See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/238332455

Assessing Time Management Skills as an Important Aspect of Student

Learning: The Construction and Evaluation of a Time Management Scale with
Spanish High School Students

Article  in  School Psychology International · May 2004

DOI: 10.1177/0143034304043684

CITATIONS READS

27 3,619

3 authors, including:

Rafael García-Ros
University of Valencia
37 PUBLICATIONS   242 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Student engagement, selfregulated learning and learning centered instruction View project

Assessment higher education View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rafael García-Ros on 18 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Assessing Time Management Skills as an
Important Aspect of Student Learning
The Construction and Evaluation of a Time Management
Scale with Spanish High School Students

RAFAEL GARCÍA-ROS, FRANCISCO PÉREZ-GONZÁLEZ

and EUGENIA HINOJOSA
Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology
Universitat de València, Spain

ABSTRACT The main purpose of this study is to analyse the factorial

structure, psychometric properties and predictive capacity for
academic achievement of a scale designed to evaluate the time
management skills of Spanish high school students. An adaptation of
the Time Management Questionnaire was presented to two samples of
350 Spanish high school students. Exploratory and Confirmatory
Factor Analysis results from the two samples shows an adequate fit
of a three-factor oblique model, as well as its superior explanatory
capacity compared to other competitive models considered. This model
basically reproduces the structure of the original scale, integrating the
subscales on short-range planning, long-range planning, and time
attitudes. The psychometric properties of the three subscales also
reach satisfactory values. Finally, the predictive capacity of time
management skills on academic achievement is examined, especially
regarding the scale on Long-range planning. The results are discussed
with regard to the prior study on the topic and their instructional
repercussions.

Time management constitutes one of the most traditional topics in the

field of learning and study strategies, occupying a central position in
the courses and numerous handbooks on study skills. This question is
not far removed from the daily situation in classrooms, as one of the

Please address correspondence to: Rafael García-Ros, Avda Blasco Ibáñez, 21,
46010-València, Spain.

School Psychology International Copyright © 2004 SAGE Publications (London,

Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi), Vol. 25(2): 167–183.
DOI: 10.1177/0143034304043684

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 School Psychology International (2004), Vol. 25(2)

most frequent complaints made by students about their teachers is

that they don’t have enough time to carry out all the tasks assigned to
them in the different academic areas, both in high school as well as in
college. The students usually point out that there are many classes,
projects, reading assignments, exam preparations, etc. that require
constant dedication over a long period of time.
In a similar way, school psychologists also receive many requests for
intervention, from teachers as well as from students, to improve study
habits, particularly those related to time management and organiza-
tion. The teachers usually ask for advice on how to intervene in this
area and/or on the materials available for working on these skills. The
students, aside from verbalizing the same complaints that affect their
teachers, also usually demonstrate difficulties in organizing, planning
and completing the academic tasks, demanding an effective inter-
vention by the school psychologist in this regard. Consequently, both
from a research point of view as a well as a professional one, the con-
sideration of and intervention in academic time management skills
become an important aspect of the school psychologist’s role.
As Kovach (1997) points out, the educational research on time
management can be structured around three main nuclei: studies on
self-regulation of study time, research on suitability of time manage-
ment and, finally, intervention in time management skills. Among the
basic conclusions of these research nuclei, we can highlight:

(a) Given the existence of numerous studies that demonstrate that

self-regulated learning is related to academic success (i.e. Pintrich
and De Groot, 1990; Zimmerman and Martínez-Pons, 1986), it
seems logical to conclude that self-regulation in time manage-
ment, defined as planning and effective regulation of study time,
will be an important (pre) condition for success in school. Studies
with college students carried out by Britton and Tesser (1991),
Macan et al. (1990) and Morgan (1985), specifically deal with this
question, and they point out that time management skills are
directly related to academic performance.
(b) Time management cannot be considered a one-dimensional vari-
able and must be studied in diverse contexts in order to under-
stand its impact on academic achievement.
(c) The amount of time spent on studying is directly related to learn-
ing acquisition but, by itself, is not a variable that explains it
sufficiently. For this reason, together with the quantitative
dimension (amount of time), it is necessary to consider the
qualitative dimension of study time. For example, Deluchi et al.
(1987) concluded that the total number of study hours is not a key
explanatory variable of the academic results of high school or

168

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 García-Ros et al.: Assessing Time Management Skills

college students. Rather, the best predictor is the type of activities

the subjects carry out while studying. On the other hand, Kovach
(1997) shows that the quantitative and qualitative time measures
he uses in his study with college students are correlated positively
and significantly (r = 0.77). These results are especially important,
given that often the subjects themselves, their teachers and/or
their family members think – and frequently state – that the
quantitative dimension makes it possible to reach the desired
academic results (Davis, 1998). These results show that ‘what is
done’ is as or more important than ‘for how long’.
(d) Interventions in time-management skills have demonstrated a
certain degree of effectiveness, both in academic contexts as well
as non-academic, which is demonstrated by increased awareness
of one’s own study habits, better self-regulation of time, stress
reduction and an increase in levels of self-efficacy (King et al.,
1986).

The recognition of time management as an effective tool in the aca-

demic realm has led to the development of theoretical models of this
psychological construct. Among these models, the proposals made by
Britton and Glynn (1989) and by Macan et al. (1990) stand out. The
former describe a model that includes three interrelated levels:
(a) selection of objectives/sub objectives and setting priorities for them
(macro level); (b) generating and prioritizing tasks and subtasks based
on the objectives (intermediate level) and finally (c) elaborating a list of
tasks, planning and carrying them out (micro level). Alternatively,
Macan (1994) proposed a procedural model of time management, in
which he highlighted the importance of setting goals and priorities, the
mechanisms for carrying out tasks (e.g. timetables and making lists)
and organization preferences. In congruence with their theoretical pro-
posals, the scales developed from both models incorporate behavioural
and attitudinal dimensions of time management. An additional con-
tribution made by the second model is the notion of perceived time
control, which is considered to be a latent super ordinate variable that
mediates between the behavioural and attitudinal dimensions incorpo-
rated in it.
With the objective of validating their theoretical proposals, these
authors have developed instruments to evaluate academic time
management (see Table 1). Britton and Tesser (1991) developed the
‘Time Management Questionnaire’ (TMQ), directed toward college stu-
dents, which integrates three subscales: short-range planning, time
attitudes and long-range planning. Diverse adaptations and trans-
cultural studies have focused their interest on confirming the factorial
structure of the TMQ and verifying its predictive capacity for academic

169

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 School Psychology International (2004), Vol. 25(2)

Table 1 Time Management Evaluation Scales

Educational
Scale Authors level Analysis Structure Factors

Time Britton College Factor Three I. Short-

Management and analysis: factors range
Questionnaire Tesser principal 36 II. Time
(TMQ) (1991) components percent attitudes
varimax common III. Long-
rotation variance range
planning

Time Macan College Factor Four I. Setting

Management et al. analysis: factors goals and
Behaviour (1990) principal 72.0 priorities
Scale components percent II. Mechanics,
(TMBS) orthoblique common planning,
rotation variance scheduling
III. Perceived
control of
time
IV. Preference
for dis-
organization

achievement. In a study with British college students, Trueman and

Hartley (1995) did not reproduce the initial three-factor structure.
They propose an alternative structure with two factors they call ‘daily
planning’ and ‘confidence in long range planning’. On their part, Mpofu
et al. (1996), in this case with African college students, were able to
reproduce the structure obtained by Britton and Tesser. The results
regarding its predictive capacity for academic achievement are differ-
ent between studies, a question that should be dealt with in the future.
On the other hand, Macan et al. (1990) also developed a scale
directed toward college students, the ‘Time Management Behaviour
Scale’ (TMBS) that evaluates four complementary dimensions of time
management: (a) establishing objectives and priorities; (b) making
up timetables and lists of activities; (c) perceived time control and
(d) organization preference. Different studies have focused their inter-
est on confirming the factorial structure of the TMBS, although in this
case with employed adults (Adams and Jex, 1997; Mudrack, 1997). The
results make it possible to partially reproduce its factorial structure,
and they point out the usefulness of considering different subscales
rather than a general score on time management skills.
Other highly recognized inventories for evaluating learning and
study strategies also incorporate subscales designed to evaluate time

170

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 García-Ros et al.: Assessing Time Management Skills

management. These are usually made up of a limited number of items

and consider this variable to be unidimensional, depending on the
objectives of the evaluation they are carrying out, e.g. Time-management
subscale on the ‘Learning and Study Strategies Inventory’ (Weinstein,
1987; Weinstein et al., 1988) or Time and study environment manage-
ment on the ‘Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire’
(García and Pintrich, 1995; Pintrich et al., 1991).

The present study

Focusing on the Spanish educational context, those school psycholo-
gists who carry out their activity in high schools find considerable
difficulties in responding to the demands of teachers and students with
regard to difficulties in studying. Among other things, this is due to the
lack of reliable and valid instruments in Spanish that make it possible
to evaluate the dimensions involved in these processes. Therefore, the
main objective of this study is to respond to the problem of developing
and validating a scale to evaluate time management suitable for use
with students at this level of our educational system (16 to 18 years of
age). Given the conceptual clarity, ease of application and foreseeable
usefulness of the TMQ at this educational level, we decided to use a
translation and adaptation of it for Spanish high schools as a jumping
off point in our study.

Methods

Participants
In the different stages of the investigation, a total of 350 Spanish high
school students participated. The participants were selected randomly
from students from eight different public schools in the Valencian
Community, all of whom had studied post-obligatory secondary courses
during the 2000–2001 school year. The age range included in the stage
of the Spanish educational system is from 16 to 18 years, although the
age of this group of students ranges from 16 to 20 years due to the fact
that some students had repeated a year or two. The mean age of the
group is 16.9 years, with a typical deviation of 0.86. Forty-nine
percent of the subjects were male and 51 percent were female, and they
present a middle to low-middle socioeconomic level.

Instruments and procedure

This study was developed in three main stages consisting of: (a) trans-
lation and adaptation of the original version of the TMQ; (b) determi-
nation of the underlying factorial structure and (c) factorial validity
and predictive capacity for school performance.

171

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 School Psychology International (2004), Vol. 25(2)

(a) Translation and adaptation of TMQ. The 18 items from the

original version of the ‘Time Management Questionnaire’ were trans-
lated into Spanish by two translators, who compared their versions
until agreeing on the most correct translation. This translation was
presented for analysis and evaluation to a group of five high school
teachers and two school psychologists, frequent collaborators of our
research group. After careful consideration, they unanimously pointed
out the need to make minor changes in four items with the purpose of
aiding students’ comprehension. Specifically, the item ‘On an average
class day do you spend more time on personal grooming than doing
school work’ was changed to ‘During an average week, do you spend
more time taking care of yourself (physical exercise, personal grooming
. . .) than studying?’, ‘Do you set and honor priorities?’ was changed to
‘Do you plan your time from the beginning of the day until the end?’, ‘Do
you make constructive use of your time’ was changed to ‘Do you use
your time well?’, and ‘Do you have a set of goals for the entire quarter?’
was changed to ‘Do you have a set of goals for the entire term?’. The
final version of the scale, to be applied in later stages of the research, is
included in Appendix 1. After the translation of the items into Spanish,
a back translation was carried out by a bilingual, native English speak-
ing translator. The two English versions were compared, and the
Spanish version was adjusted wherever there were discrepencies. Both
the final Spanish and English versions appear in Appendix 1.

(b) Determining the factorial structure underlying the TMQ in high

school students. This initial version of the scale is the one we placed
under evaluation, by presenting it to a group of 137 high-school stu-
dents who filled it out individually in a group setting during school
hours. The subjects had to respond to the items on the questionnaire
using a five point response scale: never (1); rarely (2); sometimes
(3); often (4) and always (5). The highest scores on the scale – except
on items 2, 3, 9 and 15 – corresponded to better time management
practices.

(c) Factorial validity and predictive capacity of the time management

factors for school performance. Again in a collective setting, we applied
the scale to a group of 213 students of the same educational level.
Furthermore, from the Records Office we also obtained the academic
results of the second group of subjects, evaluating them on the basis of
their grades in distinct academic areas for the first semester’s work. A
conventional scale in the Spanish educational system, ranging from
Failing (1) to Outstanding (5) was used in order to obtain their Average
Academic Achievement (referred to from here on as AAA). The mean
and standard deviation of the AAA were 3.03 and 1.0, respectively.

172

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 García-Ros et al.: Assessing Time Management Skills

Analysis
First, an Exploratory Principal Components Factor Analysis (EFA)
with varimax rotation was used to initially investigate the dimension-
ality of the responses offered on the questionnaire by the group of 137
students.
Second, the multidimensional solution obtained on the EFA under-
went factorial validation by means of a Confirmatory Maximum-
Likelihood Factor Analysis (CFA) based on the responses offered by the
second group of students. Maximum-likelihood is the CFA standard
method of estimation, and it is based in the assumption that variables
are multivariate normal distributed. However, there is growing evi-
dence that it performs well under a variety of non optimal conditions,
such as an excessive kurtosis (Hoyle and Panter, 1995). By using the
CFA, and based on the covariance matrix of the observed data, we
intended to examine two complimentary questions: (a) evaluate the
global goodness of fit of the factorial model emerging from the EFA by
using the most traditional indices in structural equation modeling
(SRMR, RMSEA, NNFI-TLI, CFI and GFI) and (b) compare the multi-
dimensional model emerging from the EFA with a competitive uni-
factorial model by means of the chi-square difference test, with the
objective of testing whether the multidimensional consideration of the
time management variable explains the data significantly better than
the consideration of a general global time management factor.
Third, with this second sample we evaluated descriptive statistics,
the internal-consistency reliability (alpha coefficient) and the inter-
correlations among the subscales. Lastly, in order to analyse the
predictive capacity of time management skills for academic results, we
also carried out a multiple regression analysis, with the predictor
variables being the scores on the time management factors and the
criterion variable being the AAAs of the students.

Results

Exploratory factor analysis

An exploratory principal components factor analysis (EFA) with
orthogonal varimax rotation was used to investigate the dimension-
ality of the data obtained from the initial group of 137 students. A com-
bination of Kaiser´s criterion and scree test suggested extracting three
factors, which accounted for 44 percent of the common item covariance.
As can be seen in Table 2, using the factorial saturation of 0.40 as a cut-
off criterion, we obtain a factorial solution that basically reproduces
that obtained by Britton and Tesser. Therefore, we decided to maintain
the factor designation of the original scale: short-range planning (items

173

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 School Psychology International (2004), Vol. 25(2)

Table 2 Factor structure and loadings of the Adaptation of the

Time-Management Questionnaire
Short-range Long-range
planning Time attitudes planning
Items (Factor I) (Factor II) Factor (III)

1 –0.17 0.00 0.23

2* 0.00 –0.15 –0.51
3* –0.00 –0.25 –0.55
4 0.20 0.75 0.20
5 0.11 0.47 0.23
6 0.46 0.38 0.31
7 0.15 0.00 0.64
8 0.27 0.75 0.16
9 0.00 –0.52 0.41
10 0.73 0.32 0.00
11 0.71 0.34 –0.16
12 0.84 0.00 0.00
13 0.67 0.00 0.19
14 0.24 0.34 0.50
15 * 0.17 –0.51 –0.17
16 0.61 0.00 0.26
17 0.27 0.19 0.37
18 0.55 0.00 0.12
Eigenvalue 4.61 2.01 1.50
% variance 26.0 10.5 8.2

Note. *These items will be computed as inverse in later analyses

6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16 and 18), time attitudes (items 4, 5, 8 and 15), and
Long-range planning (items 2, 3, 7 and 14). Based on results obtained
on the EFA, items 1, 9 and 17 were eliminated for future analyses.

Confirmatory factor analysis

Confirmatory factor analysis using the maximum likelihood estimation
method was carried out with the EQS 5.1 computer program (Bentler
and Wu, 1995), in order to test the factorial validity of the model
derived from the EFA. The null model (Model 0) – which indicates the
absence of factor structure – a unifactorial alternative factor model
(Model 1), and the three factor model derived from the EFA (Model 2),
were evaluated in this study. As we indicated above, the evaluation of
the models was based on different criteria (GFI, NNFI-TLI, CFI, SRMR
and RMSEA fit indexes). The comparison between the models was
based on the chi-square difference test. The results are summarized in
Table 3.

174

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 García-Ros et al.: Assessing Time Management Skills

Table 3 Goodness-of-Fit indexes considered in CFA: Chi-square ratio

(χ2), the Standardized Root Mean-Square Residual (SRMR), the Root
Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), the Non-Normed Fit
Index (NNFI-TLI), the Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI), the Comparative
Fit Index (CFI) and the chi-square difference test (∆χ2/df)
Model χ2 d.f. χ2/df SRMR RMSEA NNFI GFI CFI ∆χ2/df p

0. Null 963.2 90 10.70

1. One factor 392.1 90 4.36 0.08 0.12 0.59 0.77 0.65 – –
2. Oblique
three-
factor
based EFA 224.7 87 2.57 0.06 0.08 0.81 0.86 0.86 55.8 0.001

More specifically, Table 3 shows: (a) the unifactorial model (Model 1)

presents the worst results of all the goodness of fit indexes considered
and, (b) the three factor model based on the EFA (Model 2) obtained the
best results – SRMR = 0.06, RMSEA = 0.08, NNFI-TLI = 0.81, CFI =
0.86 and GFI = 0.86; (d) Lastly, the chi-square difference test indicated
the superiority of the three factor oblique model over the unifactorial
model ∆χ2 (3) = 55.8, p < 0.001.

Descriptive statistics and intercorrelation of scores on three factor

subscales
Table 4 shows the means and standard deviations of the items as well
as the standardized solution based on the model based on EFA. We can
see that all the estimations reach highly significant values. Factorial
saturations greater than 0.37 are reached in every case, so that the
previsions considered in the model are confirmed regarding the identi-
fication of the items and the correlations between factors.
The means, standard deviations, and alpha coefficients, as well as
the intercorrelations among the subscales, of the time-management
questionnaire are presented in Table 5. We can confirm that the
average scores of the three subscales (in parentheses) lie very close to
the theoretical mean (3). On the other hand, the Cronbach’s coefficient
alpha of the short-range planning (alpha equal to 0.81) indicates that
this subscale had a good internal consistency. The results were not as
high for the long-range planning (0.60) and time attitudes (0.64)
subscales. The correlation between time attitudes and the two other
subscales were 0.44 and 0.40; the correlation between the two planning
subscales was 0.33.

175

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 School Psychology International (2004), Vol. 25(2)

Table 4 Item descriptives and standardized solution of the Three

Factors Model
Subscale Item Mean SD Saturation

(1) Short-range planning 6 3.00 1.0 0.60

10 2.73 1.3 0.81
11 2.59 1.2 0.80
12 2.54 1.1 0.73
13 2.33 1.2 0.53
16 2.54 1.1 0.44
18 3.32 1.2 0.47

(2) Time attitudes 4 2.85 1.1 0.77

5 3.27 1.2 0.37
8 3.20 1.0 0.81
15 2.46 1.0 0.37

(3) Long-range planning 2 3.29 1.2 0.40

3 2.42 1.1 0.55
7 3.78 1.0 0.38
14 2.66 1.0 0.63

Table 5 Descriptive statistics, coefficient alphas and

intercorrelations among the subscale scores for the time-management
scale
Factors Mean SD α r
1 2 3

(1) Short-range planning 19.08 (2.73) 5.65 0.81 –

(2) Time attitudes 11.82 (2.96) 2.36 0.64 0.44** –
(3) Long-range planning 12.06 (3.02) 3.10 0.60 0.33** 0.40** –

** p < 0.01

Time-management and academic achievement

In order to test the predictive capacity of the time management prac-
tices for academic achievement, we carried out a multiple regression
analysis considering the scores on the three subscales for time manage-
ment as predictors and the AAA of the learners as the criterion. Time
management skills are shown to be reasonably good predictors of the
AAA, obtaining a multiple correlation of 0.25 with the criterion. How-
ever, only the Long-range planning subscale (β = 0.23, p < 0.002) was
introduced into the regression equation, showing itself to be a signifi-

176

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 García-Ros et al.: Assessing Time Management Skills

cant predictor of AAA, and not those corresponding to time attitudes

and short-range planning.

Discussion and conclusion

In the first place, the results of the Exploratory Factorial Analysis,
which was carried out based on the responses offered by the group of
137 Spanish high school students, suggest that time management is a
multidimensional psychological construct. More specifically, the three-
factor factorial solution obtained basically reproduces that obtained by
Britton and Tesser with North American college students. Following
the nomenclature used by these authors, we name the three factors in
this way:
(a) Short-range planning, which incorporates seven items designed to
evaluate short-range time planning, whether throughout the day
or weekly. Therefore, the students who scored high on this sub-
scale are characterized by organizing their daily schedule using
distinct specific time management techniques. This subscale exactly
reproduces that presented in the TMQ by Britton and Tesser.
(b) Time attitudes, made up of four items that evaluate the degree to
which subjects perceive that they use their time in a constructive
way and feel responsible for the way they use it. This is very
similar to the attitude scale proposed in the TMQ and directed
toward college students, except for item 2 (‘During a normal week,
do you spend more time taking care of yourself – physical exercise,
grooming, than studying?’) which our analysis places in the
following subscale, and item 9 (‘Do you think you could improve
the way you spend your time?’), which we did not put in any
subscale, as it saturated above 0.40 on two subscales.
(c) Long-range planning, made up of four items that evaluate the
student’s ability to set and meet personal study goals when dead-
lines or tests are not imminent, i.e. establish goals for a quarter,
mark dates on a calendar, review the material periodically and/or
finish work with enough margin before the deadline. This subscale
is also very similar to the one emphasized in the initial research
with the TMQ, with item 2 being added, and without including
items 1 (‘When you have various things to do, do you think it is
better to do a little bit of each?’) and 17 (‘Do you have a group of
objectives established for the whole school year?’), as they do not
reach the factorial saturation cut-off of 0.40.
Therefore, the differences between the results obtained using the EFA
with the responses given by the Spanish students and the results
reported by Britton and Tesser lie in two aspects: (1) that three of

177

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 School Psychology International (2004), Vol. 25(2)

the items from the original scale have not been included in the TMQ
adaptation directed toward Spanish high school students, as they did
not reach the factorial saturation considered a minimum for incorpora-
tion into one of the subscales (0.40) – items 1 and 17 – or because they
presented a saturation superior to this value in more than one factor –
item 9 – and, (2) that item 2 was moved from the time attitudes sub-
scale of the original TMQ to the long-range planning subscale in the
adaptation. This variation in the placement of this item can be
explained by using linguistic dimensions, given that its wording may
induce one to think more about the time dimension it includes (‘During
a normal week . . .’) than about the constructive use or regulation of
study time. However, in spite of the differences mentioned, we can
point out that the results obtained on the EFA are congruent with
those referred to in the original version, thus demonstrating the trans-
cultural validity of the proposal underlying it.
Secondly, through a second sample of students, we submitted the
structure of the three factors obtained in the EFA to factorial validity
by means of the Confirmatory Factorial Analysis. With this objective in
mind, we used the global fit indices that are most widely used in this
type of analysis (RMRS, RMSEA,TLI-NNFI, GFI and CFI) to evaluate
and compare the explanatory capacity of the data from two alternative
models: A unifactorial model that would indicate the existence of one
general time management factor and the three factor model coming out
of the EFA (short-range planning, time attitudes and long-range plan-
ning). The values reached by the distinct global and comparative fit
indices show the goodness of the three factor model proposed to explain
the responses the subjects offer to the questionnaire, as well as its
explanatory superiority compared to alternative unifactorial model
considered.
Given that in their study Britton and Tesser used an AFE with vari-
max rotation to an initial scale on time management made up of 35
items, they reported that the three factors obtained were orthogonal
and, therefore, did not present data on a possible oblique rotation or
on any CFA, which would facilitate the comparison with our results.
However, it seems more reasonable to point out that, at the least, long-
range planning should present a significant relationship with the time
attitudes scale, and that these factors, coinciding with our results,
could not really be considered orthogonal.
On the other hand, and in a way similar to the conclusions drawn in
the different studies that evaluate the predictive capacity of time
management skills with regard to academic performance in college,
the results of the Multiple Regression Analysis show that the time
management factors are reasonably good predictors of the academic
performance of Spanish high school students. However, some impor-

178

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 García-Ros et al.: Assessing Time Management Skills

tant differences are observed when comparing our results with those
reported by Britton and Tesser: (1) the predictive capacity of the time
management skills on the academic performance that we obtained is
inferior to that described by Britton and Tesser with North American
college students (in our case it explains only 6.25 percent of the cri-
terion variance compared to 21 percent referred to in the original
study) and (2) in our case, the time management factor that manifests
itself as a good predictor of academic achievement in Spanish high
school students is long-range planning. On the other hand, Britton and
Tesser obtained very different results, given that they refer to short-
range planning and time attitudes as significant predictors. In other
studies with adaptations of the TMQ, Mpofu et al. (1996) point out that
in the case of African college students only the short-range planning
factor proved to be a good predictor of academic achievement. Finally,
Trueman and Hartley (1995) report in their study with British college
students that the subscale they call ‘confidence in long range planning’
is the one that shows a significant relationship with academic results.
In this way, emphasizing that more research is needed on the rela-
tionship between time management and academic results in different
circumstances, contexts and academic levels, our results would point
out that in high school it is long range planning that characterizes the
students likely to gain better results (establishing medium-long range
objectives, giving priorities to academic activities, regardless of the
proximity of the exams), while in college – according to Britton and
Tesser – short range planning is the best predictor of academic success.
These results can be interpreted keeping in mind two complementary
criteria: (1) the selection of students that occurs during the transition
from high school to college based on grades may be responsible for the
homogenization of the reference population in some of the dimensions of
time management and (2) given that the degree of predictability of
academic events is very different at these two educational levels, it is
possible that different subscales show themselves to be predictors of
academic achievement in each. In addition, the student selection that
occurs in passing from high school to college could signify that the
majority of college subjects are capable of establishing medium-long
range objectives and that, furthermore, the ‘average’ student gives
great importance and priority to academic activities compared to other
types of activities. If this were true, the differences between subjects
would depend more on their ability to adjust rapidly and effectively to
changes in the demands in their classes (short range), modifying their
established plans (medium range) based on the new demands that
arise.
On the other hand, the second argument emphasizes that the educa-
tional context of high school offers a much more stable and externally

179

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 School Psychology International (2004), Vol. 25(2)

prescribed environment than that of college, so that the differences

between students can be established more on the basis of medium-long
range planning than on short range. Likewise, given that in high school
the academic tasks and activities to be developed, the deadlines for
turning in reports and/or exam dates are much more structured and
externally guided by the teachers (external short range regulation)
than in college, the differences in academic achievement can be more
affected by the long range planning skills of the learners.
In any case, in finalizing this study we wish to emphasize once again
the need to continue advancing in the study of academic time manage-
ment and the way in which the subjects try to deal with this question.
To do so, it would be necessary to study more in depth each of the
dimensions obtained based on the evaluation scale developed. It would
also be important to analyse which mediating variables can explain the
individual differences in time management skills. Variables like age,
type of studies, personality variables, motivation, etc. surely provide
an added value that would make it possible for us to more precisely
validate the evaluation instrument developed and face the subsequent
objectives in research and intervention in this field with greater
guarantees.
To close, we wish to highlight how, both from a research perspective
as well as a professional practice point of view, the consideration of and
intervention in the improvement in the academic time management
skills has become a highly relevant professional area of intervention.
Therefore, the way students manage their study time is significant as
far as its relationship to learning is concerned, and it is imperative that
students learn to manage and plan their time effectively. However,
these considerations generate, at the same time, the need to delve more
deeply into the study of the time management processes and be able to
make instructional proposals directed toward improving them, keeping
in mind the characteristics of the students and the context of the inter-
vention, that is, the schools. In this sense, having reliable and valid
instruments available in order to evaluate the way students manage
and plan their study time has become an extremely relevant goal.

References
Adams, G. A. and Jex, S. M. (1997) ‘Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Time
Management Behavior Scale’, Psychological Reports 80(1): 225–26.
Bentler, P. M. and Wu, E. J. C. (1995) EQS for Macintosh User’s Guide. Encino,
CA: Multivariate Software.
Britton, B. K. and Glynn, S. M. (1989) ‘Mental Management and Creativity: A
Cognitive Model of Time Management for Intellectual Productivity’, in
Glover, J. A., Ronning, R. R. and Reynolds, C. R. (eds) Handbook of Creativity,
pp. 429–40. New York: Plenum.

180

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 García-Ros et al.: Assessing Time Management Skills

Britton, B. K. and Tesser, A. (1991) ‘Effects of Time-Management Practices on

College Grades’, Journal of Educational Psychology 83(3): 405–10.
Davis, D. M. (1998) ‘The Effects of a Study-Skills Course on the Academic
Self-Efficacy of At-Risk Freshmen College Students’, unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Faculty of School of Education, University of San Francisco.
Deluchi, J., Rohwer, W. and Thomas, J. (1987) ‘Study-Time Allocation as a
Function of Grade Level and Course Characteristics’, Contemporary Educa-
tional Psychology 12: 365–80.
García, T. and Pintrich, P. R. (1995) ‘Assessing Students’ Motivation and
Learning Strategies: The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire’,
paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association. San Francisco, CA, 18–22 April, 1995 (ERIC Docu-
ment Reproduction Service No. 383 770).
Hoyle, R. H. and Panter, A. T. (1995) ‘Writing about Structural Models’, in
R. H. Hoyle (ed.) Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues and
Applications, pp. 159–76. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
King, A. C., Winnett, R. A. and Lovett, S. B. (1986) ‘Enhancing Coping
Behaviours in At-Risk Populations: The Effects of Time-Management
Instruction and Social Support in Women from Dual-Earner Families’,
Behavior Therapy 17: 57–66.
Kovach, R. W. (1997) ‘Academic Achievement and the Self-Regulation of Study
Time: Quantitative and Qualitative Dimensions’, unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation, Faculty of Psychology, City University of New York.
Macan, T. H. (1994) ‘Time Management: Test of a Process Model’, Journal of
Applied Psychology 79(3): 381–91.
Macan, T. H., Shahani, C., Dipboye, R. L. and Phillips, A. P. (1990) ‘College
Students’ Time Management: Correlations With Academic Performance
and Stress’, Journal of Educational Psychology 82(4): 760–68.
Morgan, M. (1985) ‘Self-Monitoring of Attained Subgoals in Private Study’,
Journal of Educational Psychology 77: 623–30.
Mpofu, E., D’Amico, M. and Cleghorn, A. (1996) ‘Time Management Practices
in an African Culture: Correlates with College Academic Grades’, Canadian
Journal of Behavioural Science 28(2): 102–12.
Mudrack, P. E. (1997) ‘The Structure of Perceptions of Time’, Educational and
Psychological Measurement 57(2): 222–40.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T. and McKeachie, W. J. (1991) A Manual
for the Use of Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ).
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 338 122).
Pintrich, P. R. and De Groot, E. V. (1990) ‘Motivational and Self-Regulated
Learning Components of Classroom Academic Performance’, Journal of
Educational Psychology 82: 33–40.
Trueman, M. and Hartley, J. (1995) Measuring Time-Management Skills:
Cross-Cultural Observations on Britton and Tesser’s Time Management
Scale. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 417 667).
Weinstein, C., Goetz, E. T. and Alexander, P. A. (1988) Learning and Study
Strategies: Issues in Assessment, Instruction and Evaluation. Toronto:
Academic Press.
Weinstein, C. (1987). LASSI User’s Manual. Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing
Co.
Zimmerman, B. J. and Martínez-Pons, M. (1986) ‘Development of a Structured
Interview for Assessing Student Use of Self-Regulated Learning Strategies’,
American Educational Research Journal 23: 614–28.

181

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 School Psychology International (2004), Vol. 25(2)

Appendix 1

Cuestionario de Gestión de Tiempo Académico (versión aplicada en

castellano)
1. Cuando tienes diversas cosas para hacer, ¿piensas que es
mejor hacer una pequeña parte de cada una? a b c d e
2. En una semana cualquiera, ¿empleas más tiempo en tu
cuidado personal (ejercicio físico, aseo personal, . . .) que
estudiando? a b c d e
3. La noche previa a la entrega un trabajo importante,
¿sueles estar trabajando todavia en él? a b c d e
4. ¿Crees que, por lo general, tienes un buen control de tu
tiempo? a b c d e
5. ¿Cuando surgen cosas/situaciones que interfieren en tu
trabajo de clase, sueles decir ‘no’ a la gente? a b c d e
6. ¿Empleas tiempo a diario en planificar tus actividades? a b c d e
7. ¿Habitualmente tienes tu mesa de trabajo despejada de
cosas salvo aquellas sobre las que estás trabajando en
ese momento? a b c d e
8. ¿Utilizas eficazmente tu tiempo? a b c d e
9. ¿Piensas que se puede mejorar la forma en que utilizas
tu tiempo? a b c d e
10. ¿Planificas cada dia antes de empezarlo? a b c d e
11. ¿Tienes planificado tu tiempo desde el inicio del dia hasta
el final? a b c d e
12. ¿Realizas un listado de cosas que tienes que hacer cada
dia? a b c d e
13. ¿Redactas a diario las actividades que te propones
realizar? a b c d e
14. ¿Revisas regularmente tus notas/apuntes de clase,
incluso cuando no estás cerca de un examen? a b c d e
15. ¿Sigues rutinas o actividades poco útiles? a b c d e
16. ¿Te haces a diario un horario de las actividades a realizar
para clase? a b c d e
17. ¿Tienes establecido un conjunto de metas para todo el
curso? a b c d e
18. ¿Tienes una idea clara de lo que quieres hacer a lo largo
de la próxima semana? a b c d e

(a) nunca (b) pocas veces (c) algunas veces (d) habitualmente (e) siempre

182

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

 García-Ros et al.: Assessing Time Management Skills

Academic Time Management Questionnaire

1. When you have several things to do, do you think it’s best to do a little bit
of work on each one?
2. During an average week, do you spend more time taking care of yourself
(physical exercise, personal grooming . . .) than studying?
3. The night before a major assignment is due, are you usually still working
on it?
4. Do you use your time well?
5. Do you often find yourself doing things which interfere with your school
work because you hate to say ‘NO’ to people?
6. Do you spend time each day planning?
7. Do you usually keep your desk clear of everything other than what you are
currently working on?
8. Do you feel you are in charge of your time by and large?
9. Do you believe there is room for improvement in the way you manage your
time?
10. Do you plan a day before you start it?
11. Do you plan your time from the beginning of the day until the end?
12. Do you make a list of things you have to do each day?
13. Do you write a set of goals for yourself each day?
14. Do you regularly review your class notes, even when a test is not
imminent?
15. Do you continue unprofitable routines or activities?
16. Do you make a schedule of the activities you have to do on work days?
17. Do you have set goals for the entire term?
18. Do you have a clear idea of what you want to accomplish during the next
week?

183

Downloaded from spi.sagepub.com at Universidad de Valencia on March 2, 2016

View publication stats