Cited by 226Education during COVID-19 pandemicE-Learning and COVID-19Student Stress and Coping

Changes and Adaptations: How University Students Self-Regulate Their Online Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Open access
Biwer, Felicitas, Wiradhany, Wisnu, oude Egbrink, Mirjam, Hospers, Harm, Wasenitz, Stella, Jansen, Walter, de Bruin, Anique·2021·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

During the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, universities had to shift from face-to-face to emergency remote education. Students were forced to study online, with limited access to facilities and less contact with peers and teachers, while at the same time being exposed to more autonomy. This study examined how students adapted to emergency remote learning, specifically focusing on students’ resource-management strategies using an individual differences approach. One thousand eight hundred university students completed a questionnaire on their resource-management strategies and indicators of (un)successful adaptation to emergency remote learning. On average, students reported being less able to regulate their attention, effort, and time and less motivated compared to the situation before the crisis started; they also reported investing more time and effort in their self-study. Using a k -means cluster analysis, we identified four adaptation profiles and labeled them according to the reported changes in their resource-management strategies: the overwhelmed, the surrenderers, the maintainers, and the adapters. Both the overwhelmed and surrenderers appeared to be less able to regulate their effort, attention, and time and reported to be less motivated to study than before the crisis. In contrast, the adapters appreciated the increased level of autonomy and were better able to self-regulate their learning. The resource-management strategies of the maintainers remained relatively stable. Students’ responses to open-answer questions on their educational experience, coded using a thematic analysis, were consistent with the quantitative profiles. Implications about how to support students in adapting to online learning are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.642593

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Practicing desirably difficult strategies should benefit everyone, both learners who want to master a subject and learners whose main aim is to achieve a sufficient grade to pass a course as efficiently as possible.

    “Importantly, practicing desirably difficult strategies should benefit everyone , both learners who want to master a certain subject and learners whose main aim is to achieve a sufficient grade to pass a course as efficiently as possible.”

    From Worth the Effort: the Start and Stick to Desirable Difficulties (S2D2) Framework (2023) · cites this paper as Biwer et al., 2021

    The Introduction discusses associations between resource-management strategies and academic performance, while the Discussion describes different student adaptation profiles. Neither section addresses desirably difficult strategies or whether practicing them benefits both mastery-focused learners and learners seeking an efficient passing grade; searches for those terms found no supporting passage. The available passages have no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.70)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. Barnard L. Lan W. Y. To Y. M. Paton V. O. Lai S.-L. (2009). Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. Internet High. Educ. 12 1– 6. 10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.10.005 · DOI
  2. Barnard-Brak L. Lan W. Paton V. (2010). Profiles in self-regulated learning in the online learning environment. Intern. Rev. Res. Open Distan. Learn. 11 61– 80. 10.19173/irrodl.v11i1.769 · DOI
  3. Boekaerts M. Niemivirta M. (2000). “ Self-regulated learning: finding a balance between learning goals and ego-protective goals,” in Handbook of Self-Regulation, eds Boekaerts M. Pintrich P. R. Zeidner M. (Cambridge, MA: Academic Press), 417– 450.
  4. Broadbent J. Fuller-Tyszkiewicz M. (2018). Profiles in self-regulated learning and their correlates for online and blended learning students. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 66 1435– 1455. 10.1007/s11423-018-9595-9 · DOI
  5. Dolmans D. H. De Grave W. Wolfhagen I. H. van der Vleuten C. P. (2005). Problem-based learning: future challenges for educational practice and research. Med. Educ. 39 732– 741. 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02205.x 15960794 · DOI
  6. Dörrenbächer L. Perels F. (2016). Self-regulated learning profiles in college students: their relationship to achievement, personality, and the effectiveness of an intervention to foster self-regulated learning. Learn. Individ. Differ. 51 229– 241. 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.09.015 · DOI
  7. Dresel M. Schmitz B. Schober B. Spiel C. Ziegler A. Engelschalk T. (2015). Competencies for successful self-regulated learning in higher education: structural model and indications drawn from expert interviews. Stud. High. Educ. 40 454– 470. 10.1080/03075079.2015.1004236 · DOI
  8. Duncan T. G. McKeachie W. J. (2005). The making of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educ. Psychol. 40 117– 128. 10.1207/s15326985ep4002_6 26627889 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Green J. K. Burrow M. S. Carvalho L. (2020). Designing for transition: supporting teachers and students cope with emergency remote education. Postdigit. Sci. Educ. 2 906– 922. 10.1007/s42438-020-00185-6 PMC7443393 40477144 · DOI
  10. Jansen R. S. van Leeuwen A. Janssen J. Kester L. Kalz M. (2017). Validation of the self-regulated online learning questionnaire. J. Comput. High. Educ. 29 6– 27. 10.1007/s12528-016-9125-x · DOI
  11. Kebritchi M. Lipschuetz A. Santiague L. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: a literature review. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 46 4– 29. 10.1177/0047239516661713 · DOI · Paper page
  12. King N. (2004). “ Using templates in the thematic analysis of text,” in Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research, eds Cassell C. Symon G. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd), 256– 270. 10.4135/9781446280119.n21 · DOI
  13. Kitsantas A. Winsler A. Huie F. (2008). Self-regulation and ability predictors of academic success during college: a predictive validity study. J. Adv. Acad. 20 42– 68. 10.4219/jaa-2008-867 · DOI
  14. Kline R. B. (2005). “ Hypothesis testing,” in Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd Edn, eds Kenny D. A. Little T. D. (New York, NY: The Guilford Press), 189– 229.
  15. Kusurkar R. A. Mak-van der Vossen M. Kors J. Grijpma J.-W. van der Burgt S. M. E. Koster A. S. (2020). ‘One size does not fit all’: the value of person-centred analysis in health professions education research. Perspect. Med. Educ. 10.1007/s40037-020-00633-w 33284407 PMC8368141 · DOI
  16. Laursen B. Hoff E. (2006). Person-centered and variable-centered approaches to longitudinal data. Merrill Palm. Q. 52: 377. 10.1353/mpq.2006.0029 · DOI
  17. Lehmann T. Hähnlein I. Ifenthaler D. (2014). Cognitive, metacognitive and motivational perspectives on preflection in self-regulated online learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 32 313– 323. 10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.051 · DOI
  18. Marsh H. W. Balla J. R. McDonald R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: the effect of sample size. Psychol. Bull. 103 391– 410. 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391 · DOI
  19. Nelson T. O. Narrens L. (1990). Metamemory: a theoretical framework and new findings. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 26 125– 173. 10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60053-5 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Nordmann E. Horlin C. Hutchison J. Murray J.-A. Robson L. Seery M. K. (2020). Ten simple rules for supporting a temporary online pivot in higher education. PLoS Comput. Biol. 16: e1008242. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008242 33001990 PMC7529278 · DOI
  21. Pintrich P. R. (2000). “ The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning,” in Handbook of Self-Regulation, eds Boekaerts M. Pintrich P. R. Zeidner M. (Cambridge, MA: Academic Press), 451– 502. 10.1016/b978-012109890-2/50043-3 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Puzziferro M. (2008). Online technologies self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of final grade and satisfaction in college-level online courses. Am. J. Distan. Educ. 22 72– 89. 10.1080/08923640802039024 · DOI
  23. Rasheed R. A. Kamsin A. Abdullah N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online component of blended learning: a systematic review. Comput. Educ. 144: 103701. 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Stone A. A. Shiffman S. (2002). Capturing momentary, self-report data: a proposal for reporting guidelines. Ann. Behav. Med. 24 236– 243. 10.1207/S15324796ABM2403_09 12173681 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Usher E. L. Schunk D. H. (2018). “ Social cognitive theoretical perspective of self-regulation,” in Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance, 2nd Edn, eds Schunk D. H. Greene J. A. (New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group), 19– 35. 10.4324/9781315697048-2 · DOI
  26. van Rooij E. C. M. Jansen E. P. W. A. van de Grift W. J. C. M. (2018). First-year university students’ academic success: the importance of academic adjustment. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 33 749– 767. 10.1007/s10212-017-0347-8 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Biwer, F., Wiradhany, W., oude Egbrink, M., Hospers, H., Wasenitz, S., Jansen, W., & de Bruin, A.
Affiliations
  • Maastricht University (NL)
  • Binus University (ID)
Corresponding author
Biwer, Felicitas
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2021-04-23
Volume
12
Pages
642593-642593
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3161724086
Cited by
226
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 17
FWCI
82.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
  • Social Sciences › Education › E-Learning and COVID-19
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
Keywords
emergency remote teaching, COVID-19 pandemic, student self-regulation, resource management strategies, student motivation, student independence, university students, attentional control, time management, effort regulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review