Journal of Education and Training Studies

Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

ISSN 2324-805X E-ISSN 2324-8068
Published by Redfame Publishing
URL: [Link]

Examination of the Relation between Academic Procrastination and Time

Management Skills of Undergraduate Students in Terms of Some Variables
Gürbüz Ocak1, Serkan Boyraz1,2
1
Curriculum and Instruction Department, Afyon Kocatepe University, Afyonkarahisar, Turkey
2
Lecturer of English at Aksaray University, Aksaray, Turkey
Correspondence: Serkan Boyraz, Lecturer of English at Aksaray University, Aksaray, Turkey; PhD. Student in
Curriculum and Instruction Department at Afyon Kocatepe University, Afyonkarahisar, Turkey

Received: January 20, 2016 Accepted: February 22, 2016 Online Published: February 27, 2016
doi:10.11114/jets.v4i5.1313 URL: [Link]

Abstract
Academic procrastination is seen to be quite common among undergraduates and time management is thought to be one
of the possible reasons of it. Two surveys, academic procrastination and time management, were given to 332
undergraduate students in this correlational research. Students’ academic procrastination is explained through
frequencies and percentages and a correlation is questioned between academic procrastination and time management.
Regression analysis is used to find out if time management predicts academic procrastination in a statistically
significant way. Besides, students’ level of time management (low, medium, high) is examined and covariance analysis
has been carried out to see if time management level and gender, time management level and housing type (private or
state dormitory or house), time management level and their major and time management level and where they live have
a common effect on academic procrastination. Results indicate that students are generally indecisive about their
behaviors of procrastination in academic tasks and are in middle level in terms of time management skills. There is a
moderate level, negative sided and statistically significant correlation between academic procrastination and time
management. Not a common effect of mentioned above variables is seen.
Keywords: academic procrastination, time management, university students
1. Introduction
People’s delaying the things they are supposed to do is a very old human behavior and struggle for time management by
people dates back to ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics even 1400 B.C. In 1750s when time and using it effectively became
key terms due to developed production process, Dr. Samuel Johnson who prepared the first comprehensive American
English dictionary (1751) described “procrastination” as ““The folly of allowing ourselves to delay what we know
cannot be finally escaped” (as cited in Janssen, 2015, p. 2) and researches point out people procrastinate in six different
aspects/domains of life: academic and work, everyday routines and obligations, health, leisure, family and partnership,
and social contacts (Janssen, 2015, s. 15) Individuals might procrastinate various things and this can be delighting at the
beginning.
For the students of today, the amount of information to be learned increases day by day together with the number and
accessibility of distractors like online games, social media, game platforms etc. which might steal their time. Current
distractors like social media have become an addiction among undergraduates (Andreassen, 2015) and this might be an
important factor in their academic procrastination. Researches reveal that students do not take notice of short periods of
time and as a result are overwhelmed with the common cliché “scarcity of time” and they should be warned that if they
plan these short periods of time well then the other tasks will be easier (Bashir, Bashir, & Nazir, 2015).
2. Literature Review
Academic procrastination which is a kind of procrastination includes delaying school based tasks and can be described
as procrastinating academic tasks due to some reason (Akbay & Gizir, 2010, p. 60). Assignments that are not done or
tasks that are not fulfilled can cause negative consequences such as disturbed sleep, stress, anxiety to manage time
effectively and might result in giving up or partially fulfilling the task (Deniz & Akdoğan, 2014, p. 30).
Klingsieck (2013) describes academic procrastination as postponing an academic task that is to be done voluntarily or

76
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

necessarily and/or which is personally important although a person is aware of possible positive short-term
consequences will be overwhelmed by long-term negative ones. In another way, it is described as delaying the
completion of an academic task/assignment or postponing to study for the examinations and this is very common among
the students all over the world (Kim & Seo, 2015, p. 26). Although it is common nowadays, it not a new issue. Ellis and
Knaus (1977) estimate that 95% of college students engage in procrastination and their tendency increases together with
the time they spend in college (as cited in Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). The prevalence of this behavior which is
performed consciously despite being aware of negative consequences was found to be around 20% (Harriot & Ferrari,
1996; p. 611); in another study 85% (Schouwenburg & Groenewoud, 2001) while another research predicts it is
between 85-90% (Steel, 2007, p. 65). In their study in which they examine academic procrastination behavior of
Turkish undergraduate students, Ozer, Demir ve Ferrari (2009) state that 405 students (52%) out of 784 perform
academic procrastination while 379 (48%) do not. Besides this prevalence, students that procrastinate unnecessarily
may not even be aware of it and feel disturbed (Lindblom-Ylänne, Saariaho, Inkinen, Anne-Haarala-Muhonen, &
Hailikari, 2015) or some of them may not be volunteered to decrease the number of it (Grunschel & Schopenhauer,
2015). The reason why this behavior is more common among undergraduates rather than primary, secondary and high
school students is the more flexible learning environment (You, 2015).
Academic procrastination is studied a lot due to its being common and having many negative aspects. Theories and
findings related to this behavior are divided into two categories. One of them emphasizes the features related to task
performance or realization of the goals while the other highlights individual differences and uses personal features to
explain academic procrastination (Johnson & Bloom, 1995, p. 127). Researchers suggest various possible predictors
like a tendency toward self-handicapping, low selfesteem, low academic self-efficacy, fear of failure, and distorted
perceptions of available and required time to complete tasks as cognitive variables; anxiety, depression, and worry as
emotional and lower conscientiousness and higher neuroticism as personality variables (Rabin, Fogel, & Nutter-Upham,
2011). According to findings of a meta-analysis that includes 121 studies, the strongest average correlations were those
with conscientiousness (rmean = -.63) and self-efficacy (rmean = -.44); anxiety and depression were moderately related
(rmean= .21 and .30, respectively); performance outcomes, such as grade point average, were negatively related (rmean=
-.28) (Van Eerde, 2003). According to Dietz, Hofer and Fries (2007) procrastination might be regarded as a failure in
self regulation and students with a high level of procrastination should take the adventage of time management
strategies to reach their academic goals. There are other studies in the literature showing ineffective time management
or lack of time management skilss as a possible reason of procrastination (Ajayi & Osiki, 2008; Díaz-Morales & Ferrari,
2015; Pang & Han, 2009; Swart, Lombard & Jager, 2010).
Time management is another common and one of the most important problems in the modern world. Examining many
various definitions in the literature, Claessens, Van Eerde, Rutte and Roe (2007) define the time management as
behaviours that intend to use the time effectively while performing certain goal directed activities which emphasize that
the use of time is not the aim itself but it is like a “tool” while fulfilling a work or academic task. Successful time
management which can be explained as realizing the best use of time in the highest level in a way that will provide
productivity, balance and self-satisfaction can be really compelling because of foreseeing an insufficient amount of time
to complete their duties/responsibilities or preferring the completion of short-term tasks with less gain to long-term but
with more gain ones (Oettingen, Kappes, Guttenberg, & Gollwitzer, 2015). Time management is simply more than
planning the time; it also includes a high level of awareness in terms of use of time and determining, planning,
monitoring and organizing of goals and (Van Eerde, 2015, p. 313). Kirillov, Tanatova, Vinichenko & Makushkin (2015)
group people into three in terms of their approach to time management: those who see it i) as necessary for success; ii)
unnecessary as everything takes it course and iii) important but do not have enough concentration and sustainability to
change. Undergraduates also fall in one of these groups according to them.
3. Problem of the Research
According to the findings in the literature, academic procrastination behavior is common among undergraduates and
insufficient time management skills is thought to be one of the possible reasons of it. This is the problem of this
research. The sub-problems are as follows:
1. What is the current situation of undergraduates in terms of academic procrastination?
2. What is the current level (low, moderate, high) of undergraduates in terms of their time management skills?
3. Is there a statistically significant relation between undergraduates’ academic procrastination behaviors and
time management skills?
4. Do the undergraduates’ time management skills predict their academic procrastination?
5. Is there a common effect of the following variables on students’ academic procrastination?
a. Time management level and gender
b. Time management level and their faculty

77
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

c. Time management level and their housing type

d. Time management level and their age
e. Time management level and where they live
4. Method
As the aim of the research is to find out if there is a relation between undergraduates’ academic procrastination
behaviors and time management skills, the study employs a correlational research method. The aim of this kind of
research is to determine the relationship between variables in order to have a better understanding for important topics.
The difference between experimental and correlational research in which it is common to investigate the relation
between two variables while it possible to look for more is not manipulating the variables (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006, p.
335-336).
4.1 Data Collection and Analysis
Two scales were used in the research to collect the data. Firstly, academic procrastination scale which is developed by
Ocak and Bulut (2015) was used in order to determine undergraduates’ academic procrastination behaviors. Ocak and
Bulut state that their scale has four sub-dimensions: irresponsibility (19 items); perceived features of the academic task
(10 items); negative perceptions towards lecturers (5 items) and academic perfectionism (4 items). These four
dimensions explain 53.61% of the total variance. Reliability of the scale is 0.947. In this study, the scale shows a four
sub-dimension form again but the number of items is different. In the same order of sub-dimensions given above, the
number of items is 16, 11, 5 and 6 and total variance explained is 51.54%. The reliability of the scale is 0.923.
Secondly, time management questionnaire which is developed by Britton and Glynn (1989) and adapted into Turkish by
Alay and Koçak (2002) is used to investigate undergraduates’ time management skills. A total of 35% variance is
explained by 27 items in total and in three sub-dimensions, namely: time planning (16 items; explained variance: 20%);
time attitudes (7 items; explained variance: 9%) and time wasters (4 items; explained variance: 6%). In this study, there
are three sub-dimensions again: 20 items in the first sub-dimension; 4 in second and 3 in the third and a total of 36.85%
of the variance is explained. The reliability of the scale is 0.73.
The total scores of the scales were used in statistical analysis and scores in sub-dimensions were not used. Normal
distribution of the data set is examined through the significance of normality tests, skewness and kurtosis values (being
close to zero) and mode-median-mean values’ being close to each other. The data from 342 participants was not
distributed normally in time management questionnaire, so extreme values are excluded from analysis to provide
normal distribution. Normal distribution was achieved after excluding 10 extreme values (5 low and 5 high extreme
values) in the time management questionnaire. Frequencies and percentages, simple linear correlation, simple
regression and two-way anova are the statistical analysis used in the study. If there is a linear relationship between the
two variables which is a precondition to do regression analysis (Can, 2014) was checked through scatter diagram and
linear relation was seen.
4.2 Universe and Sample
The universe of the research includes undergraduates studying at Aksaray University central campus in five faculties
(Engineering, Economics and Administrative Sciences (EAS), Education, Science and Literature (S&L) and Tourism)
in 2015-2016 academic year. Random sampling was used as the sampling method. This kind of sampling includes using
the sample you can directly reach at a moment (Walliman, 2006, p. 78). The table of sampling numbers which is
developed by Yazıcıoğlu and Erdoğan (2011) was used in order to determine required number of samples. According to
it, the number of samples for α = 0.05 sampling error should be 370 when there are ten thousand participants (nearly ten
thousand students in this research) in the universe. A total of 391 participants were reached but due to missing answers
(and normality) only 332 were used in statistical analysis. Demographic information of the participants are given in
Table 1 below:

78
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

Table 1. Demographics of the Participants

N % N %
Engineering 57 17.2 18 57 17.2
Education 61 18.4 19 70 21.1
Tourism 48 14.5 20 59 17.8
Faculty Age
EAS 106 31.9 21 75 22.6
S&L 60 18.1 22 and above 71 21.4
Total 332 100 Total 332 100
State Dorm. 110 33.1 Village/Town/District 85 25.6
Priv. Dorm. 107 32.2 City 119 35.8
Housing Accommodation
House 115 34.6 Metropolis 128 38.6
Total 332 100 Total 332 100
Female 175 52.7 No 273 82.2
Gender Male 157 47.3 Working Yes 59 17.8
Total 332 100 Total 332 100
Daytime 251 75.1
Type of Study Evening 81 24.9
Total 332 100
5. Findings
Findings related to the sub-problems of the study are given below.
I. Sub-problem: What is the current situation of undergraduates in terms of academic procrastination?
In order to show current situation of undergraduates in terms of their academic procrastination behaviors, their scores
were given in frequencies and percentages and the mean was calculated. It is important to note that the higher scores
from the academic procrastination scale indicate more procrastination or more tendency for procrastination. Mean for
each item was calculated and result was drawn depending on this intervals: 1.00-1.79: Strongly Disagree; 1.80-2.59:
Disagree; 2.60-3.39: Indecisive; 3.40-4.19: Agree and 4.20-5.00: Strongly Agree. According to mean scores of each
item in the scale, only two results were indicated: Disagree (D) or Indecisive (Ind).
Findings related to this sub-problem are given below. Table 2 shows descriptive statistics on the first sub-dimension of
academic procrastination scale which is “responsibility”:
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics on Responsibility Sub-Dimension of Academic Procrastination Scale
1 2 3 4 5 X Result
1- I procrastinate my academic tasks despite not having a more important thing to F 120 65 52 59 36
2.48 D
do. % 36.1 19.6 15.7 17.8 10.8
F 94 89 47 67 35
2- I procrastinate my academic tasks to the last minute as I am an unplanned person. 2.58 D
% 28.3 26.8 14.2 20.2 10.5
3- I procrastinate the tasks like doing the assignments or studying for an exam F 83 86 53 75 35
2.68 Ind
because I have a low level of concentration for studying. % 25.0 25.9 16.0 22.6 10.5
4- I procrastinate studying for the exams to the last day because of unnecessary F 83 91 48 68 42
2.68 Ind
reasons. % 25.0 27.4 14.5 20.5 12.7
5- I procrastinate my academic tasks to another day as there is not a motivating force F 82 81 61 65 43
2.72 Ind
that will activate me. % 24.7 24.4 18.4 19.6 13.0
6- I leave fulfilling academic tasks to the last day as I do not arrange them according F 80 102 555 57 38
2.61 Ind
to their priorities. % 24.1 30.7 16.6 17.2 11.4
F 80 85 46 76 45
7- I am not willing to do the assignments even when the due is close. 2.76 Ind
% 24.1 25.6 13.9 22.9 13.6
8- I leave doing my academic tasks to the last minute since I am not motivated to do F 83 84 53 68 44
2.72 Ind
them. % 25.0 25.3 16.0 20.5 13.3
9- I spend most of my time on entertaining activities instead of studying although I F 89 83 45 64 51
2.71 Ind
regret. % 26.8 25.0 13.6 19.3 15.4
F 54 98 54 84 42
10- I study the exams on the last day because of insufficient motivation. 2.89 Ind
% 16.3 29.5 16.3 25.3 12.7
F 64 89 63 68 48
11- I am a person who says her/himself I will start studying this time but doesn’t. 2.84 Ind
% 19.3 26.8 19.0 20.5 14.5
F 83 88 71 49 41
12- I am a time-waster. 2.63 Ind
% 25.0 26.5 21.4 14.8 12.3
F 85 93 75 47 32
13- I leave the academic tasks that require much effort to the last minute. 2.54 D
% 25.6 28.0 22.6 14.2 9.6
14- I leave fulfilling academic tasks to the last minute as I spend much time on social F 64 117 54 59 38
2.67 Ind
activities like watching movie, playing games, etc. % 19.3 35.2 16.3 17.8 11.4
F 86 109 69 44 24
15- I do even my important academic tasks in the last minute. 2.43 D
% 25.9 32.8 20.8 13.3 7.2
F 73 107 74 56 22
16- I can’t motivate myself when I start doing my academic tasks. 2.54 D
% 22.0 32.2 22.3 16.9 6.6

79
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

The items number 1 (I procrastinate my academic tasks despite not having a more important thing to do.) and 2 (I
procrastinate my academic tasks to the last minute as I am an unplanned person.) that participants do not agree are
negative items in meaning but carry a positive attitude or tendency towards academic procrastination. Participants do
not agree with two items number 13 (X=2.54) and 15 (X=2.43) which are about showing academic procrastination
behavior for academic tasks that require much effort or which are important. Another item that participants disagree is
number 16 which is about having difficulty in self-motivating for academic tasks. On all other 11 items, participants are
indecisive.
The second sub-dimension of the academic procrastination scale is perceived quality of the academic task. There are 11
items in this dimension and statistical finding about them are given below in Table 3:
Table 3. Descriptive Statistics on Perceived Quality of the Academic Task Sub-Dimension of Academic Procrastination
Scale
1 2 3 4 5 X Result
17- I procrastinate my responsibilities like studying the lessons or F 89 96 70 48 29
2.49 D
preparing for an exam because of failure concerns. % 26.8 28.9 21.1 14.5 8.7
F 62 98 53 74 45
18- It takes a long time even to start studying. 2.83 Ind
% 18.7 29.5 16.0 22.3 13.6
19- I plan how much time I will spend on academic tasks in F 53 74 82 75 48
2.97 Ind
advance. % 16.0 22.3 24.7 22.6 14.5
F 80 91 74 49 38
20- I quickly start doing assignments that require much time. 2.62 Ind
% 24.1 27.4 22.3 14.8 11.4
F 84 97 53 63 35
21- I quickly start and finish academic tasks that are easy to do. 2.60 Ind
% 25.3 29.2 16.0 19.0 10.5
22- I do the academic tasks that require thinking over on time as I F 60 108 68 59 37
2.71 Ind
love them. % 18.1 32.5 20.5 17.8 11.1
F 89 113 56 45 29
23- I do the assignments that I can handle on time. 2.43 D
% 26.8 34.0 16.9 13.7 8.7
F 89 118 63 36 26
24- I show enough effort to hand my assignment on time. 2.37 D
% 26.8 35.5 19.0 10.8 7.8
F 113 116 49 27 27
25- I quickly do the assignments that I enjoy while doing. 2.21 D
% 34.0 34.9 14.8 8.1 8.1
F 113 116 45 25 33
26- I quickly start doing academic tasks if they are enjoyable to do. 2.24 D
% 34.0 34.9 13.6 7.5 9.9
27- I do the academic tasks that attract me on time. F 106 117 60 23 26 2.23 D
The results show that participants (N=332) disagree with 6 items and are indecisive about 5 items out of 11. The item
with lowest mean was number 25 that says “I quickly do the assignments that I enjoy while doing.” (X=2.21) and items
number 26 and 27 that are close in meaning to it are also among the ones with lowest means. Another item that
participants disagree is number 24 (X=2.37) that tells “I show enough effort to hand my assignment on time.” The other
items that participants do not agree are numbers 25, 26 and 27 all of which are about the feeling that the assignment
gives and close in meaning show tendency towards academic procrastination.
The third sub-dimension of the academic procrastination scale is negative perception towards the lecturer. There are 5
items in this dimension and statistical finding about them are given below in Table 4.
Table 4. Descriptive Statistics on Negative Perception towards the Lecturer Sub-Dimension of Academic
Procrastination Scale
1 2 3 4 5 X Result
F 72 98 79 54 29
28- I do the academic tasks on time even if they are compelling. 2.61 Ind
% 21.7 29.5 223.8 16.3 8.7
F 72 103 80 40 37
29- I do the academic tasks on time even if they are difficult. 2.60 Ind
% 21.7 31.0 24.1 12.0 11.1
30- I procrastinate academic tasks that are given by a lecturer who I F 77 81 54 76 44
2.79 Ind
think will not teach me something. % 23.2 24.4 16.3 22.9 13.3
31- I procrastinate academic tasks that are given by an oppressive F 60 86 61 74 51
2.91 Ind
lecturer. % 18.1 25.9 18.4 22.3 15.4
32- I procrastinate academic tasks that are given by lecturers who F 53 84 54 76 65
3.05 Ind
waste the time instead of teaching the students to the last minute. % 16.0 25.3 16.3 22.9 19.6
There are two items in which participants’ mean is just above three. The mean of item number 32 that tells “I
procrastinate academic tasks that are given by lecturers who waste the time instead of teaching the students to the last
minute.” is 3.05 and the mean of item number 34 which is close in meaning to number 32 and tells “I procrastinate the
assignments given by lecturers who do not give enough importance to their lectures to the last minute.” is 3.06. The
other items with high means are number 31 (X=2.91) and 33 (X=2.95) and all these four items are related to the
lecturers.

80
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

The fourth sub-dimension of the academic procrastination scale is academic perfectionism. There are 6 items in this
dimension and statistical finding about them are given below in Table 5.
Table 5. Descriptive Statistics on Academic Perfectionism & Reaction to Teacher Sub-Dimension of Academic
Procrastination Scale
1 2 3 4 5 X Result
33- I don’t do the assignments given by lecturers that I don’t like on F 58 70 85 68 51
2.95 Ind
time. % 17.5 21.0 25.6 20.5 15.4
34- I procrastinate the assignments given by lecturers who do not F 51 83 58 75 65
3.06 Ind
give enough importance to their lectures to the last minute. % 15.4 25.0 17.5 22.6 19.6
35- I am late for studying other exams as I study over and over for an F 55 74 85 69 49
2.95 Ind
exam. % 16.6 22.3 25.6 20.8 14.862
36- There have been risks of late returns as I do corrections on F 63 92 83 66 28
2.71 Ind
assignments again and again. % 19.0 27.7 25.0 19.9 8.4
37- I keep doing the assignments to the last day as I want to do them F 56 97 73 75 31
2.78 Ind
in the best way. % 16.9 29.1 22.0 22.6 9.3
F 52 96 76 71 37
38- Even thinking of doing the best procrastinates starting to study. 2.83 Ind
% 15.7 28.9 22.9 21.4 11.1
The results show that participants are indecisive with all the 6 items in this sub-dimension. The highest mean is 3.06 in
item number 34 that is about the lecturer attitude towards his/her own lesson. The other items’ mean scores are also
relatively high and close to three. Last four items in this category is about perfectionism and tries to present if search for
better results in procrastination.
II. Sub-Problem: What is the current level (low, moderate, high) of undergraduates in terms of their time management
skills?
Participants’ score means in time management questionnaire were calculated to present their level of time management
and findings related to it were given in Table 6.
Table 6. Time Management Level of Participants
Level N %
Low 21 6.3
Intermediate 294 88.6
High 17 5.1
Total 332 100
Participants are classified into three categories as low, intermediate and high depending on their total score in time
management questionnaire. As can be seen in the table, a big majority of the participants have intermediate (N=294),
while 21 have low and 17 have high level of time management skills.
III. Sub-Problem: Is there a statistically significant relation between undergraduates’ academic procrastination
behaviors and time management skills? Findings related to this problem is given below in Table 7.
Table 7. The Relation between Academic Procrastination and Time Management
Correlation Coefficient
p
(r)
Academic Procrastination
-.309 .000
Time Management
The result of simple linear correlation analysis carried out to see if there was a statistically significant correlation
between academic procrastination and time management shows that there is a significant (p=.000; p<.05) and moderate
level and negative sided (r=-.309) relation between the two variables. This result indicates that increase in time
management scores is likely to come with decrease in academic procrastination scale scores.
IV. Sub-Problem: Do the undergraduates’ time management skills predict their academic procrastination?
The relation between time management and academic procrastination is questioned here and findings are given
below in Table 8.
Table 8. Predictive Role of Time Management on Academic Procrastination
Sum of Squares Df Sum of Squares F p
Regression 20640.373 1 20640.373
Constant 194841.516 330 590.429 34.958 .000
Total 215481.889 331
R=.309; R2=.096; Adjusted R2=.093
Simple regression analysis were done to see if time management was a statistically significant predictive of academic
procrastination and results show that there is significant relation between the two (R=0.309; R2=0.096) and time

81
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

management is a significant predictor of academic procrastination (F(1-330)=34.958; p=.000; p<.05). Time management
predicts 9.6 per cent of academic procrastination.
V. Sub-Problem: Is there a common effect of time management and other variables (gender, faculty, housing,
accommodation) on academic procrastination?
Findings related to this sub-problem are given in Table 9.
Table 9. Analysis on the Common Effect of Variables on Academic Procrastination
Variables Sum of Squares Df Mean of Squares F p
Time Management*Gender 2636.623 2 1318.312 2.130 .120
Time Management*Housing 2095.824 4 523.956 .844 .498
Time Management*Faculty 5690.492 8 711.311 1.147 .331
Time Management* Accommodation 5473.855 4 1368.464 2.205 .068
Two-way Anova results show that there was not a statistically significant common effect of the given variables on the
academic procrastination (p> .05).
6. Results and Discussion
According to the results, undergraduates are seen to have moderate level of tendency for academic procrastination. Lack
of motivation and attraction are two major reasons for academic procrastination as the participants are not volunteered
to do the academic tasks even if they are enjoyable and attractive. Similarly, Klassen, Krawchuk and Rajani (2008) and
Klassen and Kuzucu (2009) state the existence of a relation between motivation and procrastination. Besides, Lee (2005)
explains that students who motivate themselves better show less tendency towards academic procrastination. Şirin
(2011) and Stewart, Stott and Nuttall (2015) also indicate that academic motivation is a predictor of the academic
procrastination behavior. Among the highest scores which indicate higher tendency towards academic procrastination
are items related to lecturers. Participants are tended to show more tendency on procrastination when they think the
lecturers do not give enough importance to their lectures or intend to teach their students. Similarly, they are not willing
to fulfill academic tasks given by lecturers who are oppressive or of whom they think they can’t learn anything. In the
light of these findings, lecturer attitudes and behaviors can be said to effect the academic procrastination importantly.
Participants are generally in moderate level in terms of their time management skills and their mean in the time
management questionnaire is 80.80 (standard deviation: 11.41). Similarly, Zekioğlu, Erdoğan and Türkmen (2015) find
time management score mean as 81.10 (standard deviation: 14.69) of 74 sports students and Yavaş, Öztürk, Açıkel and
Özer (2012) find 79.06 (standard deviation: 14.07) of 420 medical students. There is a statistically significant and
moderate level negative relation between academic procrastination and time management. As a result, students with a
higher time management skill might be expected to show less tendency towards academic procrastination. However,
Glick and Orsillo (2015) state that although undergraduates with a better time management skill fulfill more academic
tasks, there is not a statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of academic procrastination. In
their study on undergraduates, similarly, Miqdadi, ALMomani, Masharqa and Elmousel, (2014) explain that the
minority of students with a better time management are not successful and the majority of them who show academic
procrastination are more successful students although they start doing the tasks close to due. We can infer that even
though effective time management decreases academic procrastination, it does not guarantee the success; students with
academic procrastination behavior can be successful also. Another finding indicates that the time management predicts
academic procrastination in a statistically significant way as much as nearly ten per cent. Participants are generally in
moderate level in terms of their time management skills. There is not a common effect of time management together
with gender, housing, faculty and accommodation on academic procrastination.
References
Ajayi, A. I., & Osiki, P. M. (2008). Procrastination among the undergraduates in a Nigerian university: Implications for
time management. International Business Management, 2(4), 126-131.
AKBAY, S. E., & GİZİR, C. A. (2010). Cinsiyete göre üniversite öğrencilerinde akademik erteleme davranışı:
akademik güdülenme, akademik özyeterlik ve akademik yükleme stillerinin rolü. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim
Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 60-78.
Alay, S., & Koçak, S. (2002). Validity and reliability of time management questionnaire. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim
Fakültesi Dergisi, 22, 9-13.
Andreassen, C. S. (2015). Online social network site addiction: a comprehensive review. Technology and Addiction,
2(2), 175-184. [Link]
Bashir, S., Bashir, Z., & Nazir, M. (2015). Time management and its application in academic life: a study of omani
students at dhofar university, sultanate of oman. Linguistics, 4(2), 154-159.

82
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

Can, A. (2014). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi (2. ed.). Ankara: Pegem.
Claessens, B. J., Eerde, W. V., Rutte, C. G., & Roe, R. A. (2007). A review of the timemanagement literature.
Personnel Review, 36(2), 255-276. [Link]
Deniz, M. E., & Akdoğan, A. (2014). Farklı depresyon anksiyete stres düzeylerine sahip üniversite öğrencilerinin
akademik erteleme davranışlarının incelenmesi. Psikolojik Danışmanlık ve Eğitim Dergisi, 1(1), 28-44.
Dí
az-Morales, J. F., & Ferrari, J. R. (2015). More Time to Procrastinators: The Role of Time Perspective. In M.
Stolarski, W. v. Beek, & N. Fieulaine (Eds.), Time perspective theory; review, research and application (pp.
305-322). London: Springer International Publishing.
Dietz, F., Hofer, M., & Fries, S. (2007). Individual values, learning routines and academic procrastination. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(4), 893-906. Retrieved from [Link]
Eerde, W. V. (2015). Time management and procrastination. In The Psychology of Planning in Organizations:
Research and Applications (pp. 312-333). New York: Routledge.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (and sex and drugs and rock ’n’ roll) (3. ed.). London: SAGE.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in eduation. San Francisco: McGrow
Hill.
Glick, D. M., & Orsillo, S. M. (2015). An investigation of the efficacy of acceptance-based behavioral therapy for
academic procrastination. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 144(2), 400-409.
doi:[Link]
Grunschel, C., & Schopenhauer, L. (2015). Why are students (not) motivated to change academic procrastination?: an
investigation based on the transtheoretical model of change. Journal of College Student Development, 187-200.
[Link]
Harriott, J. S., & Ferrari, J. R. (1996). Prevalence of procrastination among samples of adults. Psychological Reports,
78(2), 611-616. [Link]
Janssen, J. (2015). Academic procrastination: prevalence among high school and undergraduate student and relationship
to academic achievement (doktora tezi). Georgia State University.
Johnson, J. L., & Bloom, A. M. (1995). An analysis of the contribution of the five factors of personality to variance in
academic procrastination. Personal Individual Differences, 18(1), 127-133.
[Link]
Kim, K. R., & Seo, E. H. (2015). The relationship between procrastination and academic performance: A meta-analysis.
Personality and Individual Differences, 82, 26-33. doi:[Link]
Kirillov, A. V., Tanatova, D. K., Vinichenko, M. V., & Makushkin, S. A. (2015). Theory and practice of
time-management in education. Asian Social Science, 11(19), 193-204.
Klassen, R. M., & Kuzucu, E. (2009). Academic procrastination and motivation of adolescents in Turkey. Educational
Psychology, 29(1), 69-81. doi:[Link]
Klassen, R. M., Krawchuk, L. L., & Rajani, S. (2008). Academic procrastination of undergraduates: Low self-efficacy
to self-regulate predicts higher levels of procrastination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 915-931.
[Link]
Klingsieck, K. (2013). Procrastination when good things don’t come to those who wait. European Psychologist, 18(1),
24-34. [Link]
Lee, E. (2005). The relationship of motivation and flow experience to academic procrastination in university students.
The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 166(1), 5-15. doi:[Link]
Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Saariaho, E., Inkinen, M., Anne-Haarala-Muhonen, & Hailikari, T. (2015). Academic
procrastinators, strategic delayers and something betwixt and between: An interview study. Frontline Learning
Research. [Link]
Miqdadi, F. Z., ALMomani, A. F., Masharqa), M. T., & Elmousel, N. M. (2014). 2014. ASEE 2014 Zone I Conference
(pp. 1-5). Bridgpeort, CT: University of Bridgeport.
Ocak, G., & Bulut, R. (2015). Akademik erteleme ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. International Journal of
Educational Sciences and Research, 1(1), 109-120.

83
Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 5; May 2016

Oettingen, G., Kappes, H. B., Guttenberg, K. B., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2015). Self-regulation of time management:
Mental contrasting with implementation intentions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 218-229.
[Link]
Ozer, B. U., Demir, A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2009). Exploring academic procrastination among turkish students: possible
gender differences in prevalenceand reasons. THE JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 149(2), 241-257.
[Link]
Pang, W. G., & Han, G. N. (2009). Study on the Popularity and Causes of Academic Procrastination of Chinese
Undergraduates. Tsinghua Journal of Education, 6, 1-13.
Rabin, L. A., Fogel, J., & Nutter-Upham, K. E. (2011). Academic procrastination in college students: The role of
self-reported executive function. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 344-357.
Retrieved from [Link]
Schouwenburg, H. C., & Groenewoud, J. T. (2001). Study motivation under social temptation: Effects of trait
procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(2), 229-240. Retrieved from
[Link]
Solomon, L. J., & Rothblum, E. D. (1984). Academic procrastination: frequency and cognitive -behavioral correlates.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31(4), 503-509.
Steel, P. (2007). The nature of procrastination: a meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory
failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 65-94. [Link]
Stewart, M., Stott, T., & Nuttall, A. (2015). Study goals and procrastination tendencies at different stages of the
undergraduate degree. Studies in Higher Education, 1-17. doi:[Link]
Swart, A. J., Lombard, K., & Jager, H. d. (2010). Exploring the relationship between time management skills and the
academic achievement of African engineering students – a case study. European Journal of Engineering Education,
35(1), 79-89. Retrieved from [Link]
Şirin, E. F. (2011). Academic procrastination among undergraduates attending school of physical education and sports:
Role of general procrastination, academic motivation and academic self-efficacy. Educational Research and
Reviews, 6(5), 447-455.
Van Eerde, W. (2003). Procrastination at work and time management training. The Journal of Psychology, 137(5),
421-434. Retrieved from [Link]
Walliman, N. (2006). Social research methods. London: SAGE Publications.
doi:[Link]
Yavaş, Ü., Öztürk, G., Açıkel, C. H., & Özer, M. (2012). Tıp fakültesi öğrencilerinin zaman yönetimi becerilerinin
değerlendirilmesi. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin, 11(1), 5-10.
Yazıcıoğlu, Y., & Erdoğan, S. (2011). SPSS Uygulamalı Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (3. ed.). Ankara: Detay
Yayıncılık.
You, J. W. (2015). Examining the effect of academic procrastination on achievement using lms data in e-learning.
Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 64-74.
Zekioğlu, A., Erdoğan, N., & Türkmen, M. (2015). Sporcu öğrencilerin zaman yönetimi becerileri ve akademik
başarilari arasindaki ilişki. ULUSLARARASI HAKEMLİ PSİKİYATRİ VE PSİKOLOJİ ARAŞTIRMALARI
DERGİSİ(4), 24-37.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

84