to examine the

concept of learning strategies. Learning strategies are the

techniques^ and skills that individuals use to accomplish a

specific learning task. By using the Self-Knowledge

Inventory of Lifelong Learning Strategies (SKILLS), numerous

researchers have found that various groups of learners can

be distinguished by the learning strategies which they use.

While most of these studies have been conducted in the

United States, a need exists in the Canadian two-year

colleges for knowledge concerning the learning patterns of

the diverse students in the system.

Therefore, the purpose of this study was (a) to

identify, the learning strategies.of adult learners at
 133

two-year colleges in Alberta, Canada; (b) to investigate the

relationship of these learning strategies to academic
success, gender, age, and program of study; and (c) to
explore patterns of learning of distinctive groups of
learners that may exist. Once distinct groups of learners
were identified, the reasons for these differences were then
investigated by qualitative and quantitative means to
describe these groups.

Building upon a learning strategies study initiated at

Medicine Hat. College, five Canadian two-year community

colleges participated in this study. Demographic and

learning strategies data using SKILLS were collected from a

representative sample at each college to investigate if

learning strategies could be used to discriminate between

students when they were grouped on academic success and

demographic variables. In addition, cluster analysis with

follow-up interviews was used to identify and describe

distinct groups of learners within this population.

Profiles of Learners

The sample included 1,143 learners who ranged in age

from 17 to 71; 70.5% of the sample was female, and 29.5% was

male. Using SKILLS, the possible range of scores for the

learning strategies areas is 12 to 36. All the group means

were near the middle of the range. Resource Management was

the learning strategy area most preferred by the

 134

participants with a mean of 25.48, and Metamotivation was

the least common learning strategy area relied upon by the

students with a mean of 22.92. The 15 individual learning

strategies, which had a range of 4 to 12, also had little

divergence. Again, the group means were all near the middle
of the range. Testing Assumptions and Critical Use of
Resources, both with means of 8.85, were the two learning
strategies most commonly preferred by the participants. The

Metamotivation learning strategy of Reward/Enjoyment with a

mean of 7.04 was the strategy least relied upon by the
students.

Discriminant Analysis

Discriminant analysis was used to examine the

differences between groups of learners with respect to the

simultaneous interaction of the 15 learning strategies in

SKILLS. Learners were grouped according to gender, the type

of program in which the learners were enrolled, age, and

grade point level. These analyses failed to produced any

powerful functions although weak differences were found.

Grades. Students were grouped according to the most

successful learners as measured by grade point average and

the least successful learners. The percentage of cases

correctly classified by the discriminant function shows how

accurate the discriminant function was in grouping the

respondents. This discriminant function was 61.6% accurate

 135

in classifying cases. This discriminant function is an 11.6%

improvement over chance in predicting group placement. This
small improvement over a chance placement was judged

inadequate to discriminant between the least successful and

most successful learners on the basis of their preference
for learning strategies.

Gender. When the sample was grouped by gender, the

percentage of cases correctly classified by the discriminant
function was 60.28%. This discriminant function is a 10.3%
improvement over chance in predicting group placement. This
small improvement over a chance placement was judged

inadequate to discriminant between female and male learners

on the basis of learners' preference for learning
strategies.

Program. Students were grouped according to being in

either the University Transfer program or the Certificate/

Diploma program. The percentage of cases correctly

classified by the discriminant function was 55.14%. This

discriminant function is a 5.14% improvement over chance in

predicting group placement. This small improvement over a

chance placement was judged inadequate to discriminant

between the program of study on the basis of learners'

preference for learning strategies.
 136

Age. The learners were grouped into the three age

categories of Under 20, Age 20-23, and Over 23. The
percentage of cases correctly classified by the discriminant
function was 41.29%. This discriminant function is an 8.29%

improvement over chance in predicting group placement. This

small improvement over a chance placement was judged
inadequate to discriminant between the age categories on the
basis of learners' preference for learning strategies.

Cluster Analysis

The multivariate technique of cluster analysis produced

a solution with five clear and distinct clusters. Analysis

of variance revealed that all 15 learning strategies were

significantly related to this clustering. Individual

interviews and focus group interviews were conducted to

obtain qualitative data to further enhance the quantitative
data in describing the clusters.

The profile for each group indicates a definite

preference for specific learning strategies. Navigators are

focused learners who chart a course for learning and follow

it. Monitors are cognizant of their learning progress and

closely monitor their learning. Critical Thinkers rely

heavily on a variety of traditional critical thinking

skills. Engagers are passionate learners who involve all

five senses in their learning and learn best when they are

actively engaged in a meaningful manner with the learning

 137

task. Networkers make frequent use of human resources and

integrate others into the social and political processes of
learning.

A discriminant function was calculated to uncover the

learning strategy process that distinguishes these five

clusters from each other. This procedure revealed that the

clusters differ from each other in the processes of Locus of

Control for Learning and Structure for Learning. The
percentage of cases correctly classified by the discriminant
function in the cluster analysis was 95.45%. The

classification correctly placed 249 (96.1%) in Cluster I,

218 (96.5%) in Cluster 2, 211 (94.6%) in Cluster 3, 223

(94.5%) in Cluster 4, and 190 (95.5%) in Cluster 5. This

discriminant function is a 75.45% improvement over chance in

predicting group placement. Consequently, it demonstrates

that clusters can be distinguished on the basis of learners'

preference for learning strategies.

Conclusions

Five distinct groups of learners exist in both

formal and informal venues of adult learning.

Learning strategies are not a useful tool for

discriminating among various demographic
groupings.

Two prominent conclusions have arisen from this study.

Not only do these two discoveries address the differences

that exist in adult learners, but they also identify the

 138

pivotal relationship between content delivery and adult X

learning.

The major conclusion of this study is that five

distinct groups of learners exist in the general adult
learning population for two-year college students in

Alberta. Each of these groups have explicit preferences for

learning strategies and each group utilizes a prominent

learning strategy specific to that group. Navigators make

heavy use of planning; the cautious Monitors prefer a model

from which to work; Critical Thinkers score high in testing
assumptions; Engagers function heavily in the affective

domain and are strongly motivated by reward or enjoyment;

and Networkers prefer to learn through human interaction
over textbook or reference material.

It is significant to note that demographics have no

effect on the learners' placement within a group. Age,

program of study, gender, and grade point average were all

examined, yet none accounted for any significant difference.

This inability to associate any demographic characteristics

with learning strategies indicates that the variance due to

demographics is evenly distributed across the various

learning strategies. Although this study examined the

learning strategies of two-year college students in Alberta,

these findings have been confirmed through additional

studies that examined.various diverse populations. Recent

studies using SKILLS to measure learning strategies include
 139

populations in the corporate, medical, military, and tribal

settings. Learning strategies were examined for American
Express financial planners (Conti, Kolody, & Schneider,
1997) ; for nursing students within the state of Montana
(Lockwood, 1997); for United States Air Force personnel

(Korinek, 1997); and for Native American tribal college

students and community members (Bighorn, 1997). Each of
these studies is congruent with the major conclusion of this
study in that distinct groups of learners exist in both
formal and informal settings based on the learning

strategies utilized by the adult learner. Each study found

distinct groups of learners, and these groups, which were
elicited from smaller and more specific samples than used in
this study, can be viewed as subsets of the five groups in

this study. For example, Lockwood (1997) found four distinct

groups of learners in a study that examined learning

strategies of nursing students in the state of Montana.

Using a similar design which involved quantitative analysis

and data elicited from focus group interviews, Lockwood

named her groups Intuitives, Reinforcers, Independents, and

Retainers. Based on the results of this cluster analysis,

Lockwood concluded that her groups were compatible with the

five distinct learner groups found in this study (p. 210).

This typology of five types of learners can be useful

for initially identifying groups of learners encountered in

the instructional setting. While these characteristics apply

 140

to the general adult learner and provide a conceptual basis

for understanding the adult learner, the individuality of

each learner must also be considered. Such labels can be
beneficial to the selection of appropriate methods and
techniques when they are used to focus understanding,

discussion, and reflective thought about the learner?

however, they can be detrimental if they are used to avoid

critical thinking about the learner (Conti & Kolody, 1997).

Implications and Recommendations

Teaching

Each of the five distinct groups of learners found in

this study has a preference for specific instructional
methods, and they learn best when involved in a learning

situation that best suits their preferred learning strategy.

Adult educators can expect to have these five groups of

approximate equal size in both formal and informal learning

situations. Choice of teaching methods and content delivery

should then be based on the diversity found within the
class.

Each of the learning groups is equally prevalent in a

general learning situation such as that with learners at a

y*
comprehensive two-year college. However, in groups such as

nursing or finanical planning, which have a narrower focus,

only some of the groups may be present. Nevertheless, a

variety of the groups will exist, and teachers must assess

 141

how to best deal with the divergence. One approach could be

taken when content dictates teaching methodology. Various
subject areas are best taught using certain teaching

strategies. The teacher must then recognize that a portion

of the class may inherently use the learning strategy that
matches the teaching method. This provides an opportunity

for the educator to teach the other class members how to use
this particular strategy that may be unnatural to them and
thus to expand the learners' "toolkit" of strategies
(Fellenz & Conti, 1993) .

Practitioners could encourage learners to increase

their use of learning strategies by introducing them to

definitions and practices for each strategy, as well as to

the benefits and practical applications for specific program
areas.

Current research has demonstrated that one way to

influence the manner in which students process new
information and acquire new skills is to instruct
them in the use of learning strategies. (Weinstein
et al., 1988, p. 25)

Further understanding of learning strategies outside the

natural realm of the individual learner could be enhanced

through interaction and group work that involves students

working with others who possess different learning

preferences. Such activities could encourage learners to

either practice the lifelong learning strategies they

already possess or to develop new ones in areas of need

(Smith, 1982).
 142

Another approach to address the diversity within the

classroom is to vary teaching strategies to meet the
distinct needs of the groups. The practitioner must then be
cognizant not only of these particular needs, but also of
the student classification within the groups.
Following SchonzS recommendation for the "reflective
practitioner," educators should create knowledge about the
learners within their organization. To assist in the

process, practitioners could administer an instrument early

in the learners' program that facilitates identification of

the learning preferences specific to that population. Once

groups of learners have been identified, then the educator

can tailor learning activities and utilize teaching methods
that address the learning preferences of the various groups
within the classroom.

Data gathered from focus groups and personal interviews

indicate that learning is enhanced when teaching strategies

and learning environments are congruent with preferred

learning strategies. As learners reflected upon the specific

preferences for their group, they offered insightful

recommendations for teachers.

Teaching Navigators. Structure and organization is

crucial to the success of these learners. Teachers can

enhance learning for this group by "painting the big

picture" at the onset of the course and again for each
 143

learning activity. This can be accomplished by communicating

expected learning outcomes and by providing outlines,

schedules, and deadlines. Learners can then utilize their

most preferred learning strategy of planning to fashion
their learning activities to reach their desired goals.
Navigators also prefer that material be presented in well-
organized and sequential units with frequent summaries to
highlight areas of emphasis. As this group of learners is

highly product-oriented, they also value prompt feedback on

assignments and examinations.

Teaching Monitors. Similar to the Navigators, this

group of learners require objectives, outlines, and

deadlines in order to plan and control their learning

schedules. Specific to their group, however, these learners

are most successful and are able to best monitor their

learning progress when visual models and standards are

provided as a basis for comparison.

Teaching Critical Thinkers. Provision for individuality

and creativity in completing assignments and projects is the

key for successful learning for Critical Thinkers. As these

learners instinctively generate alternatives, learning is

enhanced with opportunities for hands-on learning and

experimentation. Because learners in this group place little

importance on memorization, they are best evaluated with

open-ended questions and problem-solving activities.
 144

Teaching Engagers. Since this group learns best when

they are actively engaged in a meaningful manner with the

subject matter, the environment, and the teacher, educators

should provide Engagers with opportunities that encourage
learning projects based on individual student interests.
Teamwork and group projects that focus on process as well as
product can also reinforce the learning strategy of

reward/enjoyment required by these learners.

Teaching Networkers. Interaction is the key to learning

for this group, so educators should provide an environment

that allows for brainstorming, teamwork, and discussion of

opposing or different viewpoints. As these learners make
heavy use of human resources, teachers can enhance their

learning by including guest speakers and media to present

expertise in various subject areas. Networkers appreciate

teachers who make learning fun but practical by sharing

personal experiences and anecdotes that enhance material in

the textbook and bring the material "to life."

TO assist practitioners in expanding their current

teaching methods to address the large divergence in the

classroom, professional development activities should be

provided to train colleagues in teaching methods that best

facilitate the learning strategies contained in SKILLS.

Innovative methods of content delivery using the various

learning strategies could be collected to create an "ideas
 145

bank" for each strategy and for different content areas.

These ideas could come from educators at conferences and
workshops and could be distributed with the contributor's
name, number, and e-mail address for future contact,
discussion, and interaction.

Students

The principles of adult learning are based upon

student-centered, self-directed methodologies. Adult

curriculum in any content area should encourage and provide

assistance for learners to examine and reflect upon their

personal preferences for learning. As students better

understand their own learning strategies, the more empowered

they are to enhance their personal learning (Knowles, 1968).
Smith (1982) explored the concept of learning how to learn
and concluded:

A central task of learning how to learn is

developing awareness of oneself as a
learner. . . ^ This requires that the learner be
able to conceptualize his own learning process and
be able to pay some attention to how he goes about
learning . . . [and] thrust himself into managing
the process. (Smith, 1982, p. 30)

Critical reflection upon one's learning preferences can

provide the insight required to successfully adapt to

various learning situations. Learners who are cognizant of

their individual learning patterns can either select those

situations that are congruent with their established

strategies, or they can consciously develop additional

 146

skills and strategies for learning. Examination of learning

strategies and the five groups of learners found in this
study also fosters understanding and tolerance of various
learning patterns used by others. Developing individual
learning strategies in both professional and personal

learning situations can also enhance success in lifelong

learning.

Research

Although fascinating, the intricacies of the human mind

have caused much dissent in the field of education as

discourse abounds on how to best teach the adult learner.

Indeed, the very individuality of the learner is the root of

the problem. Educators have searched unsuccessfully for an

explanation of learner differences in areas of intelligence,

learning style, and personality, yet all have proven

inconclusive because each of these areas deals with an

intrinsic factor over which the learner has little control.

Learning strategies, however, are those techniques or

specialized skills that a learner "elects to use in order to

accomplish a learning task" (Fellenz & Conti, 1989, p. 7).

Because learning strategies are controlled by the

individual, they can then be identified and measured. This

control provides an arena for rigorous examination of the

resulting differences among the learners.

 147

Using SKILLS to measure learning strategies of two-year

college students in Alberta, research methodologies were
combined in an innovative manner that resulted in multi­
dimensional profiles and descriptions of the learners and

their preferred learning patterns. After using deductive

reasoning to impose sense on the data and finding no

significant differences among the variables used in the

study, inductive reasoning was used to "tease sense out of

the data" (Conti, 1996). Cluster analysis was the inductive
approach used from which five distinct groups of learners

emerged. This analysis also provided a profile of each group

in which learning strategies.and demographic variables were
measured. The key to the success of this study, however, was

to conduct focus groups and personal interviews to further

describe and name these groups of learners identified in the

cluster analysis. The candid interviews not only addressed

the preferred learning strategies of each group but also

identified preferred teaching strategies for each group.

This revelation provides a detailed description of the five

distinct groups of learners as well as recommended teaching

methods for adult educators to best enhance student

learning.

This study has been a part of a major line of inquiry

by the faculty and students in the Adult Education program

at Montana State University. In order to obtain

comprehensive insights into the role of learning strategies

 148

in the adult learning process, numerous.studies have adapted

a similar design but have used different populations. As
these studies have developed, the research design has been
honed and a network of researchers has developed with
insights and ideas about this learning process.

Consequently, the results of this study have been confirmed

through subsequent studies with various populations

(Bighorn, 1997; Conti & Kolody, 1995, 1996; Conti, Kolody, &

Schneider, 1997; Korinek, 1997; Lockwood, 1997). To further

test the generalizability of this study, further studies may
be conducted using a similar design to determine if these

five groups emerge in other studies with different groups of

learners.

SKILLS has been shown to be an effective instrument to

measure learning strategies of two-year college students.

This effectiveness has been demonstrated in other studies

using SKILLS. In this study, the original, generic form of

SKILLS was used. However, when using SKILLS, researchers can

create their own scenarios to fit the specific audience or

group of learners with whom they are working (Lockwood,

1997; McKenna, 1991; Strakal, 1995). Indeed, if the original

format of the instrument is not used, its conceptual

framework can be used to direct the study (Uhland, 1995).

As the result of the team effort that has been used by

faculty and students associated with the Center for Adult

Learning Research and Adult Education program at Montana

 149

State University, a comprehensive methodology has emerged

for conducting research such as that associated with

learning strategies. This methodology involves the use of
multivariate techniques to collect both quantitative and
qualitative data to thoroughly describe a phenomenon. When
using SKILLS to measure learning strategies of a population,

it is extremely effective to use discriminant and cluster

analyses followed by focus groups of the clusters to better

define and describe specific learning groups. Inquiry for

these focus groups should include questions that are
customized for the learning strategies of each cluster
(Lockwood, 1997; Strakal, 1995).

Because of the fundamental necessity to identify the

five groups of learners in a classroom, a need exists for a

brief, valid, and reliable self-scoring instrument based on

the learning strategies contained in SKILLS. The instrument

would measure learning strategy preference and place the

participant into one of the five clusters found in this

study.

Epilogue

This study adds to the growing literature base on

learning strategies and to the previous studies initiated at

the Center for Adult Learning and Research at Montana State

University. Congruent with other studies in which reflective

practitioners are creating knowledge about their particular

 150

organizations (Schon, 1987), SKILLS was an effective

instrument for identifying adult learning strategies.

Numerous differences were found among the learners even
though strong patterns were not disclosed between the most
and least successful groups of learners. However, the
repeated failure to find differences using discriminant

analysis suggests that imposing sense upon the data through

preconceived groupings is not the best way to uncover

differences in uses of learning strategies by different

groups of learners. Instead, multivariate techniques such as

cluster analysis which allow the data to expose its own
patterns are more productive. Indeed, the findings from this
study suggest that a general typology of learners exists
which.cuts across the demographic variables which
researchers typically use to classify learners. .
REFERENCES
 152

Adams, F. (1975). Unearthing seeds of fire; The idea of

Highlander, Winston-Salem, NC: Blair.
Aldenderfer, M., & Blashfield, R. (1984). Cluster analysis.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Aldridge, 0. (1984). Tom Paine's American ideology.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology; A cognitive
view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Bighorn, R. (1997). Learning strategies of Fort Peck
Community College and community agencies learners.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Montana State
University, Bozeman.
Borg, W., & Gall, M. (1983). Educational research (4th ed.).
New York: Longman.
Boshier, R. (1973). Educational participation and dropout: A
theoretical model. Adult Education. 23. 255-282.

Brookfield, S . D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brookfield, S . D. (Ed.) (1985). Self-directed learning: From
theory to practice (New Directions for Continuing
Education, Number 25). San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Brookfield, S. D. (1986). Understanding and facilitating

adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brown, A. L. (1985). Knowing when, where, and how to

remember: A problem of metacognitiort. In Glaser (Ed.),
Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. I) (pp. 77-
165). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Campbell, G. (1971). Community colleges in Canada. Toronto:

McGraw-Hill.

Cates, W. M. (1985). A practical guide to educational

research. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Cervero, R. M. (1988). Effective continuing education for
professionals. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Cohen, A. M., & Brower, F. B. (1987). The collegiate function

of community colleges. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
 153

Conti, G. J . (1993). Using discriminant analysis in adult

education. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Adult
Education Research Conference. University Park, PA:
University of Pennsylvania.

Conti, G. J. (1996). Using cluster analysis in adult

education. Proceedings of 37th Annual Adult Education
Research Conference. Tampa, FL. University of South
Florida.

Conti, G. J., & Fellenz, R. A. (1991). Assessing adult

learning strategies. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual
Adult Education Research Conference. Norman, OK:
University of Oklahoma.
Conti, G. J., & Kolody, R. C. (1995). The use of learning
strategies: An international perspective. Proceedings
of the 36th Adult Education Research Conference
(pp. 77-89). Edmonton, University of Alberta.
Conti, G. J., & Kolody, R. C. (1997). Guidelines for
selecting methods and techniques. In M. Galbraith
(Ed.), Adult learning methods (2nd ed.). Malabar, FL:
Kreiger.

Conti, G. J., Kolody, R. C., & Schneider, R. (1997).

Learning strategies in corporate America. Proceedings
of 38th Annual Adult Education Research Conference,
Stillwater, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State University.
Counter, J., & Fellenz, R. A. (1993). Metacognition an
learning strategies. In R. Fellenz & G. Conti (Eds.),
Self-Knowledge Inventory of Lifelong Learning
Strategies (SKILLS): Manual. Bozeman, MT: Center for
Adult Learning Research.

Cross, K. P. (1981). New frontiers for higher education:

Business and the professions. In American Association
for Higher Education (ed.), Partnerships with Business
and the Professions. Washington, DC: American
Association for Higher Education.

Davenport, J. (1987). A wav out of the andraooov morass.

Paper presented at the Conference of Georgia Adult
Education Association, Savannah, GA.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and
self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Press.
 154

Dennison, J . D. (1995). Challenge and opportunity: Canada's

community colleges at the crossroads. Vancouver, BC:
University of British Columbia Press.

Dennison, J . D., & Gallagher, P. (1986) . Canada's commiinity

colleges: A critical analysis. Vancouver, BC:
University of British Columbia Press.
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1978). Teaching students through their
individual learning styles: A practical approach.
Reston, VA: Reston Publishing.

Farley, F . (1988). Biology and adult cognition. In R. A.

Fellenz (ed.) Cognition and the adult learner. Bozeman,
MT: Center for Adult Learning Research, Montana State
University.

Fellenz, R. A., & Conti, G. J. (1989). Learning and

.reality; Reflections on trends in adult learning.
Columbus, OH. The Ohio State University. (ERIC
Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational
Training, Information Series No. 336).
Fellenz, R., & Conti, G. (1993). Self-Knowledge Inventory
of Lifelong Learning Strategies (SKILLS): Manual.
Bozeman, MT: Center for Adult Learning Research.
Flavell, J . H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive
monitoring: A new area of psychological inquiry.
American Psychology. 34. 906-911.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York:

Seabury Press.

Gagne, R. M. (1970). Principles of instructional design. New

York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Gay, L. R. (1996). Educational research: Competencies for

analysis and application (5th ed). Columbus, OH:
Merrill Publishing Company.

Gleazer, E. J. Jr. (1980). The community college: values,

vision, and vitality. Washington, DC: American
Association of Community and Junior Colleges.

Grubbs, J. C. (1981). A study of faculty members and

students in selected midwestern schools of theology to
determine whether their educational orientation is
andraoooical or pedagogical. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Indiana University, DAI 42, 0055.
 155

Cuba, E. G. (1978). Toward a methodology of naturalistic

inquiry in education evaluation. Los Angeles: Center of
Study for Evaluation, University of California.
Hays, P. (1995). Learning strategies and the learning-
disabled adult student. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Montana State University, Bozeman.
Hill, M. (1992). Learning strategies used in real life and
achievement of adult Native American tribal college
students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Montana
State University, Bozeman.
Houle, C. 0. (1980). Continuing Learning in the
professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Horton, M., with Kohl, J., & Kohl, H. (1990). The long haul.
New York: Doubleday.

Jarvis, P. (1983). Professional education. London: Croom

Helm.

Keefe, J. W. (1982). Learning style profile: Examiner's

manual. Reston, VA. National Association of Secondary
School Principals.

Keller, J. M. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the

motivation to learn. Performance & Instruction. 26(8).
1-7.

Kerlinger, F. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research.

New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Kidd, J. R. (1973). How adults learn. New York: Cambridge.

Klecka, W. R. (1990). Discriminant analysis. Newbury Park:
Sage Publications.
Knowles, M. S . (1950). Informal adult education. New York:
Associated Press.

Knowles, M. S. (1968). Andragogy not pedagogy. Adult

Leadership, .16(4) , 350^352.

Knowles, M. S . (1970). The modern practice of adult

education: Andraooov versus pedagogy. New York:
Association Press.

Knox, A. B. (1977) . Adult development and learning. San

Francisco: JOssey-Bass.
 156

Kolody, R. C ., & Conti, G. J. (1996). The use of learning

strategies: Do distinctive groups of learners exist?
Proceedings of the 37th Annual Adult Education Research
Conference (pp. 199-204). Tampa, FL: University of
South Florida.

Korinek, D. (1997). An investigation of learning strategies

utilized by Air Force officers. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Montana State University, Bozeman.
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample
size for research activities. Educational and
Psychological Measurement. 30., 607-610.

Lockwood, S . (1997).An investigation of learning strategies

utilized by nursing students in Montana. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Montana State University,
Bozeman.

Long, H. (1983). Adult learning: Research and practice. New

York: Cambridge.

Mayer, R. E. (1987). Learning strategies: An overview. In

C. Weinstein, E. Goetz, & P. Alexander (Eds.). Learning
and study strategies: Issues in assessment,
instruction, and evaluation. San Diego: Academic Press.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York:

Harper & Row.

McCombs, B. L. (1988). Motivational skills training:

Combining metacognitive, cognitive, and affective
learning strategies. In C. Weinstein, E. Goetz, &
P. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies. New
York: Academic Press.

McKeachie, W. J. (Ed.) (1980). Learning, cognition, and

college teaching (New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, Number 2). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McKenna, R. J. (1991). The influences of personal and
professional learning situations of real-life learning
strategy utilization by school administrators in
Wyoming. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Montana
State University, Bozeman.

Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1991). Learning in

adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
 157

Mezirow, J . (1990). How critical reflection triggers

transformative learning. In Mezirow and Associates,
Fostering critical reflection in adulthood. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, G. (1987). The magical number seven, plus or minus
two: Some limits on our capacity for processing
information. Psychology Review. 63, 81-97.

Monroe, C. R. (1972). Profile of the community college. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, D. L. (1988) . Focus groups as Qualitative. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Norman, D. (1982). Learning and memory. San Francisco: W. H.
Freeman and Company.

Norusis, M. J. (1988a). SPSS/PC+ V2.0 basic manual. Chicago:

SPSS Inc.

Norusis, M. J. (1988b). SPSS/PC+ advanced statistics V2.0.

Chicago: SPSS Inc.

Paul, L., & Fellenz, R. (1993). Memory. In R. Fellenz & G.

Conti (Eds.), Self-Knowledge Inventory of Lifelong
Learning Strategies (SKILLS): Manual. Bozeman, MT:
Center for Adult Learning Research.
Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the '80s.
Columbus: Merrill.

Roscoe, J. T. (1975). Fundamental research statistics for

the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.

Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social learning and clinical

psychology. Englewood Cliffs: N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Rubenson, K. (1977). Participation in Recurrent Education: A

research review. Paper presented at a meeting of
national delegates on Developments in Recurrent
education. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development.

Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Scribner, S. (1986). Thinking in action: Some

characteristics of practical thought. In R. G.
Sternberg & R. K. Wagner (Eds.), Practical
 158

intelligence: Nature and origins of competence in the

everyday world. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Seaman, D. F., & Fellenz,, R. A. (1989) . Effective
strategies for teaching adults. Columbus, OH: Merrill
Publishing Company.

Shadden B. B., & Raiford, C. A. (1984). The communication

education of older persons: Prior training an
utilization of information sources. Education
Gerontology. 10. 1-2, 83-97.
Shirk, John C. (1983). Relevance attributed to urban public
libraries by adult learners: A case study and content
analysis of 81 interviews. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station.
Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning.
Review of Educational Research. 56, 411-436.

Smith, R. M. (1982). Learning how to learn. Chicago, Follett.

Statistics Canada. (1995). Education in Canada. Catalogue

#81-229-XPB.

Sternberg, R. J. (1986). The triarchic mind. New York:

Penguin Books.

Strakal, D. (1995). The use of real-life learning strategies

in personal and career development situations by
students at Eastern Idaho Technical College.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Montana State
University, Bozeman.

Tough, A. (1971). The adult's learning project. Toronto: The

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Uhland, Roberta. (1995). Learning strategy behaviors

demonstrated by low-literate adults engaged in self-
directed learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
The Pennsylvania State University, College Park.

Weinstein, C. E., Zimmerman, S. A., & Palmer, D. R. (1988).

Assessing learning strategies: The design and
development of LASSI. In C. Weinstein, E. Goetz, & P.
Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Issues
in assessment, instruction, and evaluation. San Diego:
Academic Press.

Wingfield, A. & Byrnes, D. (1981). The psychology of human

memory. New York: Academic Press.
 159

Yabui, A. E . (1993). Reflective judgment and the adult

learner's use of metacoqnitive learning strategies.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Montana State
University, Bozeman.
Yussen, S. R. (1985). The role of metacognitioh in
contemporary theories of cognitive development. In D.
L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller
(Eds). Metacocmition. cognition, and human performance
Orlando: Academic Press.

Zechmeister, E., & Nyberg, S. (1982). Human memory: An

introduction to research and theory. Monterey, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
 MONTANA STATEUNIVERSITYLIBRARIES

3 1762 10301233 O