Debunking the myth of high achievers in Finnish primary teacher education: first-year preservice teachers’ learning strategies and study success

Figures & data

Table 1. Rotated component matrix of the PCA solution for processing strategy items (adapted from Vermunt 1994, 1998).

	Component
	1 α = .77	2 α = .69
Q24. I try to construct an overall picture of a course for myself.	.736
Q10. I try to see the connection between the topics discussed in different chapters of a textbook.	.724
Q2. I try to combine the subjects that are dealt with separately in a course into one whole.	.703
Q44. I relate specific facts to the main issue in a chapter or article.	.561
Q15. I compare the conclusions drawn in different chapters.	.547
Q25. I compare my view of a course topic with the views of the authors of the textbook used in that course.	.543
Q31. I use what I learn from a course in my activities outside my studies.	.533
Q11. When I am studying a topic, I think of cases I know from my own experience that are connected to that topic.	.520	−.309
Q39. I repeat the main parts of the subject matter until I know them by heart.		.791
Q30. I make a list of the most important facts and learn them by heart.		.745
Q3. I memorise lists of characteristics of a certain phenomenon.		.724
Q40. I work through a textbook item by item and I study each part separately.		.548
Q33. I analyse the separate components of a theory step by step.		.394

Factor loadings under 0.3 are omitted from the Table 1. Components: 1 = Deep processing, 2 = Stepwise processing.

Table 2. Rotated component matrix of the PCA solution for regulation strategy items (adapted from Vermunt 1994, 1998).

	Component
	1 α = .79	2 α = .64	3 α = .72
Q28. To test my learning progress, I try to answer questions about the subject matter which I make up myself.	.808
Q34. To test my learning when I have studied a text book, I try to formulate the main points in my own words.	.752
Q9. To test my own learning, I try to describe the content of a chapter in my own words.	.746
Q5. I test my learning solely by completing the tasks provided in the course. (reversed)	−.597
Q1. If I do not understand a study text well, I try to find other literature about the subject concerned.	.517
Q27. I do more than I am expected to do in a course.	.506	−.336
Q37. To test whether I have mastered the subject matter, I try to think up other examples besides the ones given in the study material or at the lecture.	.501	−.423
Q22. When I start reading a new chapter or a complex of issues, I first think about the best way to study it.	.423
Q14. If I am able to complete all the assignments given in the study materials or by the teacher, I decide that I have a good command of the subject matter.		.640
Q29. I learn everything exactly as I find it in the textbooks.		.637
Q20. I study all the subject matter in the same way.		.616
Q19. I add something to the subject matter from other sources. (reversed)	.317	−.563
Q7. In addition to the syllabus, I study other literature related to the content of the course. (reversed)	.311	−.536
Q26. If I am able to give a good answer to the questions posed in the textbook or by the teacher, I decide that I have a good command of the subject matter.		.456
Q18. The objectives of the course are too general for me to offer any support.			.734
Q35. I have trouble processing a large amount of subject matter.			.714
Q8. I need guidance and clear goals to support my studying.			.679
Q13. I miss someone, for example a tutor, to fall back on in case of difficulties with my studying.			.669
Q4. It is difficult for me to determine whether I master the subject matter sufficiently.			.537

Factor loadings under 0.3 are omitted from the Table 2. Components: 1 = Self-regulation, 2 = External regulation, 3 = Lack of regulation.

Table 3. Average matriculation exam grades of applicants and admitted students in universities, primary teacher education and various primary teacher programmes (Vipunen 2020).

	Universities total	Primary teacher education	Tampere Uni.	Uni. Helsinki	Uni. Jyväskylä	Uni. Turku	Uni. Oulu	Uni. Eastern Finland	Åbo Akademi Uni.	Uni. Lapland
Admitted students
2016	4.95	4.59	4.98	4.88	4.63	4.62	4.55	4.55	4.30	4.23
2017	5.00	4.49	4.87	4.88	4.63	4.60	4.55	4.32	3.98	4.03
2018	5.03	4.49	4.89	4.67	4.78	4.54	4.43	4.27	4.23	4.19
2019	5.01	4.40	4.66	4.61	4.50	4.51	4.38	4.28	4.18	4.03
Applicants
2016	4.48	4.15	4.22	4.25	4.19	4.14	4.09	4.08	4.09	3.91
2017	4.49	4.14	4.19	4.27	4.23	4.10	4.10	4.03	4.00	3.89
2018	4.49	4.12	4.17	4.19	4.16	4.08	4.08	4.03	4.07	3.91
2019	4.48	4.08	4.13	4.11	4.07	4.03	4.06	3.98	4.17	3.91

Table 4. Average matriculation exam grades for male and female applicants and admitted students in universities and primary teacher education programmes (Vipunen 2020).

	Admitted Students				Applicants
	Universities		Primary teacher education		Universities		Primary teacher education
	Men	Women	Men	Women	Men	Women	Men	Women
2016	4.84	5.04	4.30	4.67	4.33	4.59	3.87	4.25
2017	4.90	5.07	4.13	4.60	4.36	4.59	3.89	4.23
2018	4.94	5.09	4.21	4.57	4.36	4.58	3.86	4.21
2019	4.96	5.05	4.09	4.48	4.36	4.55	3.82	4.16

Figure 1. Standardised mean profiles of the two-cluster solution.

Table 5. Means, standard deviations, and t-test results for group differences in processing and regulation strategies.

	Reproductive and support-dependent students (n = 73)		Deep and independent learners (n = 91)
Variable	M	SD	M	SD	t(162)	p	Cohen’s d	effect size r
Deep processing	3.48	0.38	4.16	0.33	−12.03	<.001	−1.91	−0.69
Stepwise processing	3.32	0.73	2.90	0.67	3.88	<.001	0.60	0.29
Self-regulation	2.87	0.54	3.66	0.56	−8.96	<.001	−1.44	−0.58
External regulation	3.63	0.43	2.83	0.45	11.43	<.001	1.82	0.67
Lack of regulation	3.34	0.72	2.98	0.76	3.03	<.01	0.49	0.24

Figure 2. The division of study profile groups in the three teacher education units.

Table 6. Correlations between current study success measures, matriculation exam and entrance exam scores.

	1.	2.	3.	4.
1. Number of earned study credits	1	.170*	−.035	−.054
2. Mean grade of completed courses		1	.184*	.273**
3. Mean of all subject grades in the matriculation exam			1	.339**
4. Scores on the national written entrance exam				1

**p < .01, *p < .05.

Vermunt, J. D. 1994. Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University, Department of Educational Psychology.

 Google Scholar

Vermunt, J. D. 1998. “The Regulation of Constructive Learning Processes.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 68 (2): 149–171. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1998.tb01281.x.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Vipunen. 2020. “Education Statistics Finland.” https://vipunen.fi/fi-fi

 Google Scholar