Oxidation Communications 40, No 2, 973–985 (2017)

Overall ecology

FACTORS AFFECTING SELF-REGULATED LEARNING IN

NURSING STUDENTS IN TURKEY

Y. DENATa*, Y. DIKMENb, G. G. ARSLANc, D. KARALARa, G. YILMAZa

a
Nursing Department, Nursing Faculty, Adnan Menderes University, Aydin, Turkey
E-mail: denat09@gmail.com
b
Nursing Department, Sakarya University School of Health, Sakarya, Turkey
c
Nursing Faculty, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey

ABSTRACT
This study determined the views of nursing students on the factors affecting self-
regulated learning. This study was carried out in the nursing department of Adnan
Menderes University in Aydin, Turkey. The sampling consisted of 524 students who
agreed to participate in the research. The data were obtained by Student Introduction
Form and Self-regulated Learning Skills Scale developed by Turan (2009) in Turkey.
Two-way (ANOVA) variance analysis and Independent T test were used in the analysis
of the data. Total score average of the students were determined as 149.34 r 18.92.
The meaningful difference between academic success perception and score average
of scale total and the whole sub-dimension was found and generally as success level
FRPHVGRZQWKHVFDOHVFRUHVGHFUHDVHV7KH¿QGLQJVREWDLQHGIURPWKLVVWXG\UHYHDOHG
that self-regulated learning skills in nursing students were at medium-level.
Keywords: nursing students, self-regulated learning, academic success.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND

The learning behaviour of the individual emerges as a combination of his past life
experiences, environmental conditions he is in, his relationships with other systems
surrounding him, and his personal characteristics. Thus, in ecological system, fam-
ily, university, campus area, friends, class at school and living place are regarded as
a system for a student1. Ecological approach which asserts that these systems should
FRQVLVWRIPDQ\SDUWVWKDWZRUNWRJHWKHUWRIXO¿OWKHIXQFWLRQRIHDFKRIWKHPLVEDVHG
on positive environmental factors since students can learn better2. In addition to this,
innovations especially in information technologies in recent years prove that learning
is a much more complicated process than a simple action and reaction3. Skills like

*
For correspondence.

973
individuals assuming learning responsibility, realising what and when, in which order
and to what extent to learn, knowing relevant methods and strategies related to these
and structuring his learning on his own have brought up self-regulation concept that
is frequently encountered together with learning in recent years4,5.
Self-regulated learning is an effective and a constructivist process in which the
learner determines his aims for his learning and follows, arrange and control his
understanding, motivation and behaviour with the guidance of his aims6,7:LWKWKH
VWXGLHVFDUULHGRXWLQWKH¿HOGRIVHOIUHJXODWLRQWKHHGXFDWRUVDLPVWRGHYHORSDFD-
demic learning skills and self-regulation knowledge and therefore ease the learning
process and make the students willing and skilled for learning and thus making them
more motivated8,9 7KH VWXGLHV FDUULHG RXW LQ WKLV ¿HOG UHYHDOHG WKDW WKH VWXGHQWV
whose self-regulation skill has developed, struggled to achieve their personal goals,
took into consideration the conditions while struggling to achieve their goals10, the
VWXGHQWVVHOIVXI¿FLHQFLHVZHUHKLJKWKH\XVHGWKHLUVHOIUHJXODWLRQVWUDWHJLHVHIIHF-
tively11, they could arrange their learning environment and use the time effectively12.
Self-regulation concept that played a role in students learning process constituted
the focus of the studies related to academic success and conducted in recent years13.
Self-regulation was suggested as a key for analysing motivation process in research
groups in recent years and motivation methods were developed by forming various
natural groups14. Self-regulation strategies are individual skills that the students have
to develop in order to be successful in their lives. Therefore, the students need sup-
port in this situation when it is taken into consideration that self-regulated skills are
conceivable, learnable and controllable skills15.
Self-regulated learning emphasises autonomy and control with the aspects that
knowledge should be obtained, experience should be developed and the actions that
are performed to develop the individual should be followed, directed and organised16.
Therefore, obtaining self-regulated learning skills in higher education is really im-
portant in our period in which knowledge is continuously changing and developing8.
Though there are so many researches carried out about social science in Turkey and
abroad3,8,17–26 there is not any research result in nursing students about the issue.
Therefore, it was thought that these research results could constitute data source for
illuminating individual factors affecting self-regulated learning skills of the students
and quality of university education in nursing and planning more effective and in-
novative teaching skills; and could contribute to the literature in terms of developing
the education. This study determined the views of nursing students on the factors
affecting self-regulated learning.

EXPERIMENTAL
A descriptive survey design was used in this reseacrh. This study was carried out in
the Nursing Department of Adnan Menderes University in Aydin, Turkey. The School
of Nursing awards students a nursing license diploma after four years of education.

974
The research study group consisted of 876 students who were attending classes in
the 2015–2016 academic year. The sampling consisted of 524 students who agreed
to participate in the research.
Data collection instruments. The data were obtained by Student Introduction Form
and Self-regulated Learning Skills Scale developed by Turan (2009) in Turkey27.
Student introduction form. This form created by the researchers by scanning the extant
literature consisted of the questions like gender, age, class level, graduated school,
place to live, regular reading habit and academic success perception.
Self-regulated learning skills scale (SRLSS). This scale is a scale consisting of 4 sub-
dimensions and 41 items and it is a 5-grade likert scale developed by Turan27 with an
aim of determining self-regulated learning skills of the students in Turkey. For each
LWHPLQWKHVFDOHRQHRIWKHVLJQVOLNHµ±,GRQRWFHUWDLQO\DJUHH¶µ±,GRQRW
DJUHH¶µ±,DPQRWVXUH¶µ±,DJUHH¶DQGµ±,FHUWDLQO\DJUHH¶VKRXOGEHPDUNHG
The score given for each item is taken into consideration. However, 3rd, 7th, 12th,
20th, 23rd, 32nd, and 39th items are scored reversely. Therefore, the lowest score to
be obtained from the scale is 41 and the highest score to be obtained from the scale
is 205. There are four sub-dimensions of the scale and these are taking action for
motivation and learning, planning and setting goals, use of strategy and dependency
in learning by evaluation. If higher score is obtained from the scale, this means that
VHOIUHJXODWHGOHDUQLQJVNLOOVRIWKHLQGLYLGXDODUHLQJRRGOHYHO&URQEDFKFRHI¿FLHQW
for sub-dimensions of the scale in the original scale was found as 0.88, 0.91, 0.83,
0.76, respectively and it was found as 0.91 for all the items27. Cronbach Alpha coef-
¿FLHQWWKDWLVUHOLDELOLW\FRHI¿FLHQWIRUWKHZKROHVFDOHDQGLWVVXEGLPHQVLRQVIRUWKH
sampling group in this study was found as 0.84, 0.82, 0.81, 0.82 and 0.76, respectively.
Analysis of data. The data were evaluated by using a SPSS 16.0 package program. In
descriptive statistics, frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation were cal-
culated. Two-way variance analysis (MANOVA) was used to evaluate the differences
in score averages obtained from SRLSS and its sub-dimensions in terms of academic
success perception and class levels of the students. Before solving, assumptions related
to normality of MANOVA and homogeneity of variances and covariance matrixes. In
order to control whether each dependent variable compared to independent variables
meets variance equality, Levene test was conducted (for motivation and learning, and
taking action F = 1.120, for planning and setting goal F = 0.606, for use of strategy
and evaluation F = 1.231, dependency in learning F = 0.768, for total score of the
scale F = 0.632, p > 0.06). It was seen hat variances for dependent variables were
equal and also it was concluded that Box M value was not meaningful and covariance
matrixes were equal. Therefore, basic assumptions of two-way MANOVA were met.
Moreover, Independent T-test was used to compare total scale and sub-dimension
score averages according to gender and regular reading habit of the students. Statisti-
cal meaningfulness level was taken as 0.05.

975
Ethical issues. The study was conducted in accordance with Helsinki Declaration Prin-
ciples. Before collecting data, relevant permissions from relevant organisation were
taken in order to conduct the study with written permission via e-mail from the writer.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Average of age of the students joining the framework of the study was 20.59 r 1.75
(min. 18, max. 36) and it was known that 72% of them were female, 27.7% of them
were in I Class, 26.5% – in II Class, 31.1% – in III Class, 14.7% – in IV Class and
RIWKHPKDGPLGGOHOHYHODFDGHPLFVXFFHVV,WZDVVSHFL¿HGWKDWRIWKH
participants lived together with their families and 39.5% of them had regular reading
habit.
SRLSS total score average of the students was 149.34 r 18.2 (41–205 score)
and scores related to sub-dimension were found as respectively 26.83 r 4.17 for tak-
ing action for motivation and learning, 29.68 r 5.15 for planning and setting a goal,
70.57 r 10.25 for the use of strategy and evaluation and 22.24 r 4.90 for dependency
in learning.
:KHQ7DEOHZDVDQDO\VHGLWZDVGHWHUPLQHGWKDWWKHKLJKHVWWDNLQJDFWLRQ
IRUPRWLYDWLRQDQGOHDUQLQJVXEGLPHQVLRQVFRUHDYHUDJHEHORQJHGWRWKH¿UVWFODVV
students, the lowest score belonged to the fourth class students, the highest planning
DQGVHWWLQJDJRDOVXEGLPHQVLRQVFRUHDYHUDJHEHORQJHGWRWKH¿UVWFODVVVWXGHQWVWKDW
saw themselves as successful, the lowest score belonged to the fourth class success-
ful student, the highest use of strategy and evaluation sub-dimension score average
EHORQJHGWRWKH¿UVWFODVVVWXGHQWVWKDWVDZWKHPVHOYHVDVVXFFHVVIXOWKHORZHVWVFRUH
belonged to the fourth class unsuccessful students, the highest dependency in learning
VXEGLPHQVLRQVFRUHDYHUDJHEHORQJHGWRWKH¿UVWFODVVVWXGHQWVWKDWVDZWKHPVHOYHV
as successful and the lowest score belonged to the third class unsuccessful students.
,WZDVGHWHUPLQHGWKDWVFDOHWRWDOVFRUHDYHUDJHWKHKLJKHVWEHORQJHGWRWKH¿UVWFODVV
students that saw themselves as successful and the lowest belonged to the fourth class
students that saw themselves as unsuccessful.

976
 Table 1. SRLSS and sub-dimension score averages and standard deviation values according to academic success perception and class levels of the students
Academic success Class level N Taking action for Planning and set- Use of strategy Dependency in SRLSS total
perception motivation and ting a goal and evaluation learning X ± SD
learning X ± SD X ± SD X±SD
X ± SD
Successful ¿UVWFODVV 45 30.31±4.80 31.04±4.13 73.70±11.23 23.72±5.19 158.12±16.32
second class 58 27.88±4.34 29.92±4.38 70.83±10.23 22.04±5.16 150.53±16.79
third class 47 27.05±3.62 26.60±5.75 70.09±11.09 21.61±5.61 148.62±22.17
fourth class 17 25.01±3.64 26.02±5.72 69.94±10.93 22.83±4.53 147.14±20.01
Average ¿UVWFODVV 118 28.83±3.67 30.16±5.16 70.54±10.21 21.33±4.84 155.11±16.24
second class 70 27.08±3.44 29.68±5.32 70.78±11.63 22.17±4.18 154.42±18.32
third class 75 26.13±3.83 29.62±5.14 71.24±11.15 22.75±4.87 148.17±21.14
fourth class 60 26.16±3.78 29.76±5.09 70.84±10.20 21.67±5.02 148.10±21.13
Unsuccessful ¿UVWFODVV 7 26.70±3.89 28.10±5.11 69.42±11.20 21.13±4.09 155.28±16.35
second class 9 27.10±3.46 28.66±5.02 70.01±11.53 21.19±4.37 154.78±18.02
third class 8 26.24±3.18 28.41±5.91 69.64±11.35 20.85±4.68 146.37±21.09
fourth class 10 25.11±3.62 27.93±5.18 69.09±10.78 21.06±5.19 146.14±21.16
Total 524 26.83±4.17 29.68±5.15 70.57±10.25 22.24±4.90 149.34±18.92

977
 Two-way variance analysis (MANOVA) results, which was conducted to analyse
whether there was a meaningful difference in self-regulated learning skills of the
students according to class levels, academic success perception and interaction of
these variables, are given in Table 2.

Table 2. Two-way MANOVA results related to SRLSS and sub-dimension scores according to academic
success perceptions and class levels of the students
Multiple comparison :LONV F Hypoth- p n2
lambda esis SD
Intercept 0.936 4615.00 2 0.00* 0.98
Academic success 0.938 361.90 2 0.00* 0.97
Class level 0.976 4375.89 3 0.03* 0.76
Academic success perception X class 0.012 1.375 3 0.88 0.02
level
*p < 0.05.

According to two-way MANOVA analysis results, there was a meaningful differ-

ence for the main effect of dependent variables average on academic success percep-
WLRQDQGFODVVOHYHO:LONODPEGD F(2) = 361.90, p < 0.05). However, when
academic success perception X class level common effects were analysed, it was seen
WKDWWKHUHZDVQRWDPHDQLQJIXOGLIIHUHQFH:LONODPEGD F(2) = 1.375, p >
:KHWKHUWKHVH¿QGLQJVZHUHPHDQLQJIXOLQSUDFWLFHZDVHYDOXDWHGE\WDNLQJ
LQWRFRQVLGHUDWLRQWKHPDJQLWXGHRIWKHHIIHFW:KHQHWDVTXDUHYDOXHVZHUHDQDO\VHG
DFFRUGLQJWR:LONODPEGDWHVWLWZDVVSHFL¿HGWKDWWKHYDOXHUHODWHGWRFODVVOHYHOn2
= 0.76) and academic success perception (n2 = 0.97) was strong and therefore effect
value was big. Therefore, self-regulated learning skills of the students vary according
to academic success perception and class level. One-way variance (ANOVA) analysis
related to SRLSS and sub-dimension score averages was carried out with an aim of
analysing which dependent variable contributed to the multivariate meaningfulness.
Variance results are shown in Table 3.
:KHQ7DEOHZDVDQDO\VHGLWZDVVHHQWKDWWRWDO65/66DQGDOOVXEGLPHQVLRQ
score averages in terms of main effect of academic success perception varied meaning-
fully (p < 0.05). It was determined that total scale, planning and setting a goal and use
of strategy and evaluation sub-dimension score averages in terms of the main effect
of class level varied meaningfully and taking action for motivation and learning and
dependency in learning sub-dimension score averages did not vary meaningfully. It
ZDVVSHFL¿HGWKDWWKHUHZHUHQRWPHDQLQJIXOGLIIHUHQFHVLQWHUPVRIDFDGHPLFVXFFHVV
perception and class level.

978
Table 3. One-way (ANOVA) results related to SRLSS and sub-dimension scores according to academic
success perceptions and class levels of the students
Source of variance Sum of Degree of Average of F p
squares freedom squares
Academic success perception
Taking action for motivation and 1045.198 2 1235.108 8.169 0.01*
learning
Planning and setting a goal 1428.387 2 482.670 18.498 0.02*
Use of strategy and evaluation 4352.092 2 190.678 8.897 0.02*
Dependency in learning 572.009 2 1710.978 4.498 0.01*
SRLSS Total 4567.123 2 1983.09 5.856 0.01*
Class level
Taking action for motivation and 388.819 3 129.608 0.927 0.68
learning
Planning and setting a goal 1446.762 3 478.179 4.368 0.01*
Use of strategy and evaluation 4709.197 3 195.824 7.834 0.01*
Dependency in learning 156.186 3 52.072 1.012 0.42
SRLSS total 4492.228 3 1974.18 19.856 0.01*
Academic success perception X class level
Taking action for motivation and 225.004 3 77.002 0.589 0.76
learning
Planning and setting a goal 154.678 3 51.242 0.634 0.64
Use of strategy and evaluation 135.467 3 45.155 0.918 0.44
Dependency in learning 1125.128 3 367.128 0.765 0.52
SRLSS total 646.576 3 218.903 0.891 0.43
Fault 39568.452 516 26.107
Total 1030011.000 524
*p < 0.05.

As a result of comparisons made, when it was analysed in terms of academic

success perception, total scale and the whole sub-dimension score averages of the
students that saw themselves as successful (158.12 r 16.32) were higher than the
students that were saw themselves as middle level (155.11 r 16.24) and unsuccessful
(146.14 r 21.16) (p:KHQLWZDVDQDO\VHGLQWHUPVRIFODVVOHYHOWRWDOVFDOH
planning and setting a goal and use of strategy and evaluation sub-dimension score
DYHUDJHVRIWKH¿UVWFODVVVWXGHQWVr 16.32) were higher than the upper classes
(II Class = 148.53 r 16.73; III Class = 148.61 r 21.17; IV Class = 146.29 r 20.01).

979
Table 4. T-test results related to SRLSS and its sub-dimensions according to gender and regular reading
habit of the students
Variables N Taking action Planning and Use of Dependency SRLSS total
for motiva- setting a goal strategy and in learning
tion and evaluation
learning
X ± SD X ± SD X ± SD X ± SD X ± SD
Gender
Female 378 26.85±3.95 29.73±5.16 70.59±9.88 22.33±4.94 149.52±18.56
Male 146 26.80±4.75 29.53±5.13 70.56±11.20 22.02±5.06 148.90±19.87
Statistical t = 0.130 t = 0.387 t = 0.051 t = 0.660 t = 0.330
analysis p = 0.89 p = 0.69 p = 0.95 p = 0.51 p = 0.71
Regular reading habit
Yes 207 29.99±4.43 29.09±5.54 71.12±10.83 22.51±5.11 150.92±20.06
No 317 26.59±3.97 29.47±4.88 70.22±9.89 22.07±4.76 149.31±18.06
Statistical t = 2.022 t = 1.217 t = 0.976 t = 0.996 t = 1.547
analysis p = 0.03* p = 0.26 p = 0.32 p = 0.34 p = 0.12
SRLSS – self-regulated learning skills scale; *p < 0.05.

It was observed that there was not a statistical difference between total SRLSS and
all the sub-dimensions score averages according to gender differences of the students
taken within the framework of the study (p!$OVRLWZDVVSHFL¿HGWKDWWDNLQJ
action for motivation and learning sub-dimension score average of the students having
regular reading habit was higher than the students not having regular reading habit (p
< 0.05) (Table 4). It was determined that there were not any meaningful differences
between variables like age, the school graduated and place they live and scale score
averages (p > 0.05).
In this study carried out with an aim of evaluating self-regulated learning skills
of nursing students for some variables, SRLSS total score average of the students was
149.34 + 18.92 (41–205 points), the scores related to sub-dimensions were respectively
26.83 + 4.17 for taking action for motivation and learning, 29.68 + 5.15 for planning
and setting a goal, 70.57 + 10.25 for use of strategy and evaluation and 22.24 + 4.90
for dependency in learning. The values close to the average in sub-dimensions of the
scale and total score average were found. These scores in our study were interpreted
as middle level when the ones, whose SRLSS scores were between +1 standard devia-
tion (the points between 136–166) were accepted as average, the ones, whose SRLSS
scores were over 1 standard deviation (the points over 166), were accepted as high
and the ones, whose SRLSS scores below 1 standard deviation (below 1369, were
accepted as low. In a study conducted by Turan27 with university students, similarly
ZLWKWKH¿QGLQJRIWKLVVWXG\LWZDVVSHFL¿HGWKDWVHOIUHJXODWHGVNLOOVRIWKHVWXGHQWV
were middle-level. However, in a study conducted with the students of medicine, it
was concluded that these skills of the students were above the average28. Having the
VKLOOVGHVFULEHGE\VHOIUHJXODWLRQLVVLJQL¿FDQWLQWHUPVRIPDNLQJWKHLQGLYLGXDOV

980
independent learners. This situation is one of the most important aims of higher educa-
tion. Therefore, it was observed that the students achieved this goal in medium level.
,WLVVSHFL¿HGLQWKHOLWHUDWXUHWKDWWKHLQGLYLGXDOVKDYLQJGHYHORSHGVHOIUHJXODWLRQ
skills have a higher possibility of being successful in higher education19. It was seen
in this study that SRLSS total and all the sub-dimension score averages in terms of
the main effect of academic success perception varied. Therefore, differences were
found in total score and all the sub-dimensions between academic success levels of
the students and SRLSS scores. As a result of the comparisons made, self-regulated
learning skills of the students that saw themselves as successful are higher than the
ones that saw themselves as average and unsuccessful. The highest score, 158.12 +
16.32 belonged to the students that saw themselves as successful academically and
as success level comes down, SRLSS score decreases. This result can be evaluated
DVDQLPSRUWDQW¿QGLQJRIRXUVWXG\,WFDQEHVDLGWKDWWKHVHUHVXOWVDUHVXSSRUWHGE\
many studies and therefore they can be generalised. In studies conducted in different
education levels, it was reported that there was a relationship between success and
self-regulated learning strategy8,19–21,27. In the study conducted with nursing students,
Dil 29 reported that learning approaches and studying skills were higher in the students
whose academic success perception was high. In a study conducted by Turan and
Demirel8 with the students of medicine, a meaningful difference was found between
academic success levels and self-regulated learning skills of the students and it was
reported that self-regulated learning skills decreased when general academic success
came down. Finally, in this study, the relationship between self-regulated learning
skill and academic success was supported parallel to study results carried out before
with the students in different departments and levels.
,WZDVVSHFL¿HGLQWKLVVWXG\WKDWWRWDOVFDOHSODQQLQJDQGVHWWLQJDJRDODQGXVH
of strategy and evaluation sub-dimension score averages in terms of the main effect
of class level varied meaningfully and taking action for motivation and dependency
LQOHDUQLQJVXEGLPHQVLRQVFRUHVDYHUDJHVGLGQRWYDU\PHDQLQJIXOO\:KHQLWZDV
analysed in terms of class level, total scale, planning and setting a goal and use of strat-
HJ\DQGHYDOXDWLRQVXEGLPHQVLRQVFRUHDYHUDJHVRIWKH¿UVWFODVVVWXGHQWVr
16.32) were higher than the upper class (II Class = 148.53 r 16.73, III Class = 148.61 r
21.17 and IV Class = 146 r:KLOHWKH¿UVWFODVVVWXGHQWVZHUHPRUHVXFFHVVIXO
in planning and setting a goal and using a strategy and evaluating than the second, it
can be thought that third and fourth class students, the fourth class students were more
dependent in learning though they were more close to the job of nursing. Generally,
LWFDQEHVDLGWKDWWKHVWXGHQWVPRYHGDZD\IURPWKHVNLOOVOLNHµEHLQJUHVSRQVLEOHIRU
WKHLURZQOHDUQLQJ¶DQGµPDVWHULQJWKHLURZQOHDUQLQJSURFHVV¶6LPLODUO\ZLWKWKLV
result, it was concluded in study conducted by Celik18 that the fourth class students
ZHUH PRUH GHSHQGHQW WKDQ WKH ¿UVW FODVV VWXGHQWV 6DJLUOL HW DO17 stated that there
ZHUHGLIIHUHQFHVEHWZHHQWKH¿UVWFODVVVWXGHQWVDQGIRXUWKFODVVVWXGHQWVLQWHUPV
RIVHOIUHJXODWLRQVNLOOVIRUWKHEHQH¿WRIWKH¿UVWFODVVVWXGHQWV7KHVHUHVXOWVVKRZ
parallelism with our study and show that self-regulated learning skills of the students

981
FKDQJHV LQ XSSHU FODVVHV7KHVH ¿QGLQJV WKDW VKRZ FRQWUDVW LQ WHUPV RI DFDGHPLF
development of the students can stem from the approaches aimed at transferring
knowledge based on memorisation by taking into consideration curriculum with an
aim of developing certain craft knowledge and skills at the university. Therefore, it is
important to develop higher education programs and provide activities that can bring
self-regulated skills to the students.
,W ZDV VSHFL¿HG WKDW WKHUH ZDV QRW DQ\ PHDQLQJIXO GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WRWDO
SRLSS and all the sub-dimensions score averages according to gender variable of the
students (p > 0.05) (Table 4). In a study conducted by Turan, while there was not any
PHDQLQJIXOGLIIHUHQFHLQµWDNLQJDFWLRQIRUPRWLYDWLRQDQGOHDUQLQJ¶µXVHRIVWUDWHJ\
DQGHYDOXDWLRQ¶µGHSHQGHQF\LQOHDUQLQJ¶VXEGLPHQVLRQVDQGVFDOHWRWDOVFRUHDYHU-
DJHVDFFRUGLQJWRJHQGHUWKHUHZDVDPHDQLQJIXOGLIIHUHQFHLQµSODQQLQJDQGVHWWLQJ
DJRDO¶GLPHQVLRQRIWKHVFDOHIRUWKHEHQH¿WRIIHPDOHVWXGHQWV6LPLODUO\5RHENHQ22
and Kolic-Vehovec et al.23 reported that there was not any meaningful difference
EHWZHHQPDOHDQGIHPDOHVWXGHQWVLQWHUPVRIµVHWWLQJDJRDO¶VXEGLPHQVLRQWKDWLV
one of the sub-dimensions of self-regulation. However, in the existing literature, there
are some results that are not consistent with these results. Vrugt and Oort24 concluded
that female students used self-regulation skills more effectively than male students
and Zimmerman and Martinez-Ponz25 concluded that the number of self-regulation
strategies of female students that they used in learning process was higher than male
students, they set more goals to achieve for themselves and they planned the strate-
gies to use more. The difference in the results of the study can stem from the fact
that the ratio of male participants constituting our sampling was low (27.9%). Future
studies to be carried out in wider sampling will reveal gender differences in terms of
self-regulatory learning skills in more details.
Self-regulated skill is a process that is multi-dimensional in a structural and
functional way and personal and transformational. This skill includes cognitive, sen-
sational, behavioural and motivational factors30. Also, while evaluating self-regulation
success, it is not possible to consider this skill apart from growth period. This skill
is developed with interactions including many factors. For example, conformity of
the knowledge and experiences obtained from the families (genetic factors and care),
teachers, peers, playmates, physical environment and reading a book. Therefore, taking
social environments into consideration in development process of self-regulated skill
is really important for effectiveness of this development process31,WZDVVSHFL¿HG
in this study in accordance with the extant literature that taking action for motivation
and learning sub-dimension score average of the students having regular reading
habit was meaningfully higher than the students not having regular reading habit (p
< 0.05) (Table 4).
Limititations. The restriction of the study is the fact that it was carried out with the
VWXGHQWVKDYLQJHGXFDWLRQDWWKHXQLYHUVLW\7KHUHIRUHWKHVH¿QGLQJVFDQQRWEHJHQHU-
alised with all nursing students in Turkey. Also, using scales with an aim of collecting

982
data in this study restricted the answer of the students with the statements in the scales.
7KHUHIRUHLWVKRZVUHVWULFWLRQLQWHUPVRI¿QGLQJVREWDLQHGDQGTXDQWLWDWLYHUHVHDUFK
method used in this study. Variables related to culture, features of family, structure
of the school and interactions between the educators that can affect self-regulated
learning skills of the students were discussed in this study.

CONCLUSIONS
7KH ¿QGLQJV REWDLQHG IURP WKLV VWXG\ UHYHDOHG WKDW VHOIUHJXODWHG OHDUQLQJ VNLOOV
were in medium level in nursing students, self-regulated learning skills of the fourth
class students were lower than the lower classes and there was a relationship between
academic success and self-regulated learning skills. Also, it was concluded that read-
ing habit was effective in taking action for learning and motivation of the students.
Therefore, it will be useful to support self-regulated learning skills of the students and
provide learning consultancy with the studies aimed at developing these skills in higher
education and especially in nursing education. It is thought that creating environments
that can make students discuss their ideas all-round and they can interact with each
other, make students manage their own learning processes and encourage students
to take responsibilities, raise awareness in learning process and promote students to
make self-evaluations will positively contribute to the development of self-regulation
skills of the students. Also, self-regulated skills will explain more information about
the issues thanks to the analysis of these variables in the studies to be carried out in
the future due to interactions between culture, environment, family and educators.
$OVRPRUHGHVFULSWLYH¿QGLQJVFDQEHREWDLQHGZLWKTXDOLWDWLYHUHVHDUFKHVDLPHGDW
determining the reasons why self-regulated learning skills are lower as the classes of
the students advance.

REFERENCES
1. Z. DEMIR, A.T. KAYA: Analysis and Evaluation of University Campus Areas in Terms of the Urban
Equipments. Case Study of Duzce University Campus. Oxid Commun, 39, 1, 673 (2016).
2. E. BOZDOGAN, S. SAHINLER, E. KORKMAZ: Environmental Awareness and Attitudes in Uni-
versity Students. An Example from Hatay (Turkey). Oxid Commun,39 (1), 661 (2016).
 )(5'2*$166(1*8/$6WXG\RQWKH(OHPHQWDU\6WXGHQWV¶6HOIUHJXODWHG/HDUQÕQJ6WUDWHJLHV
WRZDUGV0DWKHPDWÕFV-RXUQDORI5HVHDUFKLQ(GXFDWLRQDQG7HDFKLQJ3 (3), 108 (2014).
 -6&+8,7(0$73((760$,YDQGHU9((16HOIUHJXODWHG/HDUQLQJDQG6WXGHQWV¶3HUFHSWLRQV
of Innovative and Traditional Learning Environments: a Longitudinal Study in Secondary Education.
Educ Stud, 38 (4), 397 (2012).
5. D. ASLAN, H. AYDIN: Evaluation of the Teaching Processes at Science High Schools Based on a
Constructivist Approach. A Scale Development Study. Oxid Commun, 38 (1), 472 (2015).
6. P. R. PINTRICH: A Conceptual Framework for Assessing Motivation and Self-regulated Learning
in College Students. Educ Psychol Rev, 16 (4), 385 (2004).
7. D. H. SCHUNK: Self-regulated Learning: the Educational Legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educ Psychol,
40 (2), 85 (2005).

983
  6 785$1 2 '(0,5(/ 7KH 5HODWÕRQVKÕS EHWZHHQ 6HOIUHJXODWHG /HDUQÕQJ 6NÕOOV DQG
$FKÕHYHPHQWD&DVHIURP+DFHWWHSH8QÕYHUVÕW\0HGÕFDO6FKRRO+DFHWWHSH8QLYHUVLW\-RXUQDORI
Education, 38, 279 (2010).
 -0$57,16HOIUHJXODWHG/HDUQLQJ6RFLDO&RJQLWLYH7KHRU\DQG$JHQF\(GXF3V\FKRO39 (2),
135 (2004).
0%2(.$(576%ULQJLQJDERXW&KDQJHLQ&ODVVURRP6WUHQJWKVDQG:HDNQHVVHVRIWKH6HOI
regulated Learning Approach – EARL Presidential 2001. Learn Instr, 12, 589 (2002).
 %-=,00(50$1$FDGHPLF6WXG\LQJDQGWKH'HYHORSPHQWRI3HUVRQDO6NLOOD6HOIUHJXODWRU\
Perspective. Educ Psychol, 33, 73 (1998).
%-=,00(50$1$%$1'85$00$57,1(=32166HOIPRWLYDWLRQIRU$FDGHPLF$W-
WDLQPHQWWKH5ROHRI6HOIHI¿FDF\%HOLHIVDQG3HUVRQDO*RDO6HWWLQJ$P(GXF5HV-29 (3), 663
(992).
13. M. AINLEY, L. PATRICK: Measuring Self-regulated Learning Processes through Tracking Patterns
RI6WXGHQWøQWHUDFWLRQZLWK$FKLHYHPHQW$FWLYLWLHV(GXF3V\FKRO5HY18, 267 (2006).
.6$66(1%(5..$:2/7,1*URXSEDVHG6HOIUHJXODWLRQWKH(IIHFWVRI5HJXODWLRQ)RFXV
European Review of Social Psychology, 19, 126 (2008).
15. A. CILTAS: A Study on the Importance of Self-regulation Teaching in Education. Mehmet Akif
(UVR\8QLYHUVLW\-RXUQDORI6RFLDO6FLHQFH,QVWLWXWH3 (5), 1 (2011).
16. S. G. PARIS, A. H. PARIS: Classroom Applications of Research on Self-regulated Learning. Educ
Psychol, 36 (2), 89 (2001).
026$*,5/,$&,/7$6($=$3$*$6,.=(+,5(IIHFWVRQ+LJKHU(GXFDWÕRQ/HDUQÕQJ
6NLOOV$WDWXUN8QLYHUVLW\6DPSOH.DVWDPRQX(GXFDWLRQ-RXUQDO18 (2), 587 (2010).
18. N. CELIK: Examination of Mathematics Teacher Candidates and Teachers’ Self-regulation Skills
DQG6HOIHI¿FDF\3HUFHSWLRQV8QSXEOLVKHG0DVWHU7KHVLV$WDWXUN8QLYHUVLW\,QVWLWXWHRI6RFLDO
Sciences, Erzurum, 2012.
19. L. RUBAN, S. M. REIS: Patterns of Self-regulated Strategy Use among Low-achieving and High-
achieving University Students. Roeper Review, 28 (3), (2006).
20. P. POKAY, C. BLUMENFELD PHYLLIS: Predicting Achievement Early and Late in the Semester:
WKH5ROHRI0RWLYDWLRQDQG8VHRI/HDUQLQJ6WUDWHJLHV-(GXF3V\FKRO82 (1), 41 (1990).
21. P. R. PINTRICH, E. V. de GROOT: Motivational and Self-regulated Learning Components of
&ODVVURRP$FDGHPLF3HUIRUPDQFH-(GXF3V\FKRO82 (1), 33 (1990).
22. H. ROEBKEN: Multiple Goals, Satisfaction, and Achievement in University Undergraduate Educa-
tion: a Student Experience in the Research University (SERU) Project Research Paper. Research and
Occasional Paper Series: CSHE.2.07. Berkeley, CA, University of California, 2007.
6.2/,&9(+29(&%521&(9,&=8%.29,&,%$-6$16.,*RDORULHQWDWLRQ3DWWHUQVDQG
the Self-regulation of Reading in Highschool and University Students. In: International Handbook
RQ$SSO\LQJ6HOIUHJXODWHG/HDUQLQJLQ'LIIHUHQW6HWWLQJV(G-HV~VGHOD)XHQWH$ULDV0RXUDG$OL
Eissa). Almeria, Spain, 2010, 299–313.
$958*7)-2257(IIHFWLYH6HOIUHJXODWHG/HDUQLQJRI8QLYHUVLW\6WXGHQWV,Q,QWHUQDWLRQDO
+DQGERRNRQ$SSO\LQJ6HOIUHJXODWHG/HDUQLQJLQ'LIIHUHQW6HWWLQJV(G-HV~VGHOD)XHQWH$ULDV
Mourad Ali Eissa). Almeria, Spain, 2010, 319–340.
% - =,00(50$1 0 0$57,1(=321= 6WXGHQW 'LIIHUHQFHV LQ 6HOIUHJXODWHG /HDUQLQJ
5HODWLQJ*UDGH6H[DQG*LIWHGQHVVWR6HOIHI¿FDF\DQG6WUDWHJ\8VH-(GXF3V\FKRO82 (1), 51
(1990).
26. Z. ARSAL: The Impact of Self-regulation Instruction on Mathematics Achievements and Attitudes
of Elementary School Students. Education and Science, 24 (152), 3 (2009).
27. S. TURAN: Relationships between Probing-based Learning Attitudes, Learning Skills and Achieve-
ment. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Hacettepe University, Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara, 2009.

984
28. *66+2.$51.6+2.$5&0520(525-%8/,.6HOIGLUHFWHG/HDUQLQJ/RRNLQJ
at Outcomes with Medical Students. Fam Med, 34 (3), 197 (2002).
29. S. DIL: Relationship between Approaches to Learning and Study Skills and Some Demographic
Characteristics of Undergraduate Nursing Students’ and Perceived Academic Achievement in Higher
(GXFDWLRQ&DQNÕUÕ.DUDWHNLQ8QLYHUVLW\,QVWLWXWHRI6RFLDO6FLHQFHV-RXUQDO6 (1), 355 (2015).
:6*52/1,&.0)$5.$63DUHQWLQJDQGWKH'HYHORSPHQWRI6HOIUHJXODWLRQ,Q+DQGERRN
RI3DUHQWLQJ9RO3UDFWLFDO,VVXHVLQ3DUHQWLQJ(G0+%RUQVWHLQ+LOOVGDOH1-(UOEDXP
2002, 89–110.
31. T. G. YILDIZ, H. G. E. KARA, E. F. TANRIBUYURDU, M. GONEN: Examining Self-regulation
Skills according to Teacher-Child Interaction Quality. Education and Science, 39 (176), 329 (2014).
Received 3 June 2016
Revised 6 August 2016

985