Quality of Learning on an MBA Programme: The impact of approaches to learning on academic performance

Educational Psychology

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 123-139

  Duff, Angus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST OF SCOTLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0344629436     PISSN: 01443410     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01443410303230     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Arbuckle, J.L. (1999). Amos users' guide version 4.0. Chicago: SPSS Corporation.
2. Biggs, J.B. (1970). Personality correlates of certain dimensions of study behaviour. Australian Journal of Psychology, 22, 287-297.
3. Biggs, J.B. (1978). Individual and group differences in study processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 48, 266-279.
4. Biggs, J.B. (1979). Individual differences in study processes. Higher Education, 8, 381-394.
5. Biggs, J.B. (1987a). Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn: Australian Council for Educational Research.
6. Biggs, J.B. (1987b). Study process questionnaire manual. Hawthorn: Australian Council for Educational Research.
7. Biggs, J.B. (1993). What do inventories of student learning really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 3-9.
8. Biggs, J.B. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Educaton, 32, 347-364.
9. Biggs, J.B., & Collis, K.F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning. New York and Sydney: Academic Press.
10. Bligh, D., Caves, R., & Settle, G. (1980). 'A' level scores and degree classification as functions of university type and subject. In Billing, D. (Ed.), Indicators of performance (pp. 17-30). Guildford: Society for Research into Higher Education.
11. Bowden, J.A. (1986). Student learning: Research into practice. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne.
12. Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen & J.S. Long (Eds.) Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
13. Caplan, P.J., Crawford, M., Hyde, J.S., & Richardson, J.T.E. (1997). Gender differences in human cognition. New York: Oxford University Press.
14. Clarke, R.M. (1986). Students' approaches to studying in an innovative medical school: A cross sectional study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 56, 309-321.
15. Crawford, K., Gordon, S., Nicholas, J., & Prosser, M. (1998). Qualitatively different experiences of learning mathematics at university, Learning and Instruction, 8, 455-468.
16. Duff, A. (1997). A note on the reliability and validity of a 30-item version of Entwistle & Tait's Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 529-539.
17. Duff, A. (1999). Access policy and approaches to learning. Accounting Education, 8, 99-110.
18. Entwistle, N.J. (1984). Contrasting perspectives on learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 1-18). Edinburgh: Scottish Press.
19. Entwistle, N.J., Hanley, M., & Hounsell, D. (1979). Identifying distinctive approaches to studying. Higher Education, 8, 365-380.
20. Entwistle, N.J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Groom Helm.
21. Entwistle, N.J., & Tait, H. (1995). The Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory. Edinburgh: Centre form Research on Learning and Instruction, University of Edinburgh.
22. Entwistle, N.J., Tait, H., & McCune, V. (2000). Patterns of response to an approaches to studying inventory across contrasting groups and contexts. European Journal of the Psychology of Education, 15, 33-48.
23. Entwistle, N.J., & Waterston, S. (1988). Approaches to studying and levels of processing in university students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 258-265.
24. Fox, S. (1998). From management education and development to the study of management learning. In J. Burgoyne & M. Reynolds (Eds.), Management learning: Integrating perspectives in theory and practice (pp. 21-37). London: Sage Publications.
25. Fransson, A. (1977). 'On qualitative differences in learning, IV - Effects of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic test anxiety on process and outcome', British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47, 244-257.
26. Harper, G., & Kember, D. (1989). Interpretation of factor analyses from the Approaches to Studying Inventory. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 66-74.
27. Hayes, K., & Richardson, J.T.E. (1995). Gender, subject and context as determinants of approaches to studying in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 20, 215-221.
28. Hoyle, R.H., & Panter, A.T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R.H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling (pp. 158-176). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
29. Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R.H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling (pp. 76-99). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
30. Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
31. Janssen, P.J. (1996). Studaxology: the expertise students need to be effective in higher education. Higher Education, 31, 117-141.
32. Knight, P. (1995). Assessment for learning in higher education. London: Kogan Page.
33. MacCallum, R.C., Browne, M.W., & Sugawara, H.M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modelling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.
34. MacCallum, R.C., & Austin, J.T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modelling in psychological research. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 201-226.
35. Marsh, H.W., Balla, J.R., & Hau, K.T. (1996). An evaluation of fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In G.A. Marcoulides & R.E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling techniques (pp. 59-98). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36. Marsh, H.W., Balla, J.R., & Hau, K.T. (1997). Is more ever too much: the number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
37. Martenson, D.F. (1986). Students' approaches to studying in four medical schools. Medical Education, 20, 532-534.
38. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning - outcomes and processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.
39. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1984). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 36-55). Edinburgh: Scottish Press.
40. McDonald, R.P., & Marsh, H.W. (1990). Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness-of-fit. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 247-255.
41. Meyer, J.H.F., Dunne, T.T., & Richardson, J.T.E. (1994). A gender comparison of contextualized study behaviour in higher education. Higher Education, 27, 469-485.
42. Meyer, J.H.F., & Muller, M.W. (1990). Evaluating the quality of student learning - an unfolding analysis of the association between perceptions of the learning context and approaches to studying at an individual level. Studies in Higher Education, 15, 131-154.
43. Meyer, J.H.F., & Parsons, P. (1989). Approaches to studying and course perceptions using the Lancaster Inventory: a comparative study. Studies in Higher Education, 14, 137-153.
44. Miller, C.D., Finley, J., & McKinley, D.L. (1990). Learning approaches and motives: Male and female differences and implications for learning assistance programs. Journal of College Student Development, 31, 147-154.
45. Newstead, S.E. (1992). A study of two "quick and easy" methods of assessing individual differences in student learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 299-312.
46. Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
47. Pagano, R.R. (1981). Understanding statistics in the behavioral sciences. New York: West Publishing Company.
48. Popper, K.R. (1962). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. New York: Harper & Row.
49. Ramsden, P. (1979). Student learning and perceptions of the academic environment. Higher Education, 8, 411-427.
50. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.
51. Ramsden, P., & Entwistle, N.J. (1981). Effects of academic departments on students' approaches to studying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 368-383.
52. Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
53. Richardson, J.T.E. (1990). Reliability and replicability of the approaches to studying questionnaire. Studies In Higher Education, 15, 155-168.
54. Richardson, J.T.E. (1993). Gender differences in responses to the Approaches to Studying Inventory. Studies in Higher Education, 18, 13-13.
55. Richardson, J.T.E. (1994). Mature students in higher education: Academic performance and intellectual ability. Higher Education, 28, 373-386.
56. Richardson, J.T.E. (1995). Mature students in higher education: II. An investigation of approaches to studying and academic performance, Studies in Higher Education, 20, 309-325.
57. Richardson, J.T.E., Morgan, A., & Woodley, A. (1999). Approaches to studying in distance education. Higher Education, 37, 23-55.
58. Sadler-Smith, E. (1996). Approaches to studying: Age, gender and academic performance. Educational Studies, 22, 367-379.
59. Sadler-Smith, E., & Tsang, F. (1998). A comparative study of approaches to studying in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 81-93.
60. Severiens, S.E., & ten Dam, G.T.E. (1994). Gender differences in learning styles: A narrative review and quantitative meta-analysis. Higher Education, 27, 487-501.
61. Speth, C., & Brown, R. (1988). Study approaches, processes and strategies: Are three perspectives better than one? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 247-257.
62. Tait, H., & Entwistle, N.J. (1996). Identifying students at risk through ineffective study strategies. Higher Education, 31, 97-116.
63. Thomas, P., & Bain, J. (1984). Contextual differences of learning approaches: The effects of assessments. Human Learning, 3, 227-240.
64. Thompson, B., & Daniel, L.G. (1996). Factor analytic evidence for the construct validity of scores: A historical overview and some guidelines. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 197-208.
65. Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1991). Relating approaches to study and quality of learning outcomes at the course level. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 265-271.
66. Tucker, L.R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1-10.
67. Vermunt, J.D.H.M., & van Rijswijk, F.A.W.M. (1988). Analysis and development of students' skill in self-regulated learning. Higher Education, 17, 647-682.
68. Watkins, D. (1982). Identifying the study process dimensions of Australian university students. Australian Journal of Education, 26, 76-85.
69. Watkins, D. (1983). Assessing tertiary study processes. Human Learning, 2, 29-37.
70. Watkins, D., & Hattie, J. (1985). A longitudinal study of the approaches to learning of Australian tertiary students. Human Learning, 4, 127-141.
71. Waugh, R.F., & Addison, P.A. (1998). A Rasch measurement model analysis of the Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 95-112.
72. Wilson, K.L., Smart, R.M., & Watson, R.J. (1996). Gender differences in approaches to learning in first year psychology students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 59-71.
73. Weinstein, C.E., Underwood, V.L., Wicker, F.W., & Cubberley, W.E. (1979). Cognitive learning strategies: Verbal and imaginal elaboration. In H.F. O'Neill, Jr. & C.E. Speilberger (Eds.), Cognitive and affective learning strategies (pp. 45-75). New York: Academic Press.