The learning strategies of mature students: a study of social science students in Belgium

Abstract

Purpose

Though different claims are made in the literature with regard to learning approach differences between mature and non-mature university students, the issue seems to bare detailed study. The purpose of this paper is to report about an investigation of mature and non-mature university students’ learning strategies. The authors examine the relationship between age and learning strategy, and assess to what extent this relationship is mediated by individual and contextual factors.

Design/methodology/approach

Using original survey data on 448 university students enroled in Social Sciences programmes in Belgium, this paper examines the relationship between age and learning strategy and assesses to what extent this relationship is mediated by individual and contextual factors.

Findings

The results of the multinomial logistic regression show significant differences in learning strategies between both groups of learners. The analyses suggest that mature students are 15.3 percentage points more likely than regular students to adopt a navigator learning strategy. The navigator strategy develops in a non-linear way between the ages 30 and 37. Moreover, only a small part of the learning strategies of mature learners can be explained by mediating factors, with the job involvement playing a particular role.

Research limitations/implications

This study contributes to the body of knowledge concerning the assessment and classification of learning strategies, including a focus on mediators affecting such strategies. The results are confined to only two higher education (HE) institutions. Furthermore, there may be a non-response bias; it is plausible that we miss among the respondents a particular type of mature students such as those that do not like to participate or those that have dropped out of their master’s programme. By means of larger, random samples in future research we should verify this study’s conclusions. This study did not include motivation as a variable. However, it might also explain why mature and non-mature students’ learning approaches differ. Further research could entangle motivational components in relation to learners’ studying approaches.

Practical implications

The research results contribute to our understanding to what extent mature and non-mature students’ learning strategies differ and which mediators are prevalent in explaining these differences. It helps to understand how universities can create a supportive academic environment for mature learners.

Social implications

The authors found significant differences with regard to learning strategies between mature and non-mature university students. Furthermore, having a professional occupation plays a mediating role in explaining learning strategy differences. The study raises the issue of learner-centred HE, with considerations about differentiated designs of learning environments, programmes and support services targeting students of different ages. By integrating the Assessing the Learning Strategies of Adults instrument, instructional designers can identify learning strategies and take appropriate action to accommodate learners. Additionally, awareness of one’s own learning strategy strengthens mature students’ decision making in self-directed learning environments. In that respect, the authors note also that higher pedagogical flexibility, i.e. more varied educational formats, tracks and study arrangements, ensures adult learners’ access, persistence and retention in HE.

Originality/value

Previous studies suggest that student learning approaches are distinguishable, but did not yet focus on differences between non-mature and mature students. As the authors include graduate students in this study, the focus is on a group which has not been studied previously.

Citation

Goeman, K. and Deschacht, N. (2019), "The learning strategies of mature students: a study of social science students in Belgium", Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 814-827. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-04-2018-0063