UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' OPINIONS ABOUT ACADEMIC ROCRASTINATION: KNOWING AND INTERVENING

ABSTRACT:

This article aims to analyze the view of undergraduate health students concerning academic procrastination and how they perceived an intervention program aimed at self-management of the university experience as a coping strategy. It adopted Bandura's Cognitive Social Theory as its theoretical foundation, mainly the constructs of self-regulation of learning and self-efficacy. The research involved 299 students from the Physical Education, Physiotherapy, Nutrition, Occupational Therapy, Psychology, and Social Work courses being carried out in three stages: 1) Application of an Academic Procrastination Scale questionnaire and an identification form for the participants; 2) intervention in small groups in the form of workshops based on conversation circles; 3) individualized intervention. It was concluded that procrastination is a behavior present in the students' daily lives and that it becomes important to create spaces for reflection and learning to experiment with a strategy that facilitates coping. The group intervention showed potency, as it made it possible to listen and exchange experiences. In it, the participants were able to analyze procrastination beyond the individual aspects

Keywords: Procrastination; students; undergraduate; learning

RESUMO:

O artigo tem como objetivo analisar o olhar de graduandos da área da saúde em relação à procrastinação acadêmica e a sua percepção sobre um programa de intervenção voltado para a autogestão da experiência universitária como uma estratégia de enfrentamento. Como fundamentação teórica, adotou-se a Teoria Social Cognitiva de Bandura, especialmente os construtos de autorregulação da aprendizagem e autoeficácia. A pesquisa envolveu 299 estudantes dos cursos de Educação Física, Fisioterapia, Nutrição, Terapia Ocupacional, Psicologia e Serviço Social, sendo realizada em três etapas: 1) aplicação do questionário Escala de Procrastinação Acadêmica e uma ficha de identificação dos participantes; 2) intervenção em pequenos grupos no formato de oficinas a partir de rodas de conversa; e 3) intervenção individualizada. Concluiu-se que a procrastinação é um comportamento presente no cotidiano dos estudantes e que se torna importante criar espaços de reflexão e aprendizado para a experimentação de estratégias que facilitem o seu enfrentamento. A intervenção em grupo demonstrou potência, pois possibilitou a escuta e a troca de experiências. Nela, os participantes puderam analisar a procrastinação para além dos aspectos individuais.

Palavras-chave: Procrastinação; estudantes; graduação; universitários; aprendizagem

RESUMEN:

El artículo tiene como objetivo analizar la visión de los estudiantes del área de salud con relación a la procrastinación académica y cómo percibieron un programa de intervención dirigido a la autogestión de la experiencia universitaria como estrategia de afrontamiento. Se adoptó la Teoría Cognitiva Social de Bandura como fundamento teórico, especialmente los constructos de autorregulación del aprendizaje y autoeficacia. La investigación involucró a 299 estudiantes de los cursos de Educación Física, Fisioterapia, Nutrición, Terapia Ocupacional, Psicología y Trabajo Social, la cual se llevó a cabo en tres etapas: 1) aplicación del cuestionario Escala de Procrastinación Académica y formulario de identificación del participante; 2) intervención en pequeños grupos en forma de talleres basados en círculos de conversación; 3) intervención individualizada. Se concluyó que la procrastinación es un comportamiento presente en la vida diaria de los estudiantes y que se vuelve importante crear espacios de reflexión y aprender a experimentar estrategias que facilitan el afrontamiento. La intervención grupal demostró potencia, ya que permitió escuchar e intercambiar experiencias. En ella, los participantes pudieron analizar la procrastinación más allá de los aspectos individuales.

Palabras clave: Procrastinación; estudiantes; graduación; universitarios; aprendizaje

INTRODUCTION

Procrastination in the literature has been presented as the behavior of putting off (BURKA; YUEN, 1991); a tendency to postpone as much as possible what is necessary to achieve some goal (RODRIGUES CORREIA; DE MOURA JÚNIOR, 2017) and as a complex, but common behavior of people (ENUMO; KERBAUY, 1999). It is also understood as a polysemic concept that is difficult to define (COSTA, 2007) since it involves factors related to behavioral, emotional, cognitive (GOUVEIA et al., 2014), and social phenomena.

Postponing the performance of a task can bring benefits, even being an ally of the individuals for making more reflective decisions (BURKA; YUEN, 1991). Strategic deferral occurs when people decide to postpone the accomplishment of a task “to give themselves time to reflect, to clarify options or to help themselves focus on what is most important” (BURKA; YUEN, 1991, p. p. 20). Thus, there must be some objective conditions, such as time for analysis and reflection, management capacity and resources, and personal convictions that can be accessed to achieve the desired objectives.

What distinguishes the comfortable from the problematic postponement is the intensity of the discomfort it can cause in the subjects and how much this condition, configured as avoidance of facing reality, can lead them to intimate suffering, even reaching external consequences. significant, such as major dilemmas at work, school, relationships, or family life (BURKA; YUEN, 1991). In the case of university students, we observed that when dealing with the characteristic demands of university life, some can organize themselves by carrying out the activities required by the course and still invest in extracurricular tasks, without great difficulties. However, others get in the way of completing basic course tasks, procrastinate, and do not feel good about it.

Being a college student is a process. For Dayrell (2007), being a student is a historical construction produced in a certain space, the school context: “The young person becomes a student in a process in which the juvenile condition, intergenerational relationships and the representations arising therefrom interfere, as well as a particular school culture” (DAYRELL, 2007, p. 1119). According to the author, to think about university students, it is necessary to place them within a movement of young people who are constructed as university students and academics within a space and in a given historical time. Then, becoming a student is associated with the search for meaning for this experience, in which the beliefs and expectations, which were constituted before entering the academic environment, are being resignified by the experience. The quality of involvement with knowledge and with the teaching and learning processes is given by the meaning attributed to this experience.

The experience of “becoming a student” takes place within an environment, the university, when suffering this influence and also exercising it. It is important to remember that the university institution is not an ethereal and isolated environment. On the contrary, it is also built within a macro environment, society, producing and reproducing, within it, tensions and challenges similar to those that are built in the social environment. As it is not a static institution (DAYRELL, 2007), it needs to be aware of the movements that take place outside it, that affect its interior doing, as well as those nuances that are built, in an instituting way, within its walls. Changing its areas of reflection can help to understand the subjects and themselves.

When the human being starts to ask himself new questions, pedagogy and the school also have to ask themselves differently. In this sense, it is worth questioning to what extent the school “makes” the youth, privileging the reflection on the tensions and ambiguities experienced by the young person, when constituting himself as a student in a school routine that does not take into account his juvenile condition. (DAYRELL, 2007, p. 1107).

For the author, in contemporary school, a certain conception of student still dominates that was gestated in modern society, in which another condition that precedes that of a student, the condition of being young, is ignored. By ignoring this condition, the school institution is led to believe that it constitutes the central space of socialization of the new generations, and the young, when entering this place, is impelled to leave their reality at the gates and become idealized student, “having to internalize a school subject and invest in learning knowledge” (DAYRELL, 2007, p. 1107). A social institution, a historical reality in contemporary times, which takes care of the formation of this subject - young student -, needs to rethink itself daily, considering the social differences that cohabit the same institutional space, the tensions arising from these encounters, and the relationships between subjects - of the subjects among themselves, with the institution -, the curriculum, the knowledge, and the teaching and learning processes.

When discussing today's society, Carrano (2011) points out that “one of the great challenges of contemporaneity has become the construction of social unity in societies marked by significant personal and collective differences and inequalities” (CARRANO, 2011, p. 19). Once the school is inserted in this place, it needs to listen to itself and the subjects.

Listening to oneself and the other becomes, therefore, the condition for recognition and communication. Providing educational spaces-times and promoting learning processes so that subjects can recognize themselves and others should be a priority goal of school institutions. As well as stimulating learning that makes it possible to increase the ability to select significant content in the face of the “world of information” and contradictory references that populate daily life. (CARRANO, 2011, p. 19).

The young university student, a student under construction, interacts with the university environment and reacts to it in different ways, procrastination is one of them. To think about this behavior in the academic space, is to consider it a non-linear phenomenon (RODRIGUES CORREIA; DE MOURA JÚNIOR, 2017), but complex and dynamic (SAMPAIO; POLYDORO; ROSÁRIO, 2012), understanding it as a reaction that encompasses different factors - personal, environmental and behavioral - that interact with each other. In this way, postponing goes beyond the simple fact of not performing a given action or the fact of not meeting an established deadline. A student, when putting off a task, maybe express that he does not know how to perform it (SAMPAIO, 2011), signaling his fear of failing or winning and not knowing how to deal with this reality (RODRIGUES CORREIA; DE MOURA JÚNIOR, 2017) or using a resource that he uses to protect himself from his mistakes and insecurities, which can be evidenced during the performance, creating, in this case, even if unconsciously, apparently justifiable ways not to face a given situation ( DAYS, 2018). Therefore, it is understood that “the manifestation of procrastination goes beyond behavioral and environmental contingencies and involves a personal repertoire, consisting of a set of experiences, moral values, perceptions, beliefs, and expectations, among others” (SAMPAIO; POLYDORO; ROSÁRIO, 2012, p. 123).

This study aims to analyze the view of undergraduates in the health area on academic procrastination and their perception of an intervention program aimed at self-management of the university experience as a coping strategy. This is a partial result of the first author's doctoral thesis.

THEORETICAL FUNDAMENTALS

The data and information collected in this study were analyzed from the constructs of the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), developed by Albert Bandura (1986, 1997). This theory argues that human development is based on the reciprocal determinism between personal, behavioral, and socio-environmental variables, which interact as determinants, influencing each other in a bidirectional way. It appears that “the way people interpret the results of their behavior informs and changes their environments and the personal factors they have, which inform and change future behavior” (PAJARES; OLAZ, 2008, p. 98). Understanding a person's behavior is also considering that they have a space for action and that they can, throughout their lives, learn and acquire skills to carry out their projects.

The theoretical constructs of SCT are based on theories of human agency, self-efficacy, self-regulation, and moral disengagement (AZZI, 2014). It is understood that “being an agent means intentionally influencing one's functioning and life circumstances” (BANDURA, 2008, p. 15). With this, an individual has the possibility of intervening in his environment, altering it, at the same time that he is altered by it. In the socio-cognitive view, individuals are products and producers of the social environment in which they live (AZZI, 2014).

Self-efficacy beliefs occupy a central role in the theory and refer to “people's judgments on their abilities to organize and execute courses of action necessary to achieve certain types of performance” (BANDURA, 1986, p. 391). These beliefs are associated with the way a person interprets his ability to accomplish something and succeed in their investment. It is important to remember that having the ability to perform a given action is not the only definition of success, and just having the belief that one is capable of doing it does not guarantee success.

According to Bandura (2008), people are ambitious and proactive organisms, not just reactive, motivated, and goal-oriented. People, when faced with a challenge or when establishing a challenging goal, can intervene in the conduct of their processes and, if they do not have these conditions developed, they can appropriate them through learning. This movement refers to self-regulated learning. Learning self-regulation is a CST construct and refers to “self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions that are planned and cyclically adapted to the achievement of personal goals” (ZIMMERMAN, 2000, p. 81).

The ability to consciously and voluntarily self-regulate is a characteristic of human beings, that is, all living beings have self-regulation mechanisms that guide development and adaptation. It begins at birth, being reactive and based on reflexes, and, with maturity, it becomes increasingly one of planning and conscious control of behavior (BORUCHOVITCH, 2010). Learning self-regulation has no innate nature or origin, which means that it is a conscious process that can be directly taught or modeled (ROSÁRIO; POLYDORO, 2014).

To learn the self-regulation of learning, Zimmerman (2011) developed a theoretical model whose structure is presented from three sequential phases: 1) anticipation or prediction - encompassing the process before performing the task, involving the analysis of the task and the subjects' motivational beliefs regarding their ability to perform; 2) performance or volitional control - related to the execution process and encompassing self-control; 3) self-reflection - stage after the execution, involving the self-judgment of the subjects in face of what was accomplished and self-reactions in face of the results. According to Emílio and Polydoro (2017), the three phases act in a cyclical and interdependent way: the first phase influences the second, which affects the third and this generates an impact on the previous phase of a new cycle (EMÍLIO; POLYDORO, 2017).

As a process that can be taught, self-regulation of learning will require active participation, trust and exchange from those who teach and from those who learn. Initially assisted, it gives space for the participation of the subject in an increasingly autonomous way. The self-regulation of learning in the university context “should not be exclusively the responsibility of the student: it should be the object of teaching intentions and of curricular and institutional management policies aimed at strengthening it” (POLYDORO, 2017, p. 9).

METHODOLOGICAL COURSE

A total of 299 students from undergraduate courses in the health area participated in the research: Physical Education, Physiotherapy, Nutrition, Psychology, Social Work¹ , and Occupational Therapy. It was carried out at the Universidade Federal de São Paulo, at the Instituto Saúde e Sociedade (ISS), Baixada Santista campus, between 2016 and 2018. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Universidade Federal de São Paulo, under Opinion 2,939.790. The participants signed the Informed Consent Form - ICF, in all the stages performed.

The research surveyed various aspects that involve university life and, in this article, the perception of students in “academic procrastination” will be discussed. Data collection was carried out in three stages, and the instruments and resources described below were used to collect information on procrastination.

In stage 1, data were collected using two instruments: a) Academic Procrastination Scale (APS), adapted from the Portuguese version to the Brazilian reality by Sampaio (2011). It is a self-report questionnaire that seeks to assess specific procrastination behaviors during the study process. It consists of 10 items organized into two dimensions, procrastination in daily study and procrastination in studying for exams. The questions are organized on a five-point Likert scale (1 - never; 2 - a few times; 3 - sometimes; 4 - often; 5 - always). The scores obtained correspond to the sum of dimensions or total (POLYDORO et al., 2011). For this scale, Cronbach's alpha was 0.79. High rates indicate high procrastination. An essay question was added to the questionnaire: “Indicate three academic activities that you often put off”; b) Personal and academic characterization form of the students, prepared by the researcher using the instrument “Socioeconomic and cultural profile of undergraduate students from Brazilian federal universities - 2011 version” (FONAPRACE, 2011), organized by the National Forum of Pro-rectors of Community and Student Affairs (Fonaprace- Fórum Nacional de Pró-reitores de Assuntos Comunitários e Estudantis). The participation, in this stage, was given by the invitation made in class at times provided by the professors. Questionnaires in which participants answered at least 90% of the questions were considered and, to maintain the confidentiality of the data and information produced in the study, each participant was identified with the letter “P” plus a number.

During stage 2, workshops were organized in three meetings over three weeks. The choice of participants was defined by the students who presented the highest value in the “sum of dimensions” in the APS. The participants, 15, were divided into two groups (group A had nine participants and group B had six). The information generated was not recorded at the option of the researcher, who conducted all the meetings. To ensure the recording of the information generated, each meeting had an assistant for notes, and the information was systematized in narrative format. As a methodological strategy for the meetings, the conversation circle was chosen - to promote the socialization of “knowledge and implement the exchange of experiences, conversations, dissemination, and knowledge between those involved in building and rebuilding new knowledge about the proposed theme” (MOURA; LIMA, 2014, p. 101). The material used was structured from the work of Rosário, Nunez and González-Pienda (2012) and Burka and Yuen (1999). Three examples of the materials used are presented below.

Material 1

Material 1
Continuation..

Material 1
Continuation..

Material 2

Material 3

The dynamics of the activities were based on the self-regulation model of learning, developed by Zimmerman (2011), and the experiences were identified as follows: a) Phase 1 - anticipation or prediction - discussion of the theme, presentation of strategies aimed at developing learning skills self-regulation, elaboration of an action plan, reflection on the elaborated plan; b) Phase 2 - the experience of the plan prepared for a week, observing what was planned versus what was accomplished, time management, looking for help when realizing the need, self-observation of the feelings involved and the initiatives and motivations of self-correction; c) Phase 3 - self-reflection and self-reaction, carried out at the beginning of the meeting following the experience of the task. Participants could share their experiences with the group in an initiative to establish exchanges and bonds and to enable self-reflection in the choices made during the task. In the end, each participant evaluated the meeting.

In stage 3, four individual meetings were held with four students. The invitations were made following the criterion of those who obtained the highest scores in the APS in the questionnaires applied at the end of the workshops. Individual intervention plans were prepared for each participant, initially discussed, and adapted with the participation of those involved. The same model of self-regulation of learning (ZIMMERMAN, 2011) adopted in the workshops was followed and the themes were adapted for the students according to their demands. As the theme of procrastination was a demand of the four participants, it will also be presented in this study. The meetings were recorded with the consent of each one. In the last meeting, a narrative regarding the experience was read for each participant.

Seeking to verify the students' degree of perception in each phase of the research, in stages 2 and 3, and in the APS, the Academic Life Assessment Scale (ALAS) questionnaires (VENDRAMINI et al., 2004) and Inventory of Learning Self-Regulation Processes (ILSP) at the beginning and end of each stage. This last instrument was adapted from the Portuguese version to the Brazilian version by Polydoro et al. (2011). The purpose of applying these questionnaires is related to the search for a better understanding of the participants' learning process. In this article, the answers referring to the academic procrastination theme, that is, the APS questionnaire will be analyzed.

The APS's essay responses were analyzed following the studies by Bardin (1995) regarding content analysis, which is complemented by the works of Franco (2008). Content analysis is understood as:

A set of communication analysis techniques aimed at obtaining, through systematic and objective procedures for describing the content of messages, indicators (quantitative or not) that allow the inference of knowledge related to the conditions of production/reception (inferred variables) of these messages (BARDIN, 2016, p. 48).

This methodology allows the researcher to make inferences about the information collected, since, when dealing with the answers, he seeks to better understand the subject, his conception of the world, and his interests (FRANCO, 2008). The stages of analysis followed the guidelines of Bardin (2016) and Franco (2008), starting with the pre-analysis, a phase understood as an approximation of the documents produced, aiming at their preliminary organization and an exercise to understand the perceptions about the experience analyzed. The answers were organized in Excel files and listed one below the other, following the order of the questions. The floating reading enabled a better understanding of the documents for analysis, formulating the hypotheses and elaborating on the indicators that supported the final interpretation. We proceeded with the organization of the answers in register units, having chosen to organize them in themes, understanding that they expressed statements about the students' perceptions about a certain subject. For the composition of these themes, simple counting was adopted as a criterion, considering the number of times each one was mentioned by the participants.

For the interpretation of the information generated in stages 2 (workshops) and 3 (individualized intervention), they were organized in the format of narratives, following the guidelines of Qualitative Epistemology. According to this epistemology, subjective processes are organized in a complex way and their study does not allow prediction, description, and control since reality is not linear and determined (MORI; GONZÁLEZ REY, 2011).

The narratives were read and listed in categories of indicators following the guidelines of Gomes and González Rey (2007) and González Rey (2017). The participants' speeches were organized by the subjective meanings (MORI; GONZÁLEZ REY, 2011) attributed by the students, to the conduct of the learning process and their impressions about the experiences lived in the university environment, as well as during the workshops and in the individualized services.

ABOUT THE RESULTS: PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION

The profile of the participants

The participating group was heterogeneous, aged between 17 and 60 years old. Regarding gender, 170 students (78.1%) were female; 64 (21.5%) were male; one student identified himself as being of other sex (n=1; 0.3%) and two did not respond. The data confirm the profile of those enrolled in undergraduate courses in Brazil, presented by the 2017 Census, which revealed that 57% of enrollments in undergraduate courses corresponded to female students, while 43% were male students (BRASIL, 2017).

Of the total number of participants in the survey, 168 (56.2%) were first-year students (in the institution's terminology, first term) of the courses, and the others (47.4) from other periods. We excluded students from recent years (the seventh term for courses lasting four years and the ninth term for courses lasting five years). This choice was based on the time expected to carry out the stages of the research.

Most students came from families with family income above 10 minimum wages (n=45; 15.5%). In the second position, families with an income of up to three salaries (n=39; 13.4%); in the third, up to two salaries (n=35; 12%); and in the fourth place, family income of two to four salaries (n=30; 10.3%). The information showed a significant difference in the number of salaries received by families occupying the first and second positions (a difference of seven salaries/month), which points to a socioeconomic diversification among those involved.

The type of school in which students attended high school were: only private school (n=147; 49.2%); only public school (n=133; 44.5%); most in private schools (n=14; 4.7%); most in public schools (n=5; 4.7%). In non-mandatory activities, in the option “I never participated”, the frequency presented the following table: Extension (n=246; 83.1%); Tutorial Education Program (TEP) (n=245; 82.8%); Institutional Program for Scientific Initiation (IPSI) (n=242; 81.5%); student movement (n=158; 53%). We observed that the students showed a higher rate of interest in participating in the student movement (n=141; 47%).

As for their perception of quality of life as university students, they pointed out that some situations impair their academic experiences, such as lack of motivation to study and difficulty concentrating (n=21; 70.6%), and low academic performance (n=165; 55.1%). Regarding the question of the search for help to overcome academic and/or personal difficulties, the students answered that they had already sought psycho-pedagogical care at some time in their lives (n=62; 20.7%); psychological care (n=137; 45.8%); medical care to deal with emotional issues (n=79; 26.4%).

There is heterogeneity in the sample (age, socioeconomic status, type of school in which they attended high school), a portrait of the differences that coexist in higher education, especially after the changes implemented in federal institutions of higher education in 2004. In this way, the idea is that today it is no longer about “youth”, but about “youths” (CAMACHO, 2004) that are built in different contexts and that are found in the university environment. The group showed that they invest little of their time in activities outside the classroom and realize that the lack of motivation to study, the difficulty of concentration, and low academic performance interfere with their quality of life, harming their university experience.

How students perceive procrastination

In the results of stage 1 of the survey, through the APS questionnaire, the 299 students showed their perception of academic procrastination, as shown in the table below.

Table 1:
Descriptive measures of variables Dimension 1, Dimension 2, and Sum of dimensions - APS Questionnaire - Stage 1

Dimensions	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Standard Deviation
1 - Procrastination in studying for exams	7.00	23.00	14.25	3.54
2 - Procrastination in daily study	7.00	24.00	14.71	3.73
Summary	14.00	46.00	28.96	6.56

• Source: Prepared by the authors.

Considering that the highest value indicates a greater degree of procrastination, the group remained at the average level in both dimensions. Participants showed a higher value when comparing the two dimensions, in procrastination for the daily study, with an average of 14.71. Generally speaking, they point out that they put off their academic tasks between a few and many times.

In the workshops, stage 2, the APS results before the start of the activity (pre) and at the end (post), are described in table 2.

Table 2:
Descriptive measures of variables Dimension 1, Dimension 2, and Sum of dimensions - APS Questionnaire - Stage 2

Dimensions	Minimum		Maximum		Mean		Standard Deviation
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
1 - Study for exams	16.00	12.00	23.00	22.00	19.27	18.00	1.75	3.23
2 - Daily study	14.00	13.00	22.00	24.00	18.93	17.87	2.15	3.00
Summary	33.00	25.00	43.00	45.00	38.20	35.87	2.57	5.48

• Source: Prepared by the authors.

At this stage, the results were inverted when compared to those of stage 1. When in small groups, the students indicated that they procrastinated more in “studying for the tests”, indicating higher averages in the pre-intervention (19.27) than in the post-intervention period. (18). The results showed very close differences between the two dimensions, as in stage 1.

In the individualized interventions, the four students identified procrastination, by the APS, as follows:

Table 3:
Descriptive measures of variables Dimension 1, Dimension 2, and Sum of dimensions - APS Questionnaire - Stage 3

Dimensions	Minimum		Maximum		Mean		Standard Deviation
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
1 - study for exams	16.00	14.00	22.00	20.00	19.50	17.50	3.00	2.65
2 - Daily study	15.00	12.00	22.00	17.00	17.75	15.00	3.40	2.16
Summary	31.00	26.00	44.00	36.00	37.25	32.50	6.24	4.73

• Fonte: Elaborada pelos autores.

The study for the tests received a higher average score in the two moments, pre (19.5) and post (17.5). We noted that the differences in the means obtained between the two dimensions present a greater variation than the results found in the first two previous stages. In stage 1, students remained with very close averages, both in procrastination for tests (14.25) and in procrastination for daily study (14.75), indicating that they are predisposed to postpone their actions in both situations. This proximity is also observed in the post-intervention results of the workshops.

In a study carried out by Enumo and Kerbauy (1999) on procrastination, the authors point out that people put off performing tasks, in general, that they consider unpleasant or unimportant. They postpone the start of tasks, indicating possible emotional aspects such as a lack of disposition between the intention to do and the concrete behavior to perform. This idea corroborates the perception of the students in this study when they point out, during the workshops and in the individual meetings, that the lack of motivation to study is one of the aspects that negatively affect their quality of life.

Sampaio (2011) conducted a survey using the APS with 663 university students. The results were similar to those obtained in the first phase of this study when it was found that college students procrastinate more in daily studies than in exam studies. For this author, in daily study, the directions and goals are established by the student, requiring greater self-control and personal regulation, while studying for exams is normally characterized by clearer performance goals, in which content and deadlines are previously indicated by the teacher.

In this study, the results of stages 2 and 3 indicated that students perceive themselves as putting off studying for exams more than daily studies. One variable, common in stages 2 and 3, must be considered. In stage 2, the collection took place near the end of the semester, a period in which the students were involved with tests and deadlines for the delivery of work. In stage 3, most of the participants were in the last year of the course and, despite the collection having been carried out between September and October, they also lived with deadlines for delivering partial internship reports and during the writing of the Completion of Course Work (CCW).

In the two situations described, the students were involved both in studying for the tests and in dealing with deadlines. These events required them to develop personal skills that would enable time management and organization to carry out tasks within established deadlines. In this capacity for self-management of their actions, students needed to make choices without relying on the help of third parties, in most cases, reconciling demands and setting goals in a planned manner, with a certain degree of autonomy. These are actions that, in general, require self-control and self-regulation of behavior.

In the calculation of the results of the questionnaires, the indicators pointed to a positive decrease in the procrastination of activities. However, this result does not indicate that there was a change in the participants' procrastinating behavior, which would require a follow-up of those involved in the study for a longer period after the intervention. There was an improvement in the perception of the administration of activities. These changes confirm the idea that actions aimed at developing self-regulation skills in the learning process can be included in the context of university education (ROSÁRIO; NUNEZ; GONZÁLEZ-PIENDA, 2012; ROSÁRIO; POLYDORO, 2014; POLYDORO, 2017). By appropriating strategies that facilitate the conduct of learning, reflecting on this conduct, and sharing their experiences, students appropriate the project of “being a university student”, attributing meaning to it and realizing its meaning. In this direction, we observed that the more self-regulated they are, the less the procrastination behavior is present (SAMPAIO, 2011).

From the reports and feedback, we can see that the students were involved in the intervention process and perhaps this involvement enabled them to improve their perception of behavior as the discussions took place. In the second meeting, after practicing the first planning of the weekly tasks, they expressed this:

P8 commented that he managed to list his goals and prepared the pre-project of his CCW.

P13 shared with the group that, on the weekend before the start of the workshop, he had to do some work, but he spent the whole Saturday “rolling around” and did not do it. On Sunday, he decided to do it, but before starting, he spent much of his time researching organization techniques on the internet, which resulted in starting work only at the end of the day. He commented that he questioned himself a lot, as he realized that he spent the whole weekend procrastinating and took only an hour to complete all the work.

P38 said he managed to rethink his eating condition and was trying to eat better. He also realized that he needed help and that he set himself a goal to contact a university in the city that offered free psychological care since he had already registered and was on a waiting list. She fulfilled the established goal and contacted the service.

P41 commented that he was anxious about his procrastinating behavior, as he knew he left it to be done at the last minute. In the experience of the planning activity of the previous meeting, he realized that this behavior was causing him to wear, especially with the unwillingness he felt to do the activities the next day. He commented that the to-do list helped bring him closer to what he needed to do and realized that he was not facing reality. He also discovered that he was “stuck” when he was going to speak in public and that he tested the presentation of work with colleagues and it worked.

People develop actions and interpret the results of their actions. From these interpretations, they develop beliefs about their capabilities, which will interfere with the way they will think and act during the performance of subsequent activities (PAJARES; OLAZ, 2008). This is information that goes beyond the results obtained, referring to the interpretation that the participant makes about his performance and about the effort spent to accomplish something.

The impact of mood on self-efficacy beliefs is partially mediated by the selective recall of past experiences of success and failure that an individual can store in memory. In this direction, experiencing teaching situations that generate positive feelings, such as pleasure and/or enthusiasm, can contribute to increasing the belief in self-efficacy. (AZZI; VIEIRA, 2014, p. 33).

This interpretation is also affected when the individual perceives that others also go through similar experiences. The following reports were collected in the evaluations of the meetings, obtained without the identification of the participant.

a) Important meeting: Procrastination: I'm not alone in this!

b) Very reassuring, because I saw that I am not alone and that delay is not always bad. I'm thinking about my way of thinking and organizing myself, especially in not feeling so bad.

c) I have enjoyed the meetings and it is good to know that people are going through the same situation.

d) The meeting gave me good moments of reflection and sharing of experiences, which is very good from a personal point of view.

e) It was good to realize that I'm not the only one procrastinating. I always blame myself a lot for this and now I see that I'm not the only one, that it's something “common”.

Self-efficacy beliefs do not only refer to the individual capacity judgments that the individual makes of his conditions, they also encompass the perception he has about his social group, how each belief is shared, and also built by the group (IAOCHITE, 2017). In this aspect, the workshops have been shown to contribute to changing the procrastinating attitudes presented by the students since the discovery that they were not the only ones to experience such a situation opened paths for them, with less blame, to search for new ways out.

Procrastination was also perceived as behavior that caused them discomfort and suffering, making them uncomfortable as college students. In the workshops, they commented:

P31 said that he often felt that he had failed because he was not able to do what he planned to do.

P21 commented that he was frustrated and nervous because he was unable to fulfill everything that he set out to do.

P24 shared his sadness at realizing that she hadn't thought before that she procrastinated so much. Knowing about the level of his procrastination bothered her a lot. At the end of the meeting, she asked if she could talk to the researcher about her discomfort outside the workshop.

In individualized care, student P24 reported:

I think because of my procrastination, doesn't help much [pause]. And my motivation too… [...] When they ask me if I'm enjoying it, I say I am, but some people say they love the course and I don't have that feeling of loving the course, but I don't hate it either. I see it as part of my life that I have to do, like middle school and high school.

This student was in the second year of the course, in a period still identifying with her career. She had gone through an exam fail, the first in her academic career, and she was trying to make sense of this experience. The lack of meaning was affecting her motivation, helping her to invest little in her studies and her relationship with the course. She mentioned an important experience that was beginning to make a difference, giving it new meanings. It was an extension project that she was starting to participate in. She reported that she felt very welcomed by the group and the coordinating teacher and this was positively interfering with her motivation. She began to understand that what she was studying at graduation could open many doors of acting far greater than what she initially envisioned.

In most of the reports, the students pointed to procrastination as an individual or singular issue, which was effective by the lack of carrying out a task or by the little they invested in their experience, due to the lack of motivation. In a study on individualization and psychological suffering at the university, Leão, Ianni, and Goto (2019) pointed out that two people do not experience suffering in an equal way, since there is something common, something collectively individualized (LEÃO; IANNI; GOTO, 2019). They emphasize that socio-structural and economic issues may be related to individual suffering (which affects the objective conditions of life and conscience); collective (experiences arising from specific experiences in certain groups) and institutional (relationships directly linked to the university context).

We can find the authors' considerations in the report on student P21 during the individualized intervention. She said that she could not fulfill the course activities and that was making her very sick. She felt incapable and incompetent to manage her tasks, assuming herself as a procrastinator. She felt unmotivated to organize herself, as she did not believe that she could achieve the goals established by the course, especially those related to the internship activities. In the elaboration of the first planning of the week's activities, we observed that the student had a very large number of activities and, even if she rigorously organized her time, a significant number of tasks could not be fulfilled. Attempts to negotiate with the professors had already been tried by the class, without success. Similar reports were common among students in the last year of the same course, which leads to the belief that academic productivism, which leads to the precariousness of work, already inserted in the daily life of universities today, can affect students, interfering with their reflection and attributing them the responsibility, in a single way, for mistakes in institutional decisions.

Pajares and Olaz (2008) point out that “somatic and emotional states such as anxiety, stress, arousal, and mood states also provide information about self-efficacy beliefs” (PAJARES; OLAZ, 2008, p. 105). These states can interfere with the person's ability to judge a given situation, making it difficult to create and choose strategies that can lead him to act in a more organized way and achieve his goals. The reports of P21 contributed to the reflection on the effect of stress on university life and the need to expand this discussion in the different spaces of the school institution, reaching teachers, and important actors in the training of future professionals. The behavior of postponing actions can also comprise a reaction of subjects to an environment, especially when it does not favor the participation of those involved, preventing them from exposing their ideas and feelings through dialogue.

In stage 1 of the survey, in the APS questionnaire, the researcher included the question “Indicate three academic activities that you frequently put off”. To this, 262 students responded with 669 incidences.

Table 4:
Academic Activities Students Often Procrastinate- APS Questionnaire - Step 1

Activity	F	%
Reading texts	147	22.5
Academic works	139	21.3
Study for exams	111	17
Daily study	106	16.2
Text production	77	11.8
Non-mandatory activities	38	5.8
Group activities	15	2.3
Study plans	10	1.5
Classes	04	0.6
Several activities	07	1
Summary	669	100

• Source: Prepared by the authors.

The students pointed out that they put off reading texts they consider long, difficult, and that have unknown vocabulary and research. They also avoid texts from the modules areas that are common to all courses because they do not understand their meaning in preparing for the profession, such as 1) Social Insertion, which deals with themes related to philosophy, psychology, sociology; 2) Health Work - public policies for the health area; 3) Module from Atom to Cell - themes of the biological area.

As for academic work, they postpone preparation for seminars, work with a very distant deadline, subjects that have little interest, and the works of the modules of the common areas. They said that they put off work that requires prior planning since they need to have a vision of the whole and the ability to distribute tasks within deadlines that they need to define, which shows us that they have difficulty in self-controlling their behavior in actions that developed skills of self-regulation of learning are required.

The answers given to the same question in stage 2 of the survey show the results presented in the following table:

Table 5:
Academic activities that students frequently procrastinate (pre and post-intervention) - Stage 2

Activity	F	F	%	%
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
Text production	17	16	29.9	30.7
Academic works	12	07	21.1	13.5
Reading texts	11	08	19.3	15.4
Study for exams	09	13	15.8	25
Daily study	05	05	8.8	9.6
Study plans	01	-	1.7	-
Non-mandatory activities	01	03	1.7	5.8
Group activities	01	-	1.7	-
Summary	57	52	100	100

• Source: Prepared by the authors.

In the workshops, students reported postponing, especially, the preparation of reports, field diaries, CCW, and Scientific Initiation (CI) texts. They procrastinate reading complex, long texts and articles and the modules of the common axes, as they prioritize and see more meaning in the texts of the specific areas, which deal with training for the chosen profession. The most delayed academic papers are those that have a long deadline for submission and that requires research. In some cases, they postpone the performance of tasks required by the specific areas to dedicate to the study of the contents of the biological area, considering that this area is more likely to fail. We observed a reduction in the number of items deferred in the post-intervention compared to the pre-intervention. Despite pointing out that they see less meaning in the modules of the common areas, they are capable of changing their minds for fear of failing.

The answers obtained in Stage 3 - individualized intervention - are shown in the following table:

Table 6:
Academic activities that students frequently procrastinate (pre and post-intervention) - Stage 3

Activity	F	F	%	%
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
Text production	04	05	33,4	45,4
Study for exams	02	02	16,7	18,2
Reading texts	02	03	16,7	27,3
Academic works	01	-	8,3	-
Daily study	01	01	8,3	9,1
Study plans	01	-	8,3	-
Non-mandatory activities	01	-	8,3	-
Summary	12	11	100	100

• Source: Prepared by the authors.

Students indicated that they procrastinate more often in writing texts - field diaries, reports, and CCW -, studying for course exams and the residency competition, and reading texts and course articles. As in stage 2 (workshops), there was a significant reduction in the number of items that they perceive to be procrastinating.

As in stage 2, the results showed that activities that require more self-management from students, such as prior planning, routine organization, and negotiation with colleagues, as in group activities, were the most cited by students also in stage 3. In both stages, students reported that they put off the basic and most required actions for a higher education course in the health area - reading and writing.

For Santos and Oliveira (2010), reading is not an exclusive theme of a study area. However, even in the diversity of approaches, some points converge on the understanding of reading as a path to the development of thought. In this direction, the authors emphasize fundamental aspects, such as the interpretation of texts as a process that encompasses the apprehension and abstraction of the meaning of something. In general, university students have difficulties in reading scientific texts and this is attributed to the lack of verbal resources and lack of knowledge of specific vocabulary in the area, resulting in difficulties in decoding tables and graphs that compromise scientific discourse, and the ability to update, reaching future professional practice. It is important to consider that, while the skill of reading is necessary and fundamental, it is imbricated in complex issues, such as the formative trajectory of students, and cognitive and affective issues, such as motivation to read, the attitude towards reading, among others (SANTOS; OLIVEIRA, 2010).

About and writing, item well rated by students as a recurring behavior, Hübner and Marinotti (2004) point out that, for the production of a text, more complex skills are involved than reading, since, when writing, the student must understand the content studied and include the text within grammatical and orthographic parameters. In the case of academic texts, they must adapt them to technical-scientific parameters, such as norms of the Brazilian Association of Technical Norms (ABNT- Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas) or other required by the professor. There is also the need to present a creative and original work, which implies an exhibition process, in which the author's ideas and the structure of what he presents talk about him, his learning, his training, skills, and limits. Therefore, writing involves, in addition to cognition, affection, motivation, and self-assessment, all of which may constitute, for many, an excessive self-demand, especially when seeking perfection. For Lonka et al. (2014), exhaustion, stress, anxiety, and lack of interest, when correlated with blocking in academic writing, can lead to procrastination, as well as a search for exaggerated perfectionism. Thus, “Some students, driven by the desire to avoid a negative evaluation, procrastinate, while others exhaust themselves trying to do the perfect work; both mechanisms only perpetuate concerns” (SOUZA; PADOVANI, 2019, p. 43). By avoiding or seeking perfection, students postpone confrontation.

Students also postpone non-mandatory activities or complementary activities, indicating that they are not very willing to invest in class activities, that is, the basics required by the course. This behavior may be associated because they do not see sense in these activities or because they prioritize others that will bring them positive results, represented by the grades because they believe that these will enable them to complete the course within the established deadline. For Bzuneck (2009), the reality of the current educational context still refers to models in which grades are the greatest performance indicators, and school success is still defined by them.

Nowadays, to think about the university is to consider that there is a tangle of plots involving the relationships that are established between subjects and between them, teaching and learning. It is also necessary to think about contemporaneity and the close relationships it establishes with macrostructures and how this affects people's daily lives (LOPEZ; SAMPAIO, 2011). Institutions should not remain apart from what is built outside of them, nor should they be alien to what is going on inside them.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

The university is experiencing delicate moments. It is in profound transformations that operate both in the external context, such as the interference of neoliberal ideas in social organization (DIAS SOBRINHO, 2018; SANTOS, 2018) and within its institutional space, such as the changes arising from the expansion of vacancies in public higher education, allowing the entry of a new student (JOLY, SANTOS, SIST, 2005), which altered the daily activities of its actors. Old answers do not seem to handle the new questions, which arrive in volume and speed previously unobserved. Continuously questioning the implementation of new practices and how to provide educational spaces that promote learning can be an interesting way out.

In this article, we discussed the behavior of academic procrastination, seeking to understand it by listening to students and interpreting the meaning they attribute to their behavior of putting off school and personal tasks. Initially, we created an environment, that was protected and conducive to mutual trust so that these conversations could flow and generate results. Both the researcher and the participants were invited, in different ways, to look at procrastination from movements that took place within (fears, anxieties, powers) and outside themselves (institution, groups, society).

From the students' perception, we found that talking about academic procrastination and experiencing possible solutions, collectively, in small groups, enhanced reflection and perhaps even the finding of more effective alternatives. In the workshops, students were participatory, listened to the experiences of colleagues respectfully and collaboratively, reflected on their behavior, listened to colleagues learning from them, and analyzed the quality of the relationships they established within the institution. In several situations, they were relieved to realize that they were not alone (DE PAULA et al., 2020), but they formed a greater link that represented the “being a university student” in the health area, at Unifesp, on the Baixada Santista campus, in contemporary society. They exchanged experiences, tried out strategies, and evaluated the quality of experiences that took place both in the micro context (of each subject) and in the macro context (institutional and society).

In individualized meetings, they presented more intimate complaints, often not reported in collective spaces, which leads to the belief that these spaces are also necessary for listening. Reading the narratives was surrounded by emotion. Interpreting the other's view of their journey touched the participants, as an incentive for the appropriation of their history in the construction of “being a student”, also contributing to the improvement of self-efficacy beliefs, an important point in the process of self-regulated learning.

When comparing the activities proposed in the groups and the individualized meetings, we observed that the students were more comfortable and lighter when they could share experiences with their colleagues. Some felt encouraged to report their discomfort as they realized that they were not alone, but that they were part of a larger group, seeking ways out of similar problems. The idea of collective self-efficacy helps to understand this movement of students, as it corresponds not only to “the sum of the effectiveness of each member of the group but how much each member judges the ability of the group as a whole to carry out certain actions aiming at a given purpose” (IAOCHITE, 2017, p. 16).

When analyzing the quality of the learning process, the students realized that they procrastinate for individual reasons (due to the difficulty in organizing academic and personal tasks; because of the difficulty in conducting their studies, in demonstrating what they have learned or not; because they identify that they have school limitations from the type of school trajectory they took, before the university; for fear of making mistakes and being exposed; for the desire to present perfect works that make them stand out in front of their group and professors; for fear of standing out more than others and not knowing how to deal with success; in short, for fear of what comes from within and what comes from outside) and for reasons related to the collective and the institution (due to the level of requirements; the academic productivism that permeates everyday life and ends up stifling the creative actions of professors and students; by the pedagogical options made by courses that privilege results over process and more the amount of content to be passed on than learning; and by the relationships they established with the people involved in the teaching-learning process - professors, colleagues, subjects of the institution or their absence).

Faced with individual issues, the results of this research showed that self-regulation of learning can be an interesting alternative for students to take ownership of their learning, including the possibility of exercising reflection on the adoption of non-coping behaviors of procrastination as a way of avoiding reality. Self-regulation as a resource to be taught, according to the responses of the study participants, showed that it can contribute to improving the perception of their walk and help students to make their choices more autonomously and reflexively, facing, despite fear, the reality that is the university.

In the self-regulated learning process, experimentation is initially carried out in an assisted way, being gradually taken over by the student who is the main driver of his experience. We observed that, when the student perceives themself as capable, that is, he acquires the skills required to self-manage his actions, he takes ownership of the process, takes risks, and seeks help when he needs it.

For collective and institutional reasons, it is important to consider that the university encompasses what is happening in society. Nowadays, it is configured as a rentier capitalist society, globalized, transnational, and that meets a neoliberal project. The individuals, in this reality, need to be entrepreneurs of themselves, without formal work, individualized and productive and perhaps these premises do not fit into training that prioritizes life and subjects.

Therefore, there is a great mix and a great challenge that is to professionally train the “young person”, considering that he is still in a process of building the meaning of “being a university student”. Many contradictions should generate dialogues and not create silent and cold barriers. It is no longer a matter of teaching an expressive amount of content and only fulfilling curricula, but the institution needs to pay attention to the need for the daily exercise of rethinking, considering that many differences cohabit the institutional space and that there are many inconsistencies inside and outside it. For this very reason, it is essential to make choices that focus on the creation of educational spaces-times that provide the students with objective conditions so that, when they get to know each other in this environment, they see and recognize themselves and others. This can be an important goal and, why not, a priority for the university of today's world.

References

• AZZI, Roberta Gurgel. Introdução à Teoria Social Cognitiva São Paulo: Casa do Psicólogo, 2014.
• AZZI, Roberta Gurgel; VIEIRA, Diana Aguiar. Crenças de autoeficácia em contextos educativos São Paulo: Casa do Psicólogo , 2014.
• BANDURA, Albert. Selfy-efficacy: the exercise of control New York: Freeman, 1997.
• BANDURA, Albert. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1986.
• BANDURA, Albert. A evolução da Teoria Social Cognitiva. In: BANDURA, Albert; AZZI, Roberta Gurgel; POLYDORO, Soely Aparecida J. Teoria Social Cognitiva Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2008. p. 15-41.
• BARDIN, Laurence. Análise de conteúdo Lisboa: Edições 70, 1995.
• BORUCHOVITCH, Evely. A autorregulação da aprendizagem e a escolarização inicial. In: BORUCHOVITCH, Evely; BZUNECK, José Aloyseo. Aprendizagem: processos psicológicos e o contexto social na escola Petrópolis: Vozes, 2010. p. 55-88.
• BRASIL. Ministério da Educação. Censo da Educação Superior 2017 - divulgação dos principais resultados. Brasília: 2017. Disponível em:Disponível em:http://portal.mec.gov.br/docman/setembro-2018-pdf/97041-apresentac-a-o-censo-superior-u-ltimo/file Acesso em:05 set. 2019.
  » http://portal.mec.gov.br/docman/setembro-2018-pdf/97041-apresentac-a-o-censo-superior-u-ltimo/file
• BURKA, Jane; YUEN, Lenora. Procrastinação São Paulo: Nobel, 1991.
• BZUNECK, José Aloyseo. A motivação do aluno orientado a metas de realização. In: BORUCHOVITCH, Evely; BZUNECK, José Aloyseo. A motivação do aluno: contribuições da Psicologia contemporânea Petrópilos, RJ: Vozes, 2009. p. 58-77.
• CAMACHO, Luiza MitikoYshiguro. A invisibilidade da juventude na vida escolar. Perspectiva, Florianópolis, v. 22, n. 02, p. 325-343, jul./dez., 2004. Disponível em:Disponível em:https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/perspectiva/article/view/9647/8875 Acesso em:10 ago. 2020.
  » https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/perspectiva/article/view/9647/8875
• CARRANO, Paulo. Jovens, escolas e cidades: desafios à autonomia e à convivência. Revista Teias, Rio de Janeiro, v. 12, n. 26, p. 07-22, set./dez., 2011. Disponível em:Disponível em:https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/revistateias/article/view/24209 Acesso em: 10 ago. 2020.
  » https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/revistateias/article/view/24209
• COSTA, Marta Daniela S. Procrastinação, auto-regulação e gênero Dissertação (Mestrado em Psicologia Escolar). Portugal: Universidade do Minho, 2007.
• DAYRELL, Juarez. A escola “faz” as juventudes? Reflexões em torno da socialização juvenil. Educação e Sociedade, Campinas, v. 28, n. 100- Especial, p. 1105-1128, out., 2007. Disponível em:Disponível em:https://www.scielo.br/pdf/es/v28n100/a2228100 Acesso em: 20 ago. 2020.
  » https://www.scielo.br/pdf/es/v28n100/a2228100
• DE PAULA, Yara Aparecida et al Oficinas de apoio ao estudo: reflexões sobre a condução da aprendizagem de universitários. Revista Humanidades e Inovação, Palmas, v. 8, n. 5, 2020. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://revista.unitins.br/index.php/humanidadeseinovacao/article/view/2719 Acesso em: 10 ago. 2020.
  » https://revista.unitins.br/index.php/humanidadeseinovacao/article/view/2719
• DIAS, Diana. Psicologia da aprendizagem - paradigmas, motivação e dificuldades Lisboa: Sílabo, 2018.
• DIAS SOBRINHO, José Dias. Universidade em tempos de precarização e incertezas. Avaliação, Campinas; Sorocaba, v. 23, n. 3, p. 736-753, nov. 2018. Disponível em:Disponível em:https://www.scielo.br/j/aval/a/Vg74vx8NWmd97r75WF59njH/?lang=pt&format=pdf Acesso em: 15 mai. 2021.
  » https://www.scielo.br/j/aval/a/Vg74vx8NWmd97r75WF59njH/?lang=pt&format=pdf
• EMÍLIO, Eduarda R. V.; POLYDORO, Soely Aparecida J. Autorregulação da aprendizagem: fundamentos e implicações no contexto educativo. In: POLYDORO, Soely Aparecida J. Promoção da autorregulação da aprendizagem: contribuições da Teoria Social Cognitiva Porto Alegre: Letra1, 2017. p. 20-31.
• ENUMO, Sônia Regina Fiorim; KERBAUY, Raquel Rodrigues. Procrastinação: descrição de comportamentos de estudantes e transeuntes de uma capital brasileira. Revista de Terapia Comportamental e Cognitiva, [S. l.] v. 1, n. 2, p. 125-133, 1999.
• FONAPRACE. Fórum Nacional de Pró-Reitores de Assuntos Comunitários e Estudantis. Perfil Socioeconômico e Cultural dos Estudantes de Graduação das Universidades Federais Brasileiras Brasília: Fonaprace, 2011.
• FRANCO, Maria Laura P. B. Análise do conteúdo Brasília: Liber, 2008.
• GOMES, Cláudia Gomes; GONZÁLEZ REY, Fernado Luis. Inclusão escolar: representações compartilhadas de profissionais de educação acerca da inclusão escolar. Psicologia, Ciência e Profissão, [S. l.] n. 27, p. 406-417, 2007.
• GONZÁLEZ REY, Fernando Luis. Pesquisa qualitativa e subjetividade: os processos de construção da informação São Paulo: Cengage Learning, 2017.
• GOUVEIA, Valdiney Veloso et al Escala de Procrastinação Ativa: evidências de validade fatorial e consistência interna. Psico-USF, Bragança Paulista, v. 19, n. 2, p. 345-354, mai./ago., 2014. Disponível em:Disponível em:https://www.scielo.br/pdf/pusf/v19n2/a16v19n2.pdf Acesso em:10 agosto 2020.
  » https://www.scielo.br/pdf/pusf/v19n2/a16v19n2.pdf
• HÜBNER, Maria Marta C.; MARINOTTI, Miriam. Análise do Comportamento para a Educação: contribuições recentes Santo André: ESETec Editores Associados, 2004.
• IAOCHITE, Roberto Tadeu. Crenças de autoeficácia: considerações teóricas. In: Autoeficácia em contextos educativos. In: IAOCHITE, Roberto Tadeu; AZZI, Roberta Gurgel. Autoeficácia em contextos de saúde, educação e política Porto Alegre: Letra1, 2017. p. 13-27.
• JOLY, Maria Cristina R. A.; SANTOS, Acácia Aparecida A.; SISTO, Firmino Fernandes (orgs). Questões do cotidiano universitário São Paulo: Casa do Psicólogo , 2005.
• LEÃO, Thiago Marques; IANNI, Aurea Maria Zöllner; GOTO, Carine Sayuri. Individualização e sofrimento psíquico na universidade: entre a clínica e a empresa de si. Revista Humanidades e Inovação, Palmas, v. 6, n. 9, v. 2, p. 131-143, 2019. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://revista.unitins.br/index.php/humanidadeseinovacao/article/view/1250 Acesso em:20 jan. 2020.
  » https://revista.unitins.br/index.php/humanidadeseinovacao/article/view/1250
• LONKA, Kirst et al How to measure PhD. students’ conceptions of academic writing, and are they related to wellbeing? Journal of Writing Research, 5(3), p. 245-269, 2014. Disponível em:Disponível em:https://www.jowr.org/articles/vol5_3/JoWR_2014_vol5_nr3_Lonka_et_al.pdf Acesso em: 10 ago. 2020.
  » https://www.jowr.org/articles/vol5_3/JoWR_2014_vol5_nr3_Lonka_et_al.pdf
• LOPEZ, Fábio Nieto; SAMPAIO, Sônia Maria R. Questões contemporâneas no cotidiano da universidade: algumas implicações temporais. In: SAMPAIO, Sônia Maria R. (org.). Observatório da vida estudantil: primeiros estudos, Salvador, p. 71-91, 2011. Disponível em:Disponível em:http://books.scielo.org/id/n656x/pdf/sampaio-9788523212117-05.pdf Acesso em: 10 ago. 2020.
  » http://books.scielo.org/id/n656x/pdf/sampaio-9788523212117-05.pdf
• MORI, Valéria D.; GONZÁLEZ REY, Fernando Luis. Reflexões sobre o social e o individual na experiência do câncer. Psicologia & Sociedade, [S.l], n. 23, p. 99-108, 2011.
• MOURA, Adriana Ferro; LIMA, Maria Glória. A reinvenção da roda: roda de conversa: um instrumento metodológico possível. Revista Temas em Educação, João Pessoa, v. 23, n. 1, p. 98-106, 2014.
• PAJARES, Frank; OLAZ, Fabián. Teoria social cognitiva e autoeficácia: uma visão geral. In: BANDURA, Albert; AZZI, Roberta Gurgel, POLYDORO, Soely Aparecida J. Teoria Social Cognitiva Porto Alegre: Artmed , 2008. p. 97-114.
• POLYDORO, Soely Aparecida J. Promoção da autorregulação da aprendizagem: contribuições da Teoria Social Cognitiva Porto Alegre: Letra1, 2017.
• POLYDORO, Soely Aparecida J. et al. Sucesso no ensino superior e variáveis envolvidas. XCONPE - Congresso Nacional de Psicologia Escolar e Educacional - caminhos trilhados, caminhos a percorrer, Maringá, v. 1, p. 40, 2011.
• RODRIGUES CORREIA, Roni; DE MOURA JÚNIOR, Pedro Jácome. Aprendizagem e Procrastinação: Uma Revisão de Publicações no Período 2005-2015. REICE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, [S. l.], v. 15, n. 2, p. 111-128, 2017. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/551/55150357006.pdf Acesso em:10 ago. 2020.
  » https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/551/55150357006.pdf
• ROSÁRIO, Pedro; NUNEZ, José C.; GONZÁLEZ-PIENDA, Júlio. Cartas do Gervásio ao seu umbigo São Paulo: Almedina, 2012.
• ROSÁRIO, Pedro; POLYDORO, Soely Aparecida J. Capitanear o aprender no contexto educativo São Paulo: Casa do Psicólogo , 2014.
• SAMPAIO, Rita Karina N. Procrastinação acadêmica e autorregulação da aprendizagem em estudantes universitários Dissertação (Mestrado em Educação). Campinas: Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 2011.
• SAMPAIO, Rita Karina N.; POLYDORO, Soely Aparecida J.; ROSÁRIO, Pedro Sales L. F. Autorregulação da aprendizagem e a procrastinação acadêmica em estudantes universitários. Cadernos de Educação, Pelotas, n. 42, p. 119-142, mai./ago., 2012.
• SANTOS, Acácia Aparecida A.; OLIVEIRA, Katya Luciane. A importância da compreensão da leitura para a aprendizagem de universitários. In: BORUCHOVITCH, Evely; BZUNECK, José Aloyseo. Aprendizagem: processos psicológicos e o contexto social na escola Petrópolis: Vozes , 2010. p. 119-147.
• SANTOS, Boaventura Souza. Destrincha o assédio neoliberal às universidades. Revista IHU on line São Leopoldo, 16 jun. 2018. Disponível em: Disponível em: http://www.ihu.unisinos.br/78-noticias/579979-boaventura-de-sousa-santos-destrincha-o-assedio-neoliberal-as-universidades Acesso em: 02 ago. 2018.
  » http://www.ihu.unisinos.br/78-noticias/579979-boaventura-de-sousa-santos-destrincha-o-assedio-neoliberal-as-universidades
• SOUZA, Conceição Reis; PADOVANI, Ricardo da Costa. Quando as oportunidades oferecidas pela universidade são transformadas em sofrimento. Revista Humanidades e Inovação, Palmas, v. 6, n. 9, v. 2, p. 40-50, 2019. Disponível emDisponível emhttps://revista.unitins.br/index.php/humanidadeseinovacao/article/view/145 9. Acesso em20 jan. 2020.
  » https://revista.unitins.br/index.php/humanidadeseinovacao/article/view/145
• VENDRAMINI, Claudete Maria M. et al Construção e validação de uma escala sobre avaliação da vida acadêmica (EAVA). Estudos de Psicologia, Natal, v. 9, n. 2, p. 259-268, 2004. Disponível em:Disponível em:http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-294X2004000200007&lng=en&nrm=iso Acesso em: 21 dez. 2019.
  » http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-294X2004000200007&lng=en&nrm=iso
• ZIMMERMAN, Barry J. Attaining self-regulation: A social-cognitive perspective. In: BOEKAERTS, Monique; PINTRICH, Paul; ZEIDNER, Moshe. Self-regulation: Theory, research, and applications Orlando: FL7 Academic Press, 2000. p. 13-39.
• ZIMMERMAN, Barry J. Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning and performance. In: ZIMMERMAN, Barry J.; SCHUNK Dale. H. (org.). Handbook of selfregulation of learning and performance New York: Routledge, 2011. p. 49-64.

• 1
  Resolution 287, of October 8, 1998, from the Ministry of Health and the National Health Council, lists the following higher-level health professional categories: Biomedicine, Biology, Physical Education, Nursing, Pharmacy, Physiotherapy, Speech-Language Therapy, Medicine, Veterinary Medicine, Nutrition, Dentistry, Psychology, Social Work and Occupational Therapy.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  23 Apr 2022
• Date of issue
  2022

History

• Received
  10 Dec 2020
• Accepted
  10 Oct 2021