the amount and type of new
encoding and deep analysis and synthesis, but were not found to differ in their
endorsement of traditional study and learning methods from the students with lower
GPAs. In fact, they found that students� endorsement of traditional study was neg- atively related to their academic assessment tests (ACT). More recent research on
effective learning (for reviews see Pintrich, 2000; Puustininen & Pulkkinen, 2001;
Zimmerman, 2000) has explored successful students� reports of the regulation of learning activities and the study environment within educational settings. For exam- ple, Zimmerman and Bandura (1994) showed that self-efficacy (as rated by college
students) and grade expectations predicted grades in a writing class. VanderStoep,
Pintrich, and Fagerlin (1996) found that college students with low, medium, and high
course grades differed in their reported learning characteristics for social and natural
science but not humanities courses. Specifically, VanderStoep et al. (1996) showed
that high achievers in social and natural science had more domain-specific knowl-
edge, more adaptive motivational beliefs, and better self-regulation. More recently
Zimmerman (1998, 2002) has developed a general framework for self-regulation in studying. He demonstrated close parallels between effective activities in studying in
academic settings and self-regulated practice in the development of expert perfor-
mance in many domains of expertise (Ericsson, 1996, 2002, 2003a, 2003b).
The current paper seeks to identify observable indicators of effective learning
activities in the complex domain of academic performance in a university setting
by extending the theoretical frameworks of deliberate practice and self-regulated
learning. We propose that distinctions between deliberate practice and other types
of practice can be applied to studying and that this distinction can, at least in part, explain why measures combining all types of study activities in the school system are
not valid predictors of grades. Furthermore, we propose a few observable indicators
that would reveal active efforts by some of the students to plan study activities in
environments that are conducive to deliberate practice and self-regulated study activ-
ities in college. Of particular interest are learning activities reflecting deliberate and
self-regulated practice that are related to increased performance (GPA). However,
in addition to factors that are hypothesized to promote the quality of study, there
are numerous other factors in the college environment that also influence GPA
100 E.A. Plant et al. / Contemporary Educational Psychology 30 (2005) 96–116
and performance across a wide range of academic subjects (e.g., prior knowledge of
subject, skills, and cognitive abilities). Therefore, our approach focuses on measuring
a wide range of factors important for academic performance, so that we can statis-
tically control for these factors and eventually estimate the relationship between
study time and academic performance.
1.2. Toward a model of factors that determine grades during a semester in college
Common measures of performance in college are the cumulated GPA or the GPA
for a given semester. These measures are averages of course grades, which are likely
determined by two types of factors. The first type can be measured prior to the start
of a targeted semester, such as the knowledge, abilities, and skills that had been ac-
quired prior to the start of the semester. The second group of factors consists of the concurrent study and the learning and non-learning activities that take place during
the semester. We consider each of these types of factors in turn.
1.2.1. Factors reflecting conditions prior to the start of a semester
Previously acquired knowledge, skills, and stable abilities relevant to a given
course will directly affect performance on tests and the final examination. These fac-
tors will also have an indirect impact by influencing the amount and type of new
learning that is necessary during the semester for a student to reach a given level of mastery. Based on a large body of research, the best measures of basic cognitive
skills and abilities and prior learning are SAT scores, high-school GPA, and prior
grades in college (e.g., Allen et al., 1972; Gortner Lahmers & Zulauf, 2000; Hinrich-
sen, 1972; Schuman et al., 1985). Allen et al. (1972), for example, found that high
school rank was a better predictor of GPA than study time or test anxiety. Standard-
ized assessments of aptitude such as SAT and ACT scores are also predictive of per-
formance in college (Gortner Lahmers & Zulauf, 2000; Hinrichsen, 1972; Schuman
et al., 1985). One might argue that the single best variable summarizing this informa- tion would be the cumulative GPA for college at the time of the start of the relevant
semester. However, this measure also reflects many stable characteristics concerning
quality and quantity of past study behaviors that are likely to be continued into the
current semester.