Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Memorization strategies in basic school: grade-related differences in reported use and effectiveness

Memorization strategies in basic school: grade-related differences in reported use and effectiveness

  • Published:
European Journal of Psychology of Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study aims to examine students’ awareness and reported use of learning strategies as well as their effectiveness for word recognition using a word list memorization task. The sample included 1039 Grade 2, 1069 Grade 4, 832 Grade 6, and 3752 Grade 9 students (aged 8–15 years) from 272 Estonian schools. More students in higher grades reported using abstract grouping than students in lower grades. Students’ evaluations of rehearsal and perceptual grouping were loaded onto theoretically expected factors, and evaluative statements tended to have similar meaning across all grades. Grade 9 students tended to evaluate abstract grouping higher and rehearsal lower than students in lower grades. Reported use of abstract grouping was related to higher word-recognition scores in Grades 4 and up; this trend was not evident in Grade 2. The word-list memorization task is one possibility to assess memorization strategies in basic school, and it can provide useful information to plan activities supporting students’ development of effective usage of strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Afflerbach, P., Hurt, M., & Cho, B.-Y. (2020). Reading comprehension strategy instruction. In D. L. Dinsmore, L. K. Fryer, & M. M. Parkinson (Eds.), Handbook of Strategies and Strategic Processing (pp. 99–118). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429423635

  • Alexander, J., & Schwanenflugel, P. (1994). Strategy regulation: The role of intelligence, metacognitive attribu- tions, and knowledge base. Developmental Psychology, 30, 709–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belacchi, C., Benelli, B. & Pantaleone, S. (2011). The influence of categorical organization on verbal working memory. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 29, 942–960. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02030.x

  • Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjorklund, D. F., Coyle, T. R., & Gaultney, J. F. (1992). Developmental differences in the acquisition and maintenance of an organizational strategy: Evidence for the utilization deficiency hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 54, 434–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(92)90029-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjorklund, D. F., Dukes, C., & Douglas Brown, R. (2008). The development of memory strategies. In M. Courage, & N. Cowan (Eds.), The development of memory in infancy and childhood (pp. 145–175). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203934654

  • Blaye, A., Bernard-Peyron, V., Paour, J., & Bonthoux, F. (2006). Categorical flexibility in children: Distinguishing response flexibility from conceptual flexibility; the protracted development of taxonomic representations. The European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 3, 163–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620500412267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M., & Como, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology, 54(2), 199–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00205.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. C. & Craik, F., I., M. (2009). Encoding and retrieval of information. E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Memory (pp. 93–107). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clerc, J., & Miller, P. H. (2013). Utilization deficiencies and transfer of strategies in preschoolers. Cognitive Development, 28(1), 76–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2012.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coni, A., Ison, M., & Vivas, J. (2019). Conceptual flexibility in school children: Switching between taxonomic and thematic relations. Cognitive Development, 52, 100827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2019.100827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, H., Luciana, M., Hooper, C., & Yarger, R. (2007). Working memory performance in typically developing children and adolescents: Behavioral evidence of protracted frontal lobe development. Developmental Neuropsychology, 31(1), 103–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daugherty, A. M., & Ofen, N. (2015). That’s a good one! Belief in efficacy of mnemonic strategies contributes to age-related increase in associative memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 136, 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.02.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehn, M. (2010). Long-term memory problems in children and adolescents: Assessment, intervention, and effective instruction. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118269688

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dignath, C., Büttner, G., & Langfeldt, H.-P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively?: A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes. Educational Research Review, 3, 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinsmore, D. L., & Hattan, C. (2020). Levels of strategies and strategic processing. In D. L. Dinsmore, L. K. Fryer, & M. M. Parkinson (Eds.), Handbook of Strategies and Strategic Processing (pp. 29–46). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429423635-3

  • Dumas, D. (2020). Strategic processing within and across domains of learning. In D. L. Dinsmore, L. K. Fryer, & M. M. Parkinson (Eds.), Handbook of Strategies and Strategic Processing (pp. 11–28). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estonian Government (2020). Põhikooli Riiklik Õppekava. [National Curriculum for Basic Schools]. Riigi Teataja I. Available at: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/123042021010

  • Fritz, K., Howie, P., & Kleitman, S. (2010). “How do I remember when I got my dog?” The structure and development of children’s metamemory. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 207–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9058-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskill, P., & Murphy, K. (2004). Effects of a memory strategy on second-graders’ performance and self-efficacy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(03)00008-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glogger-Frey, I., Deutscher, M., & Renkl, A. (2018). Student teachers’ prior knowledge as prerequisite to learn how to assess pupils’ learning strategies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 76, 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.01.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. A. C., & Donoghue, G. M. (2016). Learning strategies: A synthesis and conceptual model. npj Science of Learning, 1, 16013. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L.-t., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

  • Kikas, E., Mädamürk, K., Hennok, L., Sigus, H., Talpsepp, T. & Kivi, V. (2022). Evaluating the efficacy of a teacher-guided comprehension-oriented learning strategy intervention among students in Grade 4. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37, 509–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-021-00538-0

  • Kikas, E., Mädamürk, K. & Palu, A. (2020). What role do comprehension-oriented learning strategies have in solving math calculation and word problems at the end of middle school? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 105–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12308

  • Kikas, E., Silinskas, G., Mädamürk, K., & Soodla, P. (2021). Effects of prior knowledge on comprehending text about learning strategies. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.766589

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2017). Mplus User’s Guide (8th edn). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén

  • Ofen, N., Qijing, Y., & Chen, Z. (2016). Memory and the developing brain: Are insights from cognitive neuroscience applicable to education? Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 10, 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.05.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ornstein, P., Coffman, J., Grammer, J., San Souci, P., & McCall, L. (2010). Linking the classroom context and the development of children’s memory skills. In J. Meece & J. Eccles (Eds.), Handbook of research on schools, schooling, and human development (pp. 42–59). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., Smith, A. F., Gracia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (2004). Methodological issues in questionnaire-based research on student learning in higher education. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 347–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (2011). Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelstuen, M. S., & Bråten, I. (2007). Examining the validity of self-reports on scales measuring students’ strategic processing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 351–378. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709906X106147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soderstrom, N., & Bjork, R. (2015). Learning versus performance: An integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 176–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615569000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theobald, M. (2021). Self-regulated learning training programs enhance university students’ academic performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation: A meta-analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 66, 101976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2017). Development of reading Comprehension. In K. Cain, D. Compton, & R. Parrila (Eds.), Theories of reading Development (pp. 283–306). New York: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.15.16van

  • Varasteh, H., Ghanizadeh, A., & Akbari, O. (2016). The role of task value, effort-regulation, and ambiguity tolerance in predicting EFL learners’ test anxiety, learning strategies, and language achievement. Psychological Studies, 61, 2–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. (2011). Learning to self-monitor and self-regulate. In R. Mayer & P. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 197–218). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, C. E., Acee, T. W., & Jung, J. (2011). Self-regulation and learning strategies. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2011, 45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, C. E., Krause, J. M., & Stano, N. (2015). Learning to learn. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 13, 8620–8623. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.92037-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, Q., McCall, D. M., Homayouni, R., Tang, L., Chen, Z., Schoff, D., Nishimura, M., Raz, S., & Ofen, N. (2018). Age-associated increase in mnemonic strategy use is linked to prefrontal cortex development. NeuroImage, 181(1), 162–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.07.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the European Social Fund (project 2014–2020.1.03.15–0001), by the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research, and by the grant from Tallinn University TF3818.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Natural Sciences and Health, Tallinn University, Narva mnt 25, 10120, Tallinn, Estonia

    Liis Hennok, Kaja Mädamürk & Eve Kikas

  2. Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Kaja Mädamürk

Authors
  1. Liis Hennok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kaja Mädamürk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eve Kikas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liis Hennok.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

All procedures performed involving student participants were in accordance with the APA ethical standards.

Consent to participate

Informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from all students’ parent or legal guardian.

Consent for publication

Informed consent to have anonymised data published in a journal was obtained from all students’ parent or legal guardian.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note  

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Liis Hennok

Current themes of research

Childrens’ effective learning in school. Individual characteristics and contextual factors (teaching practices) in the development of learning strategies.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education

Kikas, E., Mädamürk, K., Hennok, L., Sigus, H., Talpsep, T., Luptova, O., & Kivi, V. (2021). Evaluating the efficacy of a teacher-guided comprehension-oriented learning strategy intervention among students in Grade 4. European Journal of Psychology of Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-021-00538-0.

Kaja Mädamürk

Current themes of research

Development of math skills and motivation. The role of individual characteristics (cognitive skills, motivation) and contextual factors (teaching practices) in students’ learning.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education

Mädamürk, K., Tuominen, H., Hietajärvi, L., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2021). Adolescent students’ digital engagement and achievement goal orientation profiles. Computers & Education, 161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104058.

Mädamürk, K., & Kikas, E. (2019). Developmental trajectories of goal orientations and math skills from grades 7 to 9. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34, 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12308.

Mädamürk, K., Kikas, E., & Palu, A. (2018). Calculation and word problem-solving skill profiles: relationship to previous skills and interest. Educational Psychology, 38, 1239–1254. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2018.1495830.

Mädamürk, K., Kikas, E., & Palu, A. (2016). Developmental trajectories of calculation and word problem solving from third to fifth grade. Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 151−161 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.06.007.

Eve Kikas

Current themes of research

Children’s development and learning in kindergarten and school. The role of individual characteristics and contextual factors (e.g. teaching practices, parental support) in students’ learning. Assessing and supporting learning to learn skills.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education.

Kikas, E., Mädamürk, K., Hennok, L., Sigus, H., Talpsep, T., Luptova, O., & Kivi, V. (2022). Evaluating the efficacy of a teacher-guided comprehension-oriented learning strategy intervention among students in Grade 4. European Journal of Psychology of Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-021-00538-0.

Soodla, P., Tammik, V., & Kikas, E. (2021). Is part-time special education beneficial for children at risk for reading difficulties? An example from Estonia. Dyslexia, 27, 126-150. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1643.

Kikas, E., Mädamürk, K., & Palu, A. (2020). What role do comprehension-oriented learning strategies have in solving math calculation and word problems at the end of middle school? British Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12308.

Kikas, E. & Tang, X. (2019). Child-perceived teacher emotional support, its relations with teaching practices, and task persistence. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34, 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-018-0392-y.

Peets, K., & Kikas, E. (2017). Teachers’ promotion or inhibition of children’s aggression depends on peer-group characteristics. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 46, 848–857. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2015.1079778.

Kikas, E., & Jõgi, A.-L. (2016). Assessment of learning strategies: self-report questionnaire or learning task. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31, 759–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0276-3.

Jõgi, A.-L, Kikas, E. (2016). Calculation and word problem-solving skills in primary grades – Impact of cognitive abilities and longitudinal interrelations with task-persistent behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12096.

Kikas, E., Peets, K., and Hodges, E. (2014). Collective student characteristics alter the effects of teaching practices on academic outcomes. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 35, 273–283.

Kikas, E. (2004). Teachers’ conceptions and misconceptions concerning three natural phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 432–448.

Kikas, E., Silinskas, G., Mädamürk, K., and Soodla, P. (2021). Effects of prior knowledge on comprehending text about learning strategies. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.766589

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 25 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hennok, L., Mädamürk, K. & Kikas, E. Memorization strategies in basic school: grade-related differences in reported use and effectiveness. Eur J Psychol Educ 38, 945–961 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00630-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00630-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation