DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VULNERABLE AND NON-VULNERABLE

STUDENTS REGARDING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ABILITIES AND

SELF-CONTROL SKILLS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT OF
LEARNING
V. Ramos, T. Sánchez, J. Reina, A. Franco-Crespo
Escuela Politécnica Nacional (Ecuador)
valentina.ramos@epn.edu.ec, tarquino.sanchez@epn.edu.ec, jessica.r@redineditaepn.com,
antonio.franco@epn.edu.ec

Abstract
This research aimed to analyze and compare cognitive-affective and behavioral psychological skills from
a total of 1005 students who entered the Escuela Politécnica Nacional (EPN) leveling course in the first
semester of the year 2019, which was constituted by two population groups or segments formed by: 218
students belonging to vulnerable groups and 787 students belonging to non-vulnerable groups. For this,
comparations calculations were performed using statistical analysis.
The results show that students belonging to vulnerable groups have a higher level of discouragement
and disorganization, greater distraction in classes, greater distrust of their abilities, greater perception
of job saturation and more disinterest compared to their colleagues who are not part of vulnerable
groups. However, there were better perceptions in relation to being considered a good student, as well
as in relation to their discipline and perfectionism. These results are part of inputs for a priority work
policy and directed with these groups, verifying that motivational aspects and social skills are
fundamental elements for student success.
Keywords: Vulnerable Students, Cognitive-affective Psychological Skills, Academic Success.

1 INTRODUCTION
The lack of homogeneity of knowledge and the low motivation of students entering the Higher Education
System, cause high rates of academic dropout or delay in completing their university studies, for this
reason, it becomes a priority to make a motivational evaluation to students of vulnerable groups that
have been accepted for admission to the Escuela Politécnica Nacional in the 2019 A period, and
compare with the rest of students belonging to non-vulnerable groups, to identify the most relevant
aspects that influence academic development and success.
The Escuela Politécnica Nacional (EPN) from Ecuador is one of the most important educational
institutions of the country. In the last year, among its main achievements was to move from the position
151 on the 2017 to 126 in the year 2019 and it is estimated by 2020 to be ranked in the position 98, as
indicated in the QS Latin American University Ranking [1]. However, the percentage of the students,
who pass the initial knowledge leveling courses, was 15.62% of the first time they enroll, increasing to
38.20% in their second enrollment opportunity. One of the most affected groups in both approval and
drop out are students who belong to vulnerable groups, constituting 24% of the total number of students
at the EPN [2].
With the data collected, it is proven that there is no homogeneous level in secondary education that
must be professionally corrected. This research aims to determine the aspects regarding the lack of
motivation between two groups of students entering the education system of Ecuador in order to
promote equal opportunities for all people in accordance with objective 1 of the National Plan for Good
Living: Guarantee a decent life with equal opportunities for all people [3].
During 2017, 501.020 third-year high school students and non-school students participated in the exam
called Ser Bachiller. In that same period, in the first year 17.409 students attended university studies, of
these only 52.452 (30%) were 18 years old, which indicates that there is a very high repetition rate of
the first year (leveling year) in the university or a late entry to it, where the effect of poverty follows the
studies of young Ecuadorians [4].
Although, gender is not a criterion of differentiation in the university [5], there are other factors that
negatively affect enrollment and drop-out at all levels of education in Ecuador such as the area and
region where students come from [6] and its ethnic self-identification [7].
34.5% of Ecuadorians who are 17 years old live in rural areas, and 17.9% of Ecuadorians who are 18
years old and are enrolled in the first year of university live in rural areas, that is to say, when passing
from one age to another the enrollment drops considerably and it can be determined that in addition to
poverty there is a mobility barrier within this vulnerable group considering that the majority of universities
are in urban areas [8].
In the same context, it is observed that the natives are underrepresented in higher education. 7.24% of
the total population of Ecuador are indigenous, of these indigenous undergraduate students in
universities are 3.14%; mestizos are 74.32% of the total population of Ecuador, while mestizo
undergraduate students constitute 90.44%; The montubios constitute 3.45% of the total population of
the Andean country, while the montubios undergraduate students in the country's universities represent
1.97% [8].
The motivational assessment survey consists of different scales of motivation, which include key
aspects, such as: self-efficacy, motivation for achievement, casual attributions to success / failure and
types of academic goals. These scales of motivational evaluation were developed based on validated
questionnaires in the university field, as well as metacognitive skills and time planning and organization
strategies.
The phenomenon of low representation of vulnerable groups in higher education institutions does not
only appear in Ecuador, but also in other Latin American countries, school vulnerability negatively affects
the process of entering university [9].
In this context, it is necessary to design and implement comprehensive and inclusive programs and
policies that address student drop-out of vulnerable groups (poor, minorities, disabled, etc.). In addition,
they investigate their characteristics and expectations as subjects within society and can measure these
programs using multidimensional indicators at a strategic and operational level [10], which will allow for
an optimal model that contributes to the democratization of education and generates Sustainable
development opportunities within vulnerable groups.

The entry process and the admission process to universities in Ecuador has been a matter of permanent
concern of the governments, quota policies were defined with the objective of materializing the principle
of equal opportunities, but analyzing the results obtained from the last years it is observed that no fully
satisfactory results have been achieved.

2 METHODOLOGY
This research was developed based on the application of the motivational evaluation questionnaire,
which consists of 188 questions distributed in 7 internationally validated instruments [11] ; and they were
also validated for the understanding of the students of Ecuador, which meant linguistic adaptation. The
total number of students to whom the questionnaire was applied was 1005 students, who were admitted
to the leveling course in the academic period 2019-A. The application of the motivational instrument is for
the purpose of obtaining information that reflects the motivational level regarding cognitive-affective and
behavioral psychological skills between the two groups of students. Table 1 shows the measurement objective
of each of the instruments and the range of questions that are intended to measure the object of the scale.
Table 1. Scales of the motivational assessment instrument by questions.

No. Nro.
Evaluation Measurement Objective
Instruments Of Ítems
1 10 Personal motivation
Achievement motivation, reformulated from the MAE
2 12
(2 theoretical factors, ambition and dedication / effort).
3 22 Goal Orientation.
 Trait of Metaconocimientos on Emotional States Scale
4 24
(TMMS-24).
Integrated System for the Evaluation of Causal
Attributions and Learning Processes - Evaluation of
5 24
Multidimensional Causal Attributions (SIACEPA-
EACM).
6 12 Personality Questionnaire.
Motivational learning strategies questionnaire (MSLQ).
7 44
Self-regulation of learning.

For the obtaining and relationship between the variables that represent the psychological and
motivational skills between the two groups of students, the starting point is the validation of the
motivational instrument, for which, based on a construct or set of questions, the three main aspects to
be evaluated such as: validity, reliability and usefulness [11].
The validation of the motivational evaluation instrument was carried out by the Exploratory Factor
Analysis method and the Main Components model (AFCP), this model is characterized by analyzing the
total variance of the set of observed variables, so that it is possible to group the questions in new
categories or constructs called “main components”, so the analysis of main components is a multivariate
technique whose main objective is to reduce the dimension of a data table to move from “p” real variables
to “k” dummy variables that although not observable, they are a combination of the real ones and
synthesize most of the information contained in the data [12]. Table 1 shows the defined scales of the
motivational evaluation instrument, which define the set of variables observed and to be validated.
After the validation of the questionnaires, new factors were identified for each of the scales, to
subsequently perform the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). The final objective of the investigation is to
determine variables that show significant differences between two groups of students, one that belongs
to vulnerable groups and others that do not belong, for which a statistical analysis, called analysis of
variances, which is based on the comparison of means between two population groups, in this case, the
means of the population segment are compared with respect to the factors obtained from the
motivational instrument.
The analysis of variances (ANOVA) is based on the comparison of means, in this case, the population
segment means are compared with respect to the motivational instrument factors. The F statistic of the
ANOVA of a factor is based on the fulfillment of 2 fundamental assumptions: normality and
homocedasticity, thus the F statistic has been obtained with its level of significance. If the intraclass
level of significance (sig.) Is less than or equal to 0.05, we reject the hypothesis of equality of means, if
it is greater - we accept equality of means, that is, there are no significant differences between the two
groups analyzed [13]. In this context, Table 2 shows the reliability statistics for each of the established
scales, where it is evident that Cronbach's alpha is acceptable for the analysis.
Table 2. Reliability statistics

Scales (Questionnaires) Cronbach's alpha Nro. Of items

1 0,720 5
2 0,773 11
3 0,744 18
4 0,905 22
5 0,773 20
6 0,425 11
7 0,810 31
 3 RESULTS
Among the variables that presented significant differences represented by the F statistic are those
shown in the following results.

3.1 Results of the Validation of the motivational instrument

The validation of the motivational assessment instrument was performed for each of the categories in
the SPSS statistical software.

The KMO and Bartlett test, for the whole instrument, gave that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure (KMO
measure) has a value of 0.949, which represents that it is possible to use the principal component
method as an analysis instrument for validation of the questionnaire. Similarly, in Table 3, the result of
the KMO test by scale is shown, showing that the values range between 0.858 and 0.944, with respect
to the scale indicated in Table 4, where it is concluded that the questions that make up the Different
scales of the motivational assessment instrument are valid and reliable.
Table 3. KMO test result by scale.

PREGUNTAS ESCALAS Medida

KMO
10 Personal Motivation 0,862
12 Achievement motivation 0,858
22 Goal orientatios 0,887
24 Trait of metaconocimientos on 0,925
emotional states scale (TMMS-
24
24 Integrated system for the 0,869
evaluation of causal attributions
and learning processes -
evaluation of multidimensional
causal attributions (SIACEPA-
EACM).
22 Personality Questionnnaire 0,878
44 Motivational learning strategies 0,944
questionnaire (MSLQ). Self-
regulation of learning.

3.2 Results of analyse and compare cognitive-affective and behavioural

psychological skills, obtained from ANOVA analysis.

Table 4. Questionnaire achievement motivation

Mean

Factor Variable 1 Variable 2 No Vulnerable Sig.

Vulnerable Group
Group
F3. Work saturation and Knowledge Score / 51 to 55
3.333 3.887 0.040
daily duties 55 points points
F2. Competitiveness in Members of the More than
4.030 3.417 0.001
academic performance family 6 people
 Of the students with respect to the grade with excellent knowledges over 55 points, for which they
obtained between 51 and 55 points, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means
of 0.04 with respect to the population segment. Thus, students who belong to the group of vulnerable
students have a greater perception in the saturation of work and daily duties, compared to students who
belong to the group of non-vulnerable students.

Of the students with respect to the number of family members, which are more than six people, it is
evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.001 with respect to the population
segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students have greater
competitiveness in academic performance, compared to students belonging to the group of vulnerable
students.

Table 5. Questionnaire goal orientation

Mean

Factor Variable 1 Variable 2 No Vulnerable Sig.

Vulnerable Group
Group
Level of Studies of
F4.1 Disinterest in learning Incomplete
the Head of 2.852 3.875 0.008
and little effort Elementary
Household
F3.1 Self-confidence and Members of the More than
3.970 3.347 0.003
good academic performance family 6 people

The students with respect to the level of studies of the head of household with an incomplete primary
school, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.008 with respect to the
population segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of vulnerable students perceive a greater
lack of learning and little effort, compared to students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students.
Of the students with respect to the number of family members, more than six people, it is evident that
there is a significant difference between the means of 0.003 with respect to the population segment.
Thus, students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students have greater self-confidence and good
performance, compared to students belonging to the group of vulnerable students.

Table 6. Trait of metaknowledge on emotional states scale (TMMS-24)

Mean

Factor Variable 1 Variable 2 No Vulnerable Sig.

Vulnerable Group
Group
Level of Studies of Incomplete
F3.2 Constant worry of
the Head of Higher 3.249 2.225 0.017
feelings about thoughts
Household Education
F1.2 Recognition of
3.571 3.330 0.042
emotional states Members of the 2 or 3
F2.2 Positive attitude family people
3.985 3.734 0.026
towards adversities
 Of the students with respect to the level of studies of the head of household who have incomplete higher
education, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.017 with respect to
the population segment. Thus, students who belong to the group of vulnerable students have a lower
constant concern for feelings about thoughts regarding students who belong to the group of non-
vulnerable students.
Of the students regarding the number of family members, which are between two or three people, it is
evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.042 with respect to the population
segment. Thus, students who belong to the group of non-vulnerable students have greater recognition
of emotional states, compared to students who belong to the group of vulnerable students.

Of the students regarding the number of family members, which are between two or three people, it is
evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.026 with respect to the population
segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students have a greater positive
attitude towards adversities, compared to students belonging to the group of vulnerable students.

Table 7. Integrated system for the evaluation of causal attributions and learning processes -
evaluation of multidimensional causal attributions (SIACEPA-EACM).
Mean

Factor Variable 1 Variable 2 No Vulnerable Sig.

Vulnerable Group
Group
F2.3 Lack of confidence in
2.317 2.427 0.038
intellectual capacity
Knowledge Score / 31 to 40
F3.3 Distrust and doubts 55 points points
about academic 2.655 3.900 0.035
performance.
Level of Studies of Incomplete
F4.3 Little effort and poor
the Head of Higher 3.939 2.839 0.036
performance
Household Education
F5.3 Unfair qualification by Number of
one 2.579 1.000 0.040
the teacher children

Of the students with respect to the average knowledge score on 55 points, for which they obtained
between 31 and 40 points, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.038
with respect to the population segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of vulnerable students
have a greater lack of confidence in intellectual capacity, compared to students belonging to the group
of non-vulnerable students, in addition it was also determined with an F value of 0.035 than students of
Vulnerable groups have greater distrust and doubts about academic performance compared to
colleagues from non-vulnerable groups.
Of the students regarding the level of studies of the head of household who have incomplete higher
education, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.036 with respect to
the population segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students make little
effort and lower performance compared to students belonging to the group of vulnerable students.

Of the students with respect to the number of children, who have only one child, it is evident that there
is a significant difference between the averages of 0.004 with respect to the population segment. Thus,
students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students perceive that there are certain unfair
qualifications on the part of the teacher, regarding students belonging to the group of vulnerable
students.
 Table 8. Personality questionnaire

Mean

Factor Variable 1 Variable 2 No Vulnerable Sig.

Vulnerable Group
Group
Grade Ser
F2.4 Discouragement and 901 to
Bachiller/1000 2.730 3.270 0.048
disorganization 1000 points
points
F1.4 Discipline and Incomplete
Level of Studies of 4.088 4.433 0.030
improvement Primary
the Head of
F2.4 Discouragement and Household Postgradua
2.714 4.518 0.025
disorganization te
F2.4 Discouragement and Number of
More of two 2.833 1.333 0.004
disorganization children
F2.4 Discouragement and Members of the 4 to 6
2.739 2.571 0.042
disorganization family people

Of the students with respect to the grade of knowledge Ser Bachiller / 1000 points, which they obtained
between 901 to 1000 points, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means of
0.048 with respect to the population segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of vulnerable
students have a greater perception of discouragement and disorganization, compared to students
belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students.
Of the students with respect to the level of studies of the head of household who have incomplete
primary, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.030 with respect to the
population segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of vulnerable students have greater
discipline and improvement compared to students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students.
Of the students with respect to the number of children, who have more than two children, it is evident
that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.004 with respect to the population segment.
Thus, students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students have greater discouragement and
disorganization, compared to students belonging to the group of vulnerable students.
Of the students regarding the number of family members, which are between four to six people, it is
evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.042 with respect to the population
segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of groups of non-vulnerable students have greater
discouragement and disorganization, compared to students belonging to the group of vulnerable
students.

Table 9. Motivational learning strategies questionnaire (MSLQ). Self-regulation of learning.

Mean

Factor Variable 1 Variable 2 No Vulnerable Sig.

Vulnerable Group
Group
F3.5 Distraction in class and
nervousness before Grade Ser 2.507 3.602 0.044
assessments 801 to 900
Bachiller/1000
points
F5.5 Consideration of being points
3.312 4.292 0.024
a good student
F3.5 Distraction in class and
Knowledge Score / 31 to 40
nervousness before 2.442 3.600 0.028
55 points points
assessments
F1.5 Integration of Incomplete
Level of Studies of 4.386 2.500 0.039
knowledge learned Elementary
the Head of
F5.5 Consideration of being Household No studies 3.250 3.734 0.022
a good student
F1.5 Integration of Members of the 2 or 3
4.294 4.119 0.025
knowledge learned family people

Of the students with respect to the knowledge mark Ser Bachelor / 1000 points, for which they obtained
between 801 to 900 points, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.044
with respect to the population segment. Thus, students who belong to the group of vulnerable students
have greater distraction in class and nervousness before the evaluations, with respect to students who
belong to the group of non-vulnerable students, in addition to an F value of 0.024, students from
vulnerable groups present greater consideration of being good students compared to students from non-
vulnerable groups.

Of the students with respect to the average knowledge mark on 55 points, for which they obtained
between 31 and 40 points, there is a significant difference between the averages of 0.028 with respect
to the population segment. Thus, students who belong to the group of vulnerable students are more
distracted in class and nervous about the assessments, compared to students who belong to the group
of non-vulnerable students.
Of the students with respect to the level of studies of the head of household who have incomplete
primary, it is evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.039 with respect to the
population segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students perceive a
greater integration of the knowledge learned regarding students belonging to the group of vulnerable
students.
Of the students regarding the number of family members, which are between two or three people, it is
evident that there is a significant difference between the means of 0.025 with respect to the population
segment. Thus, students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students perceive a greater
integration of the knowledge learned regarding students belonging to the group of vulnerable students.

4 CONCLUSIONS
In the validation results, using the SPSS program, Cronbach's alpha values were determined for each
questionnaire, whose values mostly presented values greater than 0.7, which means that the items are
interrelated and the reliability of internal consistency of the items is acceptable, with the exception of
questionnaire 6 that presented a value of 0.425, indicating a medium internal consistency, which
indicates that there is a low correlation between the items.
Once the analysis of variances of a factor (ANOVA) has been carried out, among the study groups it is
evidenced the need to intervene in the group of students in vulnerable conditions, designing a program
to strengthen the skills framed within three groups such as: Self-confidence, Self-control, Self-image.
The results of the students with the highest grades, both in the knowledge test and in the Ser Bachelor
test, show that students belonging to vulnerable groups perceive greater saturation of work and tasks,
therefore greater distrust and doubts about performance academic compared to students who belong
to non-vulnerable groups, so you should work on motivation and self-confidence so that they feel
confident in their own abilities.
In the cases regarding the number of family members, the results were the same in the ANOVA
analyzes, where students belonging to vulnerable groups perceive less competitiveness in academic
performance, less confidence, lower performance, a lower positive attitude towards adversities, resulting
in less integration of knowledge learned compared to students from non-vulnerable groups.
Students belonging to the vulnerable group have greater discipline, and less integration of knowledge
learned compared to students belonging to the group of non-vulnerable students, considering for both
groups the variable: level of education of the head of the family with incomplete primary.
Contrasting both study groups with respect to the level of studies of the head of the family who have
incomplete higher education, it is evident that students belonging to the group of vulnerable students
have a lower constant concern for feelings about thoughts, as well as present a better academic
performance and demonstrate greater effort, compared to students from non-vulnerable groups.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research results presented are part of the project “Design and Implementation of an Inclusive
Admission Model for the Higher Education System in Ecuador” funded by Secretaría de Educación
Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (SENESCYT) of Ecuador.

REFERENCES

[1] Quacquarelli Symonds Limited, "QS Latin American University Rankings 2020," 2020. Available:
https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/latin-american-university-rankings/.
[Accessed 8 1 2020].

[2] T. Sánchez, J. Vidal, L. Molina, J. Reina, R. Guayasamín and C. Pérez, "EVALUACIÓN

DIAGNÓSTICA DE CONOCIMIENTOS Y PROPUESTA DE UN CURSO DE INTERVENCIÓN A
LOS ESTUDIANTES QUE INGRESAN AL CURSO DE NIVELACIÓN DE LA ESCUELA
POLITÉCNICA NACIONAL," in Retos en la Formación de Ingenieros en la Era Digital, Caragena
de Indias, 2019.

[3] Secretaría Nacional de Planificación y Desarrollo, "Plan Nacional para el Buen Vivir 2017-2021,"
Secretaría Nacional de Planificación y Desarrollo, Senplades, Quito, 2017.

[4] F. Pesántez Avilés and V. Robles Bykbaev, "The Impact of Poverty in the Young Ecuadorian
Citizens Aged 5-14: A Data Analysis," Review of European Studies, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 53-61, 2017.

[5] G. Guevara Segarra, S. Ortiz Santacruz and E. Stefos, "An Analysis of the Socio-Demographic
Differences in Ecuadorian Economically Active Population between Genders," Modern Applied
Science, vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 7-18, 2017.

[6] G. Valdivieso, E. Stefos and L. Williams Goodrich,, "The Ecuadorian Amazon: A Data Analysis of
Social and Educational Characteristics of the Population," Review of European Studies, vol. 9, no.
1, pp. 137-147.

[7] J. Castellano, E. Stefos and L. Williams Goodrich, "The Educational and Social Profile of the
Indigenous People of Ecuador: A Multidimensional Analysis," Review of European Studies, vol. 9,
no. 1, pp. 137-147, 2017.

[8] W. Vásquez von Schoettler and E. Stefos, "El acceso de estudiantes indígenas de pregrado en la
educación superior en el Ecuador," in Jornadas Repensando la educación superior en Ecuador,
América Latina y el Caribe: a cien años de la Reforma Universitaria de Córdoba, Quito, 2018.

[9] P. González Adonis, V. Arancibia Clavel and D. Boyanova, "Talento académico, vulnerabilidad
escolar y resultados en la prueba de selección universitaria," Estudios Pedagógicos XLIII, no. 1,
pp. 171-191, 2017.
[10] E. Stefos, "La importancia de tener indicadores en la inclusión educativa," Inclusión, discapacidad
y educación, pp. 629-630, 2017.

[11] J. L. Castejón, C. González, R. Gilar and P. Miñano, Psicología de la Educación, Alicante: Editorial
Club Universitario, 2010.

[12] E. Villavicencio Caparó, V. Ruiz García and A. Cabrera Duffaut, "Validación de Cuestionarios,"
Revista Odontología Activa OACTIVA, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 71-76, 2016.

[13] J. F. LOPEZ, S. FERNANDEZ HENAO and C. LOZADA RIASCOS, "ANÁLISIS FACTORIAL CON
COMPONENTES PRINCIPALES PARA INTERPRETACION DE IMÁGENES SATELITALES
“LANDSAT TM 7” APLICADO EN UNA VENTANA DEL DEPARTAMENTO DE RISARALDA,"
Scientia et Technica, vol. 38, pp. 241-246, 2008.

[14] Grupo de Innovación Educativa Universidad de Valencia, "InnovaMIDE," 5 10 2013. Available:

https://www.uv.es/innomide/spss/SPSS/SPSS_0702b.pdf. [Accessed 06 01 2020].