Teachers’ and students’ evaluations of the effectiveness of learning strategies: An overview of the results of Estonian schools


  • Mikk Granström
  • Eve Kikas




learning strategies, deep learning, surface learning, teachers’ knowledge


Uuringu eesmärk on teada saada, kuidas õpetajad (N = 659) ja õpilased (N = 4888) hindavad erinevate õpistrateegiate tõhusust. Varasemad väikese valimiga uuringud on näidanud, et õpetajate ja õpilaste teadlikkus tõhusatest ja mittetõhusatest õpistrateegiatest on erinev, seega on teemat oluline uurida põhjalikumalt suurema valimiga. 2021. aastal viidi läbi üle-eestiline Õpetajauurimus 2021 ning järgmisel aastal Õpilasuurimus 2022. Uuringu käigus paluti õpetajatel ja õpilastel hinnata erinevate õpistrateegiate tõhusust nelja õpistsenaariumi kontekstis. Tulemustest selgus, et põhikooliõpetajad hindavad sügavat õppimist toetavaid õpistrateegiaid kõrgemalt kui põhikooliõpilased, kuid gümnaasiumis õpetajate ja õpilaste hinnangute vahel erinevust ei ole. Nii põhikoolis kui gümnaasiumis hindavad õpetajad pindmist õppimist toetavaid õpistrateegiaid madalamalt kui õpilased. Mõningaid erinevusi leiti ka konkreetsete õpistrateegiate tõhususe hinnangutes. Õppeainetest ning õpetajate staažist ei sõltunud, kuidas õpetajad õpistrateegiate tõhusust hindavad. Kokkuvõttes selgus, et nii õpetajate kui ka õpilaste teadmised uuringus kasutatud õpistrateegiatest olid pigem head. Õpetajate puhul kinnitab see varasemalt leitut ning õpilaste puhul saadi teada, et ka nemad hindavad kõrgemalt sügavat õppimist toetavaid õpistrateegiaid.



Download data is not yet available.


Agarwal, P. K., Nunes, L. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2021). Retrieval practice consistently benefits student learning: A systematic review of applied research in schools and classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1409–1453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09595-9

Badali, S., Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2022). Do students effectively regulate their use of self-testing as a function of item difficulty? Educational Psychology Review, 34(3), 1651–1677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09665-6

Bentler, P. M. (1992). On the fit of models to covariances and methodology to the Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 400–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.400

Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In Psychology and the real world: Essays illustrating fundamental contributions to society. (pp. 56–64). Worth Publishers.

Brod, G. (2020). Generative learning: Which strategies for what age? Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1295–1318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09571-9

Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford publications.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:somere:v:21:y:1992:i:2:p:230-258.

Carpenter, S. K., Cepeda, N. J., Rohrer, D., Kang, S. H. K., & Pashler, H. (2012). Using spacing to enhance diverse forms of learning: Review of recent research and implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 369–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9205-z

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834

Chen, O., Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2021). Spacing and interleaving effects require distinct theoretical bases: A systematic review testing the cognitive load and discriminativecontrast hypotheses. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1499–1522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09613-w

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed ed.). L. Erlbaum Associates.

DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage publications.

Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual review of psychology, 64, 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750

Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2018). Teachers’ direct and indirect promotion of selfregulated learning in primary and secondary school mathematics classes – insights from video-based classroom observations and teacher interviews. Metacognition and Learning, 13(2), 127–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-018-9181-x

Dignath, C., & Veenman, M. V. J. (2020). The role of direct strategy instruction and indirect activation of self-regulated learning – Evidence from classroom observation studies. Educational Psychology Review, 33(2), 489–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09534-0

Dinsmore, D. L., & Hattan, C. (2020). Levels of strategies and strategic processing. In Handbook of strategies and strategic processing (pp. 29–46). Routledge.

Dirkx, K. J. H., Camp, G., Kester, L., & Kirschner, P. A. (2019). Do secondary school students make use of effective study strategies when they study on their own? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(5), 952–957. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3584

Duncan, T. G., & McKeachie, W. J. (2005). The Making of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4002_6

Dunlosky, J. (2013). Strengthening the student toolbox: Study strategies to boost learning. American Educator, 37(3), 12–21.

Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (Third edit). London and New York: Sage.

Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2015a). Eight ways to promote generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9348-9

Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2015b). Learning as a generative activity. Cambridge University Press.

Foster, N. L., Mueller, M. L., Was, C., Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2019). Why does interleaving improve math learning? The contributions of discriminative contrast and distributed practice. Memory & Cognition, 47(6), 1088–1101. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00918-4

French, B. F., & Finch, W. H. (2006). Confirmatory factor analytic procedures for the determination of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 13(3), 378–402. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1303_3

Glogger-Frey, I., Ampatziadis, Y., Ohst, A., & Renkl, A. (2018). Future teachers’ knowledge about learning strategies: Misconcepts and knowledge-in-pieces. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 28, 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.02.001

Granström, M., Kikas, E., & Eisenschmidt, E. (2023). Classroom observations: How do teachers teach learning strategies? Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1119519

Granström, M., Härma, E., & Kikas, E. (2022). Teachers’ knowledge of learning strategies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2022.2074536

Gurung, R. A., Weidert, J., & Jeske, A. (2010). Focusing on how students study. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 28–35.

Halamish, V. (2018). Pre-service and in-service teachers’ metacognitive knowledge of learning strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02152

Haridus- ja Noorteamet. (2022). Põhikooli lõpueksamite taustaküsitlus. https://harno.ee/eksamite-taustakusitlused

Haridus- ja Teadusministeerium (2018). Haridusvaldkonna arengukava 2021–2035. https://www.hm.ee/ministeerium-uudised-ja-kontakt/ministeerium/strateegilised-alusdokumendid-ja-programmid#haridusvaldkonna-are

Hattie, J. A. C., & Donoghue, G. M. (2016). Learning strategies: A synthesis and conceptual model. npj Science of Learning, 1(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.13

Hennok, L., Mädamürk, K., & Kikas, E. (2022). Memorization strategies in basic school: grade-related differences in reported use and effectiveness. European Journal of Psychology of Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00630-z

Hu, L. t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Kang, S. H. K. (2016). Spaced repetition promotes efficient and effective learning. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215624708

Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student learning: Do students practise retrieval when they study on their own? Memory, 17(4), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210802647009

Kikas, E., & Jõgi, A.-L. (2016). Assessment of learning strategies: Self-report questionnaire or learning task. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31(4), 579–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0276-3

Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., Otto, B., Klieme, E., & Büttner, G. (2015). Teaching learning strategies. The role of instructional context and teacher beliefs. Journal for educational research online, 7(1), 176–197.

Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2007). The promise and perils of self-regulated study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 219–224. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194055

McCabe, J. (2011). Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates. Memory & Cognition, 39(3), 462–476. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-010-0035-2

McCabe, J. (2018). What learning strategies do academic support centers recommend to undergraduates? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7(1), 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.10.002

McDaniel, M. A., Agarwal, P. K., Huelser, B. J., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger III, H. L. (2011). Test-enhanced learning in a middle school science classroom: The effects of quiz frequency and placement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021782

Merilo, K., Eisenschmidt, E., & Kikas, E. (2021). Developing students’ learning strategies with the support of the intervention programme and involving parents. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian Journal of Education, 9(1), 219–242. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2021.9.1.09

Moder, K. (2010). Alternatives to F-test in one way ANOVA in case of heterogeneity of variances (a simulation study). Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 52(4), 343.

Morehead, K., Rhodes, M. G., & DeLozier, S. (2016). Instructor and student knowledge of study strategies. Memory, 24(2), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2014.1001992

O’Reilly, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). The impact of science knowledge, reading skill, and reading strategy knowledge on more traditional "High-Stakes" measures of high school students’ science achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 161–196. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831206298171

Ornstein, P., Coffman, J., Grammer, J., Souci, P. S., & McCall, L. (2010). Linking the classroom context and the development of children’s memory skills. In Handbook of Research on Schools, Schooling and Human Development. Routledge.

Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422

R Core Team. (2022). The R Project for Statistical Computing. In (Version 4.2.1) R foundation for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org/

Rau, M. A., Aleven, V., & Rummel, N. (2015). Successful learning with multiple graphical representations and self-explanation prompts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 30–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037211

Rawson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (2005). Rereading effects depend on time of test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.1.70

Rodriguez, F., Kataoka, S., Janet Rivas, M., Kadandale, P., Nili, A., & Warschauer, M. (2021). Do spacing and self-testing predict learning outcomes? Active Learning in Higher Education, 22(1), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787418774185

Roediger, H. L., & Butler, A. C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in longterm retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(1), 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.003

Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x

Roediger, H. L., & Pyc, M. A. (2012). Inexpensive techniques to improve education: Applying cognitive psychology to enhance educational practice. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(4), 242–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2012.09.002

Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02

Rutkowski, L., & Svetina, D. (2014). Assessing the hypothesis of measurement invariance in the context of large-scale international surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 74(1), 31–57.

Schleepen, T. M. J., & Jonkman, L. M. (2012). Children’s use of semantic organizational strategies is mediated by working memory capacity. Cognitive Development, 27(3), 255–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2012.03.003

Shevlin, M., & Miles, J. (2000). Applying regression and correlation: A guide for students and researchers. Applying Regression and Correlation, 1–272.

Smith, M. A., & Karpicke, J. D. (2014). Retrieval practice with ort-answer, multiplechoice, and hybrid tests. Memory, 22(7), 784–802. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2013.831454

Surma, T., Camp, G., de Groot, R., & Kirschner, P. A. (2022). Novice teachers’ knowledge of effective study strategies. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.996039

Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in science education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2

Vabariigi Valitsus (2021). Gümnaasiumi riiklik õppekava. RT I, 23.04.2021, 11. https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/123042021011

Vabariigi Valitsus (2023). Põhikooli riiklik õppekava. RT I, 08.03.2023, 5. https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/112042022010

van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 486–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.686740

Waeytens, K., Lens, W., & Vandenberghe, R. (2002). "Learning to learn": Teachers’ conceptions of their supporting role. Learning and instruction, 12(3), 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00024-X

Weinstein, Y., McDermott, K. B., & Szpunar, K. K. (2011). Testing protects against proactive interference in face–name learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(3), 518. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0085-x

Weinstein, Y., Sumeracki, M., & Caviglioli, O. (2019). Understanding how we learn: A visual guide. Routledge.

Yeo, D. J., & Fazio, L. K. (2019). The optimal learning strategy depends on learning goals and processes: Retrieval practice versus worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(1), 73. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000268



How to Cite

Granström, M., & Kikas, E. (2023). Teachers’ and students’ evaluations of the effectiveness of learning strategies: An overview of the results of Estonian schools. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian Journal of Education, 11(2), 98–128. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2023.11.2.05