PISA 2022 Results (Volume V)

Annex A5. Additional thematic literature review

The concept of lifelong learning is recognised as a fundamental pillar of individual and collective development. It is evermore important in a 21^st century shaped by major environmental challenges, technological advancement and socio-economic transformation. Lifelong learning encompasses the continuous development of an individual’s cognitive, metacognitive, emotional and behavioural potential through self-directed learning skills, competencies, and creative learning traits (Manea, 2014[1]). Its importance is underscored by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4) and its call to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all” (United Nations, 2023[2]).

Lifelong learning is a dynamic and continuous process of acquiring skills and knowledge throughout one’s life (OECD, 2021[3]). The concept integrates learning into everyday life for all ages, levels of education, and learning modalities and domains, as well as for a variety of purposes (UNESCO, 2021[4]).

Lifelong learning encompasses a broad spectrum of learning experiences, ranging from formal education settings (such as formal schooling or apprenticeship programmes) to informal and non-formal educational environments (including intentional and non-intentional learning in homes, workplaces and beyond, commonly referred to as “experience”) (OECD, 2019[5]; UNESCO, 2006[6]). This is underpinned by the principle of agency – the capacity and willingness of individuals to actively engage in learning activities throughout their lives. Moreover, lifelong learning requires a shift in one’s mindset from passive recipient of knowledge to active participant in the learning process (Jones and Candy, 1993[7]).

Nurturing a culture of lifelong learning and tackling systemic barriers enable people to realise their potential to the fullest and to strengthen and improve one’s quality of life (Demirel, 2009[8]).

The willingness to learn and early skills development are the foundation for learning processes that take place later on in life. Early childhood is a critical period for the development of foundational skills (e.g. speaking, listening, memorisation, critical and creative thinking) and learning attitudes (e.g. curiosity and interest in learning, motivation and persistence), laying the groundwork for future educational attainment and lifelong learning engagement (Cotton, 1998[9]). PISA’s comparative assessment of students’ learning strategies, motivations and attitudes provides a strong basis of analysis of students’ preparedness for lifelong learning.

The promotion of lifelong learning is not just a matter of education policy but a fundamental imperative for a more just, equitable, and sustainable world. It is in sustainable, adaptable and inclusive societies that vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals are empowered to fully participate socially, economically, and politically, and in which there is more fluid social mobility and diminished intergenerational poverty (UNESCO, 2015[10]).

Sustained lifelong learning strategies

Sustained lifelong learning strategies are approaches and techniques that enable learners to regulate, enhance, and sustain their learning over time. More concretely, they encompass strategies and skills that enable learners to inquire, rebuild and reuse their knowledge, and be resilient and durable in challenging circumstances (Forbes et al., 2023[11]). This report focuses on long-term learning readiness and skills that extend beyond compulsory schooling. This includes students’ self-control and self-monitoring of their learning process, critical thinking, proactive behaviour, cognitive activation and creative problem-solving. An effective learner uses these strategies (consciously or not); is able and motivated to navigate through resources and information; and learns from past experiences to achieve specific goals.

Cognitive activation

Cognitive activation engages students in higher-order thinking tasks that require them to evaluate, integrate, and mobilise knowledge in different contexts (Lipowsky et al., 2009[12]). This strategy not only encourages students to discover creative and alternative ways of solving problems but also enables them to communicate their thinking processes and results to their peers and teachers (Le Donné, Fraser and Bousquet, 2016[13]). Cognitive activation is a sustainable learning strategy that fosters students’ engagement and self-initiated efforts in the learning process. This facilitates information processing and fosters a deeper understanding and long-term retention of knowledge (Opfer, 2016[14]). Moreover, cognitive activation practices are not merely about reflecting on challenging tasks. They can be as ordinary as memorisation; making connections between new information and previously existing knowledge; and interactive and collaborative learning (Praetorius and Charalambous, 2018[15]; Praetorius et al., 2018[16]).

Empirical studies have shown that integrating cognitive activation into teaching/learning practices helps students build a robust understanding of concepts, resulting in improved learning outcomes. Indeed, cognitive activation, especially when combined with effective classroom management enabling exploration and discussion, has been shown to enhance learning outcomes like performance in mathematics (Montague et al., 2014[17]; Opfer, 2016[14]).

Moreover, cognitive activation promotes the development of complementary skills such as collaboration, communication and autonomy (Ulaywi, 2021[18]). This is because cognitive activation strategies are usually led by the teacher, at first by showing students their exemplary applications, but the ultimate aim is for students to use the strategies independently.

Cognitive activation is a core learning strategy that cultivates deep, lasting learning that individuals can continuously build on throughout their lives. Cognitive activation strategies are transferable and therefore enable students to be effective learners in different areas and circumstances.

Controlling one’s own learning and self-monitoring

The ability to control one’s own learning is an essential aspect of self-regulated learning. It is not only key for academic achievement but also for learning throughout life, especially beyond traditional learning settings. Students who control their learning, actively and autonomously engage in the learning process by mobilising their cognitive, motivational and emotional abilities (Sahranavard, Miri and Salehiniya, 2018[19]; Zimmerman, 1990[20]). Research suggests that self-regulated learners set realistic goals and take necessary actions to achieve them, demonstrating control over their psychological processes and resilience towards their environment (Schunk, Zimmerman and Gettinger, 1995[21]). Individuals who can control their own learning are also able to acknowledge their limitations and seek help when needed.

Empirical studies all show the significant and positive influence of self-regulation skills on students’ academic performance (Khan, Shah and Sahibzada, 2020[22]; Magno, 2010[23]; Galizty and Sutarni, 2021[24]). Studies focusing on self-correction suggest that this practice improves not only students’ academic performance but increases motivation, self-efficacy, and awareness of their learning processes, strengths and weaknesses (Rana and Peerven, 2013[25]; Ramdass and Zimmerman, 2008[26]; Kearsley and Klein, 2016[27]).

Individuals capable of regulating their learning by themselves are more likely to be independent and resilient in their learning experiences and to continuously adapt, grow and thrive in various learning contexts throughout their lives.

Critical thinking

Literature defines critical thinking as a reflective thinking process (about an idea or a problem) in which individuals analyse and evaluate whether the available information, evidence and results are reasonable, logical or correct in order to draw conclusions and make informed decisions (Paul, 1992[28]; Lipman, 1988[29]; Halpern, 2013[30]; Ennis, 1989[31]). Individuals with critical thinking skills tend to be efficient learners (Moon, 2007[32]) as they question assumptions, consider multiple perspectives, and engage themselves with content, which enhances their understanding and retention of knowledge (Ben-Eliyahu, 2021[33]). Critical thinking is an essential skill that enables individuals to engage with the world in a more thoughtful way, especially in the digital age where a vast amount of data is available online.

Studies suggest that critical thinking skills can significantly improve learning outcomes (Ghanizadeh, 2017[34]; D’Alessio, Avolio and Charles, 2019[35]; Soodmand Afshar, Rahimi and Rahimi, 2014[36]; Orhan, 2022[37]), including in various disciplines like mathematics and science (Montague et al., 2014[17]) as well as in reading (Vaseghi, Reza; Gholami, Reza; Barjesteh, 2012[38]) and foreign languages (Shirkhani and Fahim, 2011[39]). Research also suggests that the positive relationship between critical thinking and academic performance is reciprocally mediated by other dispositions such as motivation, open-mindedness, and persistence (Facione, 2000[40]). Indeed, motivated students who are willing to deepen their understanding and learning are more likely to be critical thinkers and more likely to persist in challenging tasks.

However, there is some disagreement in the literature about the domain-generality or domain-specificity of critical thinking skills in learning. Some argue that the fundamental cognitive processes involved in critical thinking, although manifested in different ways, remain the same across disciplines (Lipman, 1988[29]; Ennis, 1989[41]), while others stress the importance of background knowledge in a specific domain when it comes to applying them (Facione, 2000[40]; Perkins and Salomon, 1989[42]).

Proactivity towards learning

Proactivity towards learning (or proactive study behaviour as defined in PISA 2022) is an essential characteristic that drives students to engage actively and enthusiastically in their educational pursuits. Proactivity is characterised by “a stable disposition to take initiative in a broad range of activities and situations” (Seibert, Kraimer and Crant, 2001[43]) A proactive learner seeks out learning opportunities and feedback in order to make use of them, connects new information to prior knowledge, displays a forward-looking attitude towards learning and perseveres until they see meaningful change in their situation (Bateman and Crant, 1993[44]). In contrast, learners who are less proactive are passive and tend to rely on others to act (Crant, 2000[45]).

Research has highlighted the benefits of proactive behaviours in learning for academic performance and the development of various motivational and behavioural skills. Empirical studies show that proactive students tend to achieve higher academic outcomes due to their higher academic engagement and intrinsic motivation (Cansino, Román and Expósito, 2018[46]; Chen, Bao and Gao, 2021[47]; Ogawa, 2011[48]). Research has even suggested that proactivity is a stronger predictor of motivation to learn compared to the so-called Big Five personality factors (i.e. neuroticism, extraversion, openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness) (Major, Turner and Fletcher, 2006[49]). Furthermore, proactive students are more likely to feel greater satisfaction from their learning activities, persist in the face of difficulties, and set ambitious goals (Parker, Bindl and Strauss, 2010[50]). In the workplace, proactivity is linked with positive outcomes, career success, stress resistance, and better adaptation for newcomers (Seibert, Crant and Kraimer, 1999[51]; Parker, Williams and Turner, 2006[52]; Cooper-Thomas and Burke, 2012[53]). Thus, proactive behaviours are essential for learning and social-emotional outcomes, especially when one has left formal educational settings or when there is a lack of support. They foster individuals’ mastery approach to learning and a sense of self-sufficiency regardless of the (learning) context (Major, Holland and Oborn, 2012[54]).

Problem-solving

Problem-solving is ubiquitous in everyday life, in and outside of educational settings, and is therefore a critical approach to lifelong learning. Problem-solving ability can be defined as a high-level thinking skill that enables the generation of new ideas in response to an obstacle (Oliveri, Lawless and Molloy, 2017[55]). However, the difficulty of a problem is not inherent as it varies according to the knowledge and experience of the solver. Thus, a problem might be a complex challenge for one individual but might not be for another. Steps in the problem-solving process have been outlined in the literature: 1) an appropriate mental representation of the problem (understanding of its nature, its scope, and its impact), 2) gathering information (which may involve activating prior knowledge, researching, or seeking support), 3) generating possible solutions, before 4) assessing each potential solution (involving analysis of its feasibility, risks, benefits), 5) decision-making (choosing the best option), and 6) implementing the solution (outlining the necessary steps, assigning responsibilities and goals) (Metallidou, 2009[56]; Alturki and Aldraiweesh, 2023[57]; Wang, 2021[58]).

A positive relationship between problem-solving skills and academic performance is consistently highlighted in the literature. Research suggests that students who develop strong problem-solving skills tend to perform better in mathematics, where problem-solving can account for about 70% of the variance in their performance (Sinaga, Sitorus and Situmeang, 2023[59]). Other studies have shown that problem-solving skills are associated to better performance in science, technology and engineering due to increased student engagement (Wang, 2021[58]; Alturki and Aldraiweesh, 2023[57]). Moreover, students who regularly engage in problem-solving are often more motivated, confident, and proactive in their learning (Gök and Sýlay, 2010[60]; Perveen, 2010[61]), which extends beyond immediate educational outcomes.

Problem-solving is considered a sustainable learning strategy because it equips students with skills that are applicable throughout their lives and across various contexts. It promotes their resilience and adaptability to tackle complex and unfamiliar problems as well as their stress resistance and life satisfaction (D’Zurilla, 1990[62]).

Motivation and self-beliefs in learning

Motivation and self-beliefs play a crucial role in shaping one’s learning experiences and outcomes throughout life. Interest in learning, personal and instrumental motivation, growth mindset, and mathematical self-concept and self-efficacy are critical constructs in lifelong learning. They are largely self-generated by the individual and shape their engagement and resilience in learning. As malleable constructs, these motivations and self-beliefs can be cultivated and reinforced through targeted educational interventions, allowing individuals to carry them across their lives.

In this report, motivation is seen as a driving force behind learning. Self-beliefs refer to the confidence learners have in themselves, how well they believe they can perform even difficult tasks (self-efficacy), and what they believe about their own abilities (self-concept).

Personal and instrumental motivation

Personal motivation (or intrinsic motivation) is defined as the willingness to engage in a learning activity that is driven by the interest, enjoyment, or satisfaction of that particular activity (Schiefele, 1999[63]). Instrumental motivation (or extrinsic motivation), on the other hand, corresponds to the intention to engage in a learning activity when the motivation does not come from the activity itself but from external factors (e.g. rewards, pressure, parental approval, or good grades).

This distinction between types of motivations is not static. Individuals can be simultaneously intrinsically and extrinsically motivated. For instance, students may express a strong interest and motivation to learn mathematics, while having some clear career objectives. Or students who were initially extrinsically motivated might develop an intrinsic motivation as they become more involved in a subject.

Although there is no consensus on the existence of a direct effect of personal or instrumental motivation on academic performance, empirical studies tend to convey that intrinsic motivation fosters deep and meaningful learning experiences and outcomes across educational stages (Lemos and Veríssimo, 2014[64]). Highly intrinsically motivated students often exhibit greater resilience and engagement with challenges than those extrinsically motivated (Schiefele, 2012[65]). However, both motivation types can lead to sustained learning, as these motivated learners are more likely to be actively engaged, curious, and persistent in their learning endeavours beyond formal education.

Interest in learning

Interest in learning is a type of intrinsic motivation that can be defined as an individual’s desire and curiosity to increase and master their knowledge, skills, and experiences. It is a multifaceted concept that acts as a powerful internal driver that stimulates students’ engagement, attention, and cognitive processes. Highly interested individuals can make learning feel effortless and enjoyable.

The literature distinguishes two types of interest that are integral to the learning process: situational interest and individual or personal interest. Situational interest arises spontaneously from environmental factors, such as engaging task instructions. Individual interest denotes a more stable, ongoing relationship with specific domains, defined by dispositional motivational characteristics (Schiefele, 1999[63]; Schiefele, 2012[65]).

Interest is seen as a dynamic construct. Repeated experiences of situational interest over time can develop into an emergent personal interest (Harackiewicz, Smith and Priniski, 2016[66]; Harackiewicz et al., 2008[67]). Several empirical studies have explored the relationship between interest and academic performance, and suggest that the more interested and engaged the students are in learning, the more likely they are to invest time and effort into it (Renninger and Hidi, 2022[68]; Ainley, 2006[69]; Ainley, Hidi and Berndorff, 2002[70]; Hidi and Renninger, 2006[71]). Moreover, while interest significantly enhances cognitive activity, motivation, and learning outcomes regardless of prior knowledge, studies have shown that it has long-term influence on one’s life outcomes (Harackiewicz et al., 2000[72]).

Growth mindset

Individuals with a growth mindset believe they can cultivate their abilities through work and effort. In contrast, a fixed mindset is the belief that one’s abilities are innate and unchangeable. Adopting a growth mindset can foster a love for learning and adaptive learning strategies, and build the resilience needed for sustainable achievement (Dweck, 2006[73]; Dweck, 2012[74]).

Empirical studies suggest that students with a growth mindset, unlike those with fixed mindsets, are more likely to consider failures as opportunities for instructive feedback and improvement. Moreover, research shows that students with a growth mindset tend to attain better learning outcomes and often outperform those with a fixed mindset (Yeager et al., 2019[75]). Likewise, students with a growth mindset tend to have smoother progressions through education systems and into further learning opportunities (Blackwell, Trzesniewski and Dweck, 2007[76]) as they are more willing to adapt to change and challenge. In addition, research suggests that in some contexts, growth mindset could mitigate the negative effects of students’ disadvantaged socio-economic situation on their academic performance (Claro, Paunesku and Dweck, 2016[77]).

As the same research suggests, growth mindsets are not innate; it is a disposition that can be nurtured and developed in and beyond educational settings. These studies have shown that teaching and promoting the concept of neuroplasticity (the idea that the brain grows with practice) with an emphasised praise for effort over prior ability is an effective way to promote growth mindset (Yeager and Walton, 2011[78]).

Mathematical self-concept and self-efficacy

Mathematical self-concept encompasses students’ perceptions of their own abilities in mathematics (OECD, 2013[79]).

Empirical research shows a strong correlation between mathematical self-concept and students’ performance in mathematics (Passiatore et al., 2023[80]; Huang, 2011[81]; Abu-Hilal, 2000[82]). Studies suggest that mathematics self-concept is more strongly correlated to performance than other student-based aspects (Lotz, Schneider and Sparfeldt, 2018[83]). However, a negative relationship has been found between mathematical anxiety and self-concept: the more anxious students are about mathematical tasks, the less secure they are about their competencies in mathematics (Kaskens et al., 2020[84]; Ahmed et al., 2012[85]).

Mathematical self-efficacy refers to students’ confidence in their ability to perform mathematical tasks successfully (OECD, 2013[79]). It includes students’ reflections on their past performance, self-assessment of their competence, and their engagement and expectations for their future performance of mathematics tasks. Mathematical self-efficacy determines their level of commitment, resilience and tolerance when faced with a difficult problem (Pajares, 1996[86]; Zakariya, 2022[87]).

Studies have shown that mathematical self-efficacy not only predicts academic performance but also mediates the effects of other constructs such as motivation, mathematics anxiety and metacognitive experiences on learning outcomes (Özcan and Eren Gümüş, 2019[88]; Zakariya, 2021[89]). Other studies have explored the positive relationship between mathematical self-efficacy and self-regulated learning, and confirmed the strength of the relationship even after accounting for personal traits (Zuffianò et al., 2013[90]).

Social and emotional skills

Open-mindedness in learning

Open-mindedness is a fundamental characteristic that drives both intellectual and psychological growth and fosters a love for learning. Open-minded individuals are not only curious but also prone to explore, question, and understand the multifaceted realities around them. This trait transcends mere tolerance as it refers to the ability and willingness to embrace diversity, consider a variety of approaches and beliefs, and think creatively to examine problems from multiple angles (Kwong, 2015[91]; Mitchell and Nicholas, 2005[92]; Baehr, 2011[93]).

Curiosity is considered as a catalyst for open-mindedness. Defined as the “motivation to acquire information regarding a particular topic”, curiosity fuels intellectual exploration, making learning rewarding by virtue of its novelty or process of seeking innovative solutions to uncertainty (Singh and Manjaly, 2022[94]). In that regard, curiosity can lead individuals to delve deeper into subjects and acquire new skills throughout their lives.

The relationship between open-mindedness and academic achievement has garnered significant attention. Although research literature has not consistently found a direct correlation between open-mindedness and academic performance, it appears that this trait may act as a mediator between positive attitudes towards learning (such as motivation) and performance. In other words, students who are motivated and have positive attitudes are more likely to be open-minded, which makes them perform better compared to those who are close-minded. Moreover, while female students tend to demonstrate higher levels of curiosity and positive attitudes towards learning compared to males (Jaen and Baccay, 2016[95]), a significant and positive relationship between open-mindedness and academic achievement was observed among female students (Majeed and Rashid, 2022[96]). In contrast, such correlation was not identified among their male counterparts. Even though these results call for more in-depth research, they suggest that being open-minded might be more beneficial to girls’ academic performance than boys’.

Task performance (persistence)

Persistence (synonymous with perseverance and grit) is a cornerstone for not only academic success but lifelong learning. This skill refers to one’s ability to adaptively engage with challenging learning tasks until overcoming them (Bandura, Freeman and Lightsey, 1999[97]). Students who are persistent in their learning view challenges as opportunities for growth and are able to maintain their interests and exert efforts over extended periods of time (Duckworth et al., 2007[98]).

Being perseverant does not mean spending an excessive amount of time attempting to solve a problem without making substantial progress, which is defined by the notion of “wheel-spinning” (Beck and Gong, 2013[99]; Yang and Ogata, 2023[100]). In some cases, this behaviour might reflect a lack of adaptability and strategic thinking as individuals may fail to identify alternative approaches or seek assistance when faced with challenges. In contrast, persistence demonstrates one’s analytical ability and resilience in the learning process.

Literature has shown that academic performance is intricately related to persistence. Students exhibiting higher levels of persistence tend to achieve higher academic scores (Rimfeld et al., 2016[101]; Hu, McCormick and Gonyea, 2011[102]). Persistence predicts better performance especially in mathematics (OECD, 2013[79]). Research has also shown that perseverance is a large part of students’ (growth) mindset: indeed, the amount of effort individuals put forth during challenging tasks or for a specific objective is intrinsically associated with the extent to which they believe effort is essential for continued improvement (Dweck, 2006[73]). Other empirical studies have explored the relationship between perseverance and various psychological factors such as students’ conscientiousness, self-regulation abilities, and engagement in academic activities (Muenks et al., 2017[103]).

Fostering students’ persistence may enhance habits of hard work and a continuous pursuit of goals in and beyond formal school settings. This ability equips learners with the tenacity to overcome adversity and develop meaningful skills and mindset throughout life.

Emotional regulation

Emotional control

Emotional control or regulation plays a critical role in shaping our life experiences, including learning. It can be defined as the processes through which individuals influence the emotions they have, when they have them, and how they experience and express them (Gross, 1998[104]) to increase, appease or sustain these emotions (Usán Supervía and Quílez Robres, 2021[105]). Controlling emotions involves self-regulating negative emotions such as temper, irritation, impulsiveness, anger or anxiety (Kautz et al., 2014[106]; OECD, 2015[107]).

Empirical studies have explored the impact of emotional regulation ability on students’ learning. In fact, several studies have found a positive although not direct relationship between emotional control skills and students’ academic performance. Evidence demonstrated that within this relationship, self-efficacy plays a critical mediating role: students who are able to control their emotions are more likely to achieve higher academic scores when they believe in their own ability to perform specific tasks (Usán Supervía and Quílez Robres, 2021[105]; Morrish et al., 2017[108]). Other studies highlighted that students endowed with high emotional control ability are predisposed to experiencing enhanced psychological well-being and self-beliefs, and better engagement in their academic pursuits (more persistence) despite challenging circumstances (Lei, 2022[109]).

Regarding lifelong learning, emotional management ability is a foundational skill that empowers individuals to adapt and navigate through changing circumstances, and maintain engagement and motivation throughout their lifespan. Indeed, the resulting emotional stability is considered an important driver of lifetime success, influencing not only educational attainment but earnings, employment, crime rate, and health outcomes (Kautz et al., 2014[106]). Fostering emotional control skills from an early age equips individuals with the tenacity and resilience needed to thrive in an ever-changing world.

Stress resistance

Stress resistance, understood as the ability to manage and adapt to stressful situations or challenges effectively, enables individuals to maintain emotional and psychological well-being (OECD, 2015[107]). It is a robust social and emotional skill that facilitates the modulation of anxiety within and beyond school settings. Stress-resistant individuals use various coping strategies, which are cognitive and behavioural efforts to manage both external and internal stressors.

Literature has distinguished two coping styles: approach coping and avoidance coping (Moos, 1993). Approach coping involves a variety of cognitive and behavioural efforts including logical analysis (attempts to understand and prepare mentally for a stressor and its impacts), positive reappraisal (attempts to restructure a problem in a positive way while still accepting the reality of the situation), seeking guidance and support, and problem-solving. These strategies encourage individuals to engage directly with stressors to control or eradicate them. In contrast, avoidance copers tend to focus on emotions, with efforts to avoid thinking about stressors and their consequences. Avoidance coping strategies can make individuals rely on acceptance or even resignation (attempts to reject the problem), alternative rewards (attempts to get involved in substitute activities and create new sources of satisfaction), and emotional discharge (attempts to reduce tension by expressing negative feelings). These strategies may provide temporary relief but often fail to address the root cause of stress (Gustems-Carnicer, Calderón and Calderón-Garrido, 2019[110]).

The influence of stress resistance on students’ mental health has been demonstrated by several empirical studies. The findings indicated a significant improvement in students’ motivation in learning and a reduction in negative self-beliefs (Keogh, Bond and Flaxman, 2006[111]). One study revealed that stress-coping skills can account for almost one-third of the variance in overall life satisfaction among high-performing high-school students. Although there are some studies indicating that students experiencing less stress and engaging more in problem-focused approach coping performed better academically (Gustems-Carnicer, Calderón and Calderón-Garrido, 2019[110]), the literature has not reached consensus on a direct relationship between stress management skills and performance. Most results highlight the mediation of mental health (especially through an improved self-efficacy) within this relationship, making the correlation significant (Suldo, Shaunessy and Hardesty, 2008[112]).

Since it enables the adults of tomorrow to manage and adapt to an increasingly complex and demanding world, and gives them the possibility to fully employ their cognitive and emotional skills in their learning experiences, stress resistance with the underlying resilience-building strategies seems to be a major driver in lifelong learning.

Collaboration

Co-operation

At its core, co-operation signifies one’s orientation towards harmonious interactions and appreciation for interconnectedness among individuals. The concept of co-operative learning is characterised by five key elements, which collectively contribute to creating an environment where students collaborate to understand and internalise academic material: positive interdependence, promotive interaction, individual and group accountability, group processing, and the development of small-group interpersonal skills. Additionally, some authors make a clear distinction between co-operative learning and collaborative learning. Unlike collaborative learning, where the instructor actively participates with students in the discovery and creation of knowledge, co-operative learning supports the traditional role of the teacher as a subject expert and classroom authority (Bruffee, 1995[113]; Yamarik, 2007[114]).

Co-operative learning is grounded in the belief that individuals can achieve more collectively than they can individually. However, the relationship between co-operation and performance seems complex. In fact, some evidence suggests that co-operation/collaboration may be negatively associated with students’ academic performance (OECD, 2021[115]).

Co-operative learning methods such as Think-Pair-Share, Jigsaw, and structured controversy, have been explored extensively for their potential benefits in enhancing critical-thinking skills, especially in reading (Devi, Musthafa and Gustine, 2016[116]). Encouraging student-student interactions, providing group purposes, and stimulating students’ idea generation have been identified as key mechanisms through which co-operative learning promotes critical thinking. Furthermore, co-operative learning was found to increase students’ motivation and persistence in the learning process (Springer, Stanne and Donovan, 1999[117]), thereby fostering opportunities for language use and interpersonal relationship development. According to the OECD (2021), co-operative students are more likely to expect completing tertiary education, suggesting a long-term commitment to learning.

In addition, literature has demonstrated that the impact of co-operative learning extends beyond academic achievement. Research has shown that it significantly reduces bullying, with empathy serving as a mediator for this effect. Co-operative learning was also strongly associated with increased empathy, which in turn was mediated by peer-relatedness (Van Ryzin and Roseth, 2019[118]). These findings highlight the potential of co-operative learning not only to improve students’ academic outcomes but foster a positive and empathetic school environment. It is also important to consider co-operation as a component of a broader educational approach that prepares students for lifelong learning.

Assertiveness

Defined as the ability to confidently voice opinions, needs, and feelings, assertiveness enables individuals to exert social influence effectively. Assertive individuals are not only confident in expressing themselves but possess the courage to take a stand and confront others when necessary without exerting coercion (OECD, 2021[115]; Kankaraš and Suarez-Alvarez, 2019[119]; Marugán de Miguelsanz, Carbonero Martín and Palazuelo Martínez, 2017[120]). An assertive individual maintains composure in face of opposition, which implies empathy and moral values, enabling them to understand different perspectives and adapt their responses accordingly.

Research has not reached a consensus on the relationship between assertiveness and academic performance. On one hand, empirical studies have revealed a negative correlation, albeit of low magnitude, between these variables in subjects like social and natural sciences, mathematics, and technology. This correlation was weaker in language subjects. Moreover, students tend to report greater assertiveness with age (Marugán de Miguelsanz, Carbonero Martín and Palazuelo Martínez, 2017[120]).

On the other hand, several studies have found that assertiveness and task performance are positively associated when students are surrounded by assertive pairs (Moneva and Bolos, 2020[121]). Some authors have explored this positive relationship by explaining it with anxiety. Students with lower assertiveness levels may experience higher levels of anxiety, leading to reduced academic performance (González Fragoso et al., 2018[122]).

Furthermore, statistically significant gender differences in both assertiveness and anxiety levels have been identified: men tend to display less assertiveness and are more prone to aggressive behaviours when facing adversity while women report higher levels of anxiety and obsessive preoccupations.

References

[82] Abu-Hilal, M. (2000), “A Structural Model for Predicting Mathematics Achievement: Its Relation with Anxiety and Self-Concept in Mathematics”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 86/3, pp. 835-847, https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2000.86.3.835.

[85] Ahmed, W. et al. (2012), “Reciprocal relationships between math self-concept and math anxiety”, Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 22/3, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.12.004.

[69] Ainley, M. (2006), “Connecting with Learning: Motivation, Affect and Cognition in Interest Processes”, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 18/4, pp. 391-405, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9033-0.

[70] Ainley, M., S. Hidi and D. Berndorff (2002), “Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 94/3, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.545.

[57] Alturki, U. and A. Aldraiweesh (2023), “The Factors Influencing 21st Century Skills and Problem-Solving Skills: The Acceptance of Blackboard as Sustainable Education”, Sustainability, Vol. 15/17, p. 12845, https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712845.

[93] Baehr, J. (2011), “The Structure of Open-Mindedness”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 41/2, pp. 191-213, https://doi.org/10.1353/cjp.2011.0010.

[97] Bandura, A., W. Freeman and R. Lightsey (1999), “Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control”, Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, Vol. 13/2, https://doi.org/10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158.

[44] Bateman, T. and J. Crant (1993), “The proactive component of organizational behavior: A measure and correlates”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 14/2, pp. 103-118, https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030140202.

[99] Beck, J. and Y. Gong (2013), “Wheel-Spinning: Students Who Fail to Master a Skill”, in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Artificial Intelligence in Education, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39112-5_44.

[33] Ben-Eliyahu, A. (2021), “Sustainable Learning in Education”, Sustainability, Vol. 13/8, p. 4250, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084250.

[76] Blackwell, L., K. Trzesniewski and C. Dweck (2007), “Implicit Theories of Intelligence Predict Achievement Across an Adolescent Transition: A Longitudinal Study and an Intervention”, Child Development, Vol. 78/1, pp. 246-263, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x.

[113] Bruffee, K. (1995), “Sharing Our Toys: Cooperative Learning Versus Collaborative Learning”, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, Vol. 27/1, https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1995.9937722.

[46] Cansino, J., R. Román and A. Expósito (2018), “Does student proactivity guarantee positive academic results?”, Education Sciences, Vol. 8/2, https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8020062.

[47] Chen, P., C. Bao and Q. Gao (2021), “Proactive Personality and Academic Engagement: The Mediating Effects of Teacher-Student Relationships and Academic Self-Efficacy”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 12, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.652994.

[77] Claro, S., D. Paunesku and C. Dweck (2016), “Growth mindset tempers the effects of poverty on academic achievement”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 113/31, pp. 8664-8668, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1608207113.

[53] Cooper-Thomas, H. and S. Burke (2012), “Newcomer Proactive Behavior: Can There Be Too Much of a Good Thing?”, in The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Socialization, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199763672.013.0004.

[45] Crant, J. (2000), “Proactive behavior in organizations”, Journal of Management, Vol. 26/3, https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600304.

[35] D’Alessio, F., B. Avolio and V. Charles (2019), “Studying the impact of critical thinking on the academic performance of executive MBA students”, Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 31, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.02.002.

[8] Demirel, M. (2009), “Lifelong learning and schools in the twenty-first century”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 1/1, pp. 1709-1716, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.303.

[116] Devi, A., B. Musthafa and G. Gustine (2016), “Using Cooperative Learning In Teaching Critical Thinking In Reading”, English Review: Journal of English Education, Vol. 4/1, p. 1, https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v4i1.310.

[98] Duckworth, A. et al. (2007), “Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals.”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 92/6, pp. 1087-1101, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087.

[73] Dweck (2006), “Mindset: the new psychology of success”, Choice Reviews Online, Vol. 44/04, https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.44-2397.

[74] Dweck, C. (2012), “Mindset: How you can fulfil your potential”, Robinson Publishing.

[62] D’Zurilla, T. (1990), Problem-solving training for effective stress management and prevention, https://doi.org/10.1891/0889-8391.4.4.327.

[31] Ennis, R. (1989), “Critical Thinking and Subject Specificity: Clarification and Needed Research”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 18/3, pp. 4-10, https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004.

[41] Ennis, R. (1989), “Critical Thinking and Subject Specificity: Clarification and Needed Research”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 18/3, https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018003004.

[40] Facione, P. (2000), “The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking: Its Character, Measurement, and Relationship to Critical Thinking Skill”, Informal Logic, Vol. 20/1, https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v20i1.2254.

[11] Forbes, D. et al. (2023), “Sustainable Strategies for Teaching and Learning Online”, Sustainability, Vol. 15/17, p. 13118, https://doi.org/10.3390/su151713118.

[24] Galizty, R. and N. Sutarni (2021), “The Effect of Student Resilience and Self-Regulated Learning On Academic Achievement”, Pedagonal : Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan, Vol. 5/2, https://doi.org/10.33751/pedagonal.v5i2.3682.

[34] Ghanizadeh, A. (2017), “The interplay between reflective thinking, critical thinking, self-monitoring, and academic achievement in higher education”, Higher Education, Vol. 74/1, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0031-y.

[60] Gök, T. and I. Sýlay (2010), “The Effects of Problem Solving Strategies on Students’ Achievement, Attitude and Motivation”, Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, Vol. 4.

[122] González Fragoso, C. et al. (2018), “Relación entre Asertividad, Rendimiento Académico y Ansiedad en una Muestra de Estudiantes Mexicanos de Secundaria”, Acta colombiana de Psicología, Vol. 21/1.

[104] Gross, J. (1998), “The Emerging Field of Emotion Regulation: An Integrative Review”, Review of General Psychology, Vol. 2/3, pp. 271-299, https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271.

[110] Gustems-Carnicer, J., C. Calderón and D. Calderón-Garrido (2019), “Stress, coping strategies and academic achievement in teacher education students”, European Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 42/3, pp. 375-390, https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2019.1576629.

[30] Halpern, D. (2013), Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking, Fifth Edition, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315885278.

[72] Harackiewicz, J. et al. (2000), “Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting interest and performance over time”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 92/2, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.316.

[67] Harackiewicz, J. et al. (2008), “The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations between achievement goals, interest, and performance.”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 100/1, pp. 105-122, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.105.

[66] Harackiewicz, J., J. Smith and S. Priniski (2016), “Interest Matters”, Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 3/2, pp. 220-227, https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732216655542.

[71] Hidi, S. and K. Renninger (2006), “The Four-Phase Model of Interest Development”, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 41/2, pp. 111-127, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4.

[81] Huang, C. (2011), “Self-concept and academic achievement: A meta-analysis of longitudinal relations”, Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 49/5, pp. 505-528, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.07.001.

[102] Hu, S., A. McCormick and R. Gonyea (2011), “Examining the Relationship between Student Learning and Persistence”, Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 37/5, pp. 387-395, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9209-5.

[95] Jaen, M. and E. Baccay (2016), “Curiosity, Motivation, Attitude, Gender, and Mathematics Performance”, The Normal Lights, Vol. 10/2, https://doi.org/10.56278/tnl.v10i2.255.

[7] Jones, J. and P. Candy (1993), “Self-Direction for Lifelong Learning”, Studies in Art Education, Vol. 34/3, https://doi.org/10.2307/1320627.

[119] Kankaraš, M. and J. Suarez-Alvarez (2019), “Assessment framework of the OECD Study on Social and Emotional Skills”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 207, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5007adef-en.

[84] Kaskens, J. et al. (2020), “Impact of Children’s math self-concept, math self-efficacy, math anxiety, and teacher competencies on math development”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 94, p. 103096, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103096.

[106] Kautz, T. et al. (2014), “Fostering and Measuring Skills: Improving Cognitive and Non-cognitive Skills to Promote Lifetime Success”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 110, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jxsr7vr78f7-en.

[27] Kearsley, P. and A. Klein (2016), “Self-Corrected Homework for Incentivizing Metacognition”, 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.18260/p.26155.

[111] Keogh, E., F. Bond and P. Flaxman (2006), “Improving academic performance and mental health through a stress management intervention: Outcomes and mediators of change”, Behaviour Research and Therapy, Vol. 44/3, pp. 339-357, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.03.002.

[22] Khan, Y., M. Shah and H. Sahibzada (2020), “Impact of self-regulated learning behavior on the academic achievement of university students”, FWU Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 14/2.

[91] Kwong, J. (2015), “Open-Mindedness as a Critical Virtue”, Topoi, Vol. 35/2, pp. 403-411, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-015-9317-4.

[9] Laboratory, N. (ed.) (1998), Lifelong Learning Skills for the Middle/Junior High School Student: Tips for Parents. Research You Can Use. Booklet 3., https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED421270.pdf.

[13] Le Donné, N., P. Fraser and G. Bousquet (2016), “Teaching Strategies for Instructional Quality: Insights from the TALIS-PISA Link Data”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 148, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jln1hlsr0lr-en.

[109] Lei, X. (2022), “The impact of emotion management ability on learning engagement of college students during COVID-19”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 13, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.967666.

[64] Lemos, M. and L. Veríssimo (2014), “The Relationships between Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, and Achievement, Along Elementary School”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 112, pp. 930-938, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1251.

[29] Lipman, M. (1988), Critical Thinking--What Can It Be?.

[12] Lipowsky, F. et al. (2009), “Quality of geometry instruction and its short-term impact on students’ understanding of the Pythagorean Theorem”, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 19/6, pp. 527-537, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.11.001.

[83] Lotz, C., R. Schneider and J. Sparfeldt (2018), “Differential relevance of intelligence and motivation for grades and competence tests in mathematics”, Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 65, pp. 30-40, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.03.005.

[23] Magno, C. (2010), “Assessing Academic Self-Regulated Learning among Filipino College Students: The Factor Structure and Item Fit Facilitating Academic Self-regualtion using a Learning Mnagement System View project Knowledge Channel View project”, The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, Vol. 5/August.

[96] Majeed, S. and W. Rashid (2022), “Open-Minded and its Relationship to Academic Achievement among the Students at the Department of History in Diyala University”, Res Militaris, Vol. 12/2.

[54] Major, D., J. Holland and K. Oborn (2012), “The Influence of Proactive Personality and Coping on Commitment to STEM Majors”, The Career Development Quarterly, Vol. 60/1, pp. 16-24, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2012.00002.x.

[49] Major, D., J. Turner and T. Fletcher (2006), “Linking proactive personality and the Big Five to motivation to learn and development activity.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91/4, pp. 927-935, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.927.

[1] Manea, A. (2014), “Lifelong Learning Programs–An Effective Means of Supporting Continuing Education”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 142, pp. 454-458, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.648.

[120] Marugán de Miguelsanz, M., M. Carbonero Martín and M. Palazuelo Martínez (2017), “Assertive Skills and Academic Performance in Primary and Secondary Education, Giftedness, and Conflictive Students”, Electronic Journal of Research in Education Psychology, Vol. 10/26, pp. 213-232, https://doi.org/10.25115/ejrep.v10i26.1492.

[56] Metallidou, P. (2009), “Pre-service and in-service teachers’ metacognitive knowledge about problem-solving strategies”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 25/1, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.07.002.

[92] Mitchell, R. and S. Nicholas (2005), “Knowledge creation in groups: The value of cognitive diversity, transactive memory, and openmindedness Norms”, Proceedings of the European Conference on Knowledge Management, ECKM.

[121] Moneva, J. and N. Bolos (2020), “Assertiveness and Performance Tasks”, International Journal of Social Science Research, Vol. 8/2, p. 143, https://doi.org/10.5296/ijssr.v8i2.16839.

[17] Montague, M. et al. (2014), “The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on math problem solving of middle-school students of varying ability.”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 106/2, pp. 469-481, https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035176.

[32] Moon, J. (2007), Critical Thinking, Routledge, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203944882.

[108] Morrish, L. et al. (2017), “Emotion Regulation in Adolescent Well-Being and Positive Education”, Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol. 19/5, pp. 1543-1564, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9881-y.

[103] Muenks, K. et al. (2017), “How true is grit? Assessing its relations to high school and college students’ personality characteristics, self-regulation, engagement, and achievement”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 109/5, https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000153.

[115] OECD (2021), Beyond Academic Learning: First Results from the Survey of Social and Emotional Skills, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/92a11084-en.

[3] OECD (2021), OECD Skills Outlook 2021: Learning for Life, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0ae365b4-en.

[5] OECD (2019), OECD Skills Outlook 2019: Thriving in a Digital World, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/df80bc12-en.

[107] OECD (2015), Skills for Social Progress: The Power of Social and Emotional Skills, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264226159-en.

[79] OECD (2013), PISA 2012 Results: Ready to Learn (Volume III): Students’ Engagement, Drive and Self-Beliefs, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264201170-en.

[48] Ogawa, A. (2011), “Facilitating Self-Regulated Learning: An Exploratory Case of Teaching a University Course on Japanese Society”, International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 23/2.

[55] Oliveri, M., R. Lawless and H. Molloy (2017), “A Literature Review on Collaborative Problem Solving for College and Workforce Readiness”, ETS Research Report Series, Vol. 2017/1, https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12133.

[14] Opfer, D. (2016), “Conditions and Practices Associated with Teacher Professional Development and Its Impact on Instruction in TALIS 2013”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 138, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jlss4r0lrg5-en.

[37] Orhan, A. (2022), “The Relationship between Critical Thinking and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis Study”, Psycho-Educational Research Reviews, Vol. 11/1, https://doi.org/10.52963/perr_biruni_v11.n1.18.

[88] Özcan, Z. and A. Eren Gümüş (2019), “A modeling study to explain mathematical problem-solving performance through metacognition, self-efficacy, motivation, and anxiety”, Australian Journal of Education, Vol. 63/1, pp. 116-134, https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944119840073.

[86] Pajares, F. (1996), “Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 66/4, pp. 543-578, https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066004543.

[50] Parker, S., U. Bindl and K. Strauss (2010), “Making Things Happen: A Model of Proactive Motivation”, Journal of Management, Vol. 36/4, pp. 827-856, https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310363732.

[52] Parker, S., H. Williams and N. Turner (2006), “Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91/3, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.636.

[80] Passiatore, Y. et al. (2023), “Mathematics self-concept moderates the relation between cognitive functions and mathematical skills in primary school children”, Social Psychology of Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-023-09854-3.

[28] Paul, R. (1992), “Critical thinking: What, why, and how”, New Directions for Community Colleges, Vol. 1992/77, https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.36819927703.

[42] Perkins, D. and G. Salomon (1989), “Are Cognitive Skills Context-Bound?”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 18/1, https://doi.org/10.2307/1176006.

[61] Perveen, K. (2010), “Effect Of The Problem-Solving Approach On Academic Achievement Of Students In Mathematics At The Secondary Level”, Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER), Vol. 3/3, https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v3i3.181.

[15] Praetorius, A. and C. Charalambous (2018), “Classroom observation frameworks for studying instructional quality: looking back and looking forward”, ZDM, Vol. 50/3, pp. 535-553, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0946-0.

[16] Praetorius, A. et al. (2018), “Generic dimensions of teaching quality: the German framework of Three Basic Dimensions”, ZDM – Mathematics Education, Vol. 50/3, pp. 407-426, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0918-4.

[26] Ramdass, D. and B. Zimmerman (2008), “Effects of Self-Correction Strategy Training on Middle School Students’ Self-Efficacy, Self-Evaluation, and Mathematics Division Learning”, Journal of Advanced Academics, Vol. 20/1, pp. 18-41, https://doi.org/10.4219/jaa-2008-869.

[25] Rana, A. and U. Peerven (2013), “Motivating students through self correction”, Educational Research International, Vol. 2/2.

[68] Renninger, K. and S. Hidi (2022), “Interest: A unique affective and cognitive motivational variable that develops”, in Advances in Motivation Science, Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adms.2021.12.004.

[101] Rimfeld, K. et al. (2016), “True grit and genetics: Predicting academic achievement from personality.”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 111/5, pp. 780-789, https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000089.

[19] Sahranavard, S., M. Miri and H. Salehiniya (2018), “The relationship between self-regulation and educational performance in students”, Journal of Education and Health Promotion, Vol. 7/1, p. 154, https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_93_18.

[65] Schiefele, U. (2012), “Interests and Learning”, in Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning, Springer US, Boston, MA, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_351.

[63] Schiefele, U. (1999), “Interest and Learning From Text”, Scientific Studies of Reading, Vol. 3/3, https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0303_4.

[21] Schunk, D., B. Zimmerman and M. Gettinger (1995), Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance: Issues and Educational Applications.

[51] Seibert, S., J. Crant and M. Kraimer (1999), “Proactive personality and career success.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 84/3, pp. 416-427, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.3.416.

[43] Seibert, S., M. Kraimer and J. Crant (2001), “What do proactive people do? A longitudinal model linking proactive personality and career success”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 54/4, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00234.x.

[39] Shirkhani, S. and M. Fahim (2011), “Enhancing Critical Thinking In Foreign Language Learners”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 29, pp. 111-115, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.214.

[59] Sinaga, B., J. Sitorus and T. Situmeang (2023), “The influence of students’ problem-solving understanding and results of students’ mathematics learning”, Frontiers in Education, Vol. 8, https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1088556.

[94] Singh, A. and J. Manjaly (2022), “Using Curiosity to Improve Learning Outcomes in Schools”, SAGE Open, Vol. 12/1, p. 215824402110693, https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211069392.

[36] Soodmand Afshar, H., A. Rahimi and M. Rahimi (2014), “Instrumental motivation, critical thinking, autonomy and academic achievement of iranian EFL learners”, Issues in Educational Research, Vol. 24/3.

[117] Springer, L., M. Stanne and S. Donovan (1999), “Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 69/1, pp. 21-51, https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543069001021.

[112] Suldo, S., E. Shaunessy and R. Hardesty (2008), “Relationships among stress, coping, and mental health in high‐achieving high school students”, Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 45/4, pp. 273-290, https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20300.

[18] Ulaywi, R. (2021), “Cognitive Activation Strategy as an Innovative Teaching Trend to EFL Students in Writing Skill”, Al-Adab Journal 137, pp. 29-42, https://doi.org/10.31973/aj.v2i137.1645.

[4] UNESCO (2021), Lifelong Learning.

[10] UNESCO (2015), Rethinking education: towards a global common good?, UNESCO, https://doi.org/10.54675/mdzl5552.

[6] UNESCO (2006), Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2006: Literacy for life, GEM Report UNESCO, https://doi.org/10.54676/hfrh4626.

[2] United Nations (2023), The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2023 Special Edition, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2023/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2023.pdf (accessed on 11 April 2024).

[105] Usán Supervía, P. and A. Quílez Robres (2021), “Emotional Regulation and Academic Performance in the Academic Context: The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy in Secondary Education Students”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 18/11, p. 5715, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115715.

[118] Van Ryzin, M. and C. Roseth (2019), “Effects of cooperative learning on peer relations, empathy, and bullying in middle school”, Aggressive Behavior, Vol. 45/6, pp. 643-651, https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21858.

[38] Vaseghi, Reza; Gholami, Reza; Barjesteh, H. (2012), “Critical Thinking An Influential Factor in Developing English Reading Comprehension Performance”, Advances in Asian …, Vol. 2/1.

[58] Wang, Y. (2021), “Effects of Online Problem-Solving Instruction and Identification Attitude Toward Instructional Strategies on Students’ Creativity”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 12, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.771128.

[114] Yamarik, S. (2007), “Does Cooperative Learning Improve Student Learning Outcomes?”, The Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 38/3, pp. 259-277, https://doi.org/10.3200/jece.38.3.259-277.

[100] Yang, A. and H. Ogata (2023), “Evaluation and modeling of students’ persistence and wheel-spinning propensities in formative assessments”, Smart Learning Environments, Vol. 10/1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00283-5.

[75] Yeager, D. et al. (2019), “A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement”, Nature, Vol. 573/7774, pp. 364-369, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1466-y.

[78] Yeager, D. and G. Walton (2011), “Social-Psychological Interventions in Education”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 81/2, pp. 267-301, https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311405999.

[87] Zakariya, Y. (2022), “Improving students’ mathematics self-efficacy: A systematic review of intervention studies”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 13, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.986622.

[89] Zakariya, Y. (2021), “Self-Efficacy Between Previous and Current Mathematics Performance of Undergraduate Students: An Instrumental Variable Approach to Exposing a Causal Relationship”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 11, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.556607.

[20] Zimmerman, B. (1990), “Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An Overview”, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 25/1, pp. 3-17, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2.

[90] Zuffianò, A. et al. (2013), “Academic achievement: The unique contribution of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning beyond intelligence, personality traits, and self-esteem”, Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 23, pp. 158-162, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.07.010.