Students' approaches to study, conceptions of learning and judgements about the value of networked technologies

Active Learning in Higher Education

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 55-65

  Buckley, Charles Alan ^a   Pitt, Edd ^b   Norton, Bill ^b   Owens, Tessa ^b  

^a BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b LIVERPOOL HOPE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Approaches to study; Blended learning; Networked technologies; Undergraduate students

Indexed keywords

EID: 77749301362     PISSN: 14697874     EISSN: 17412625     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1469787409355875     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Biggs, J.B. (1979) Individual Differences in Study Processes and the Quality of Learning Outcomes, Higher Education 8: 381-94.
2. Bradley, C. & Boyle, T. (2004) 'The Design, Development and Use of Multimedia Learning Objects', Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Special Edition on Learning Objects 13 (4): 371-89.
3. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology, Qualitative Research in Psychology 3: 77-101.
4. Burr, V. (1995) An Introduction to Social Constructionism. London: Routledge.
5. Byrne, M., Flood, B. &Willis, P. (2002) Approaches to Learning of European Business Students, Journal of Further and Higher Education 26 (1): 19-28.
6. Dickinson, J. (2005) Enabling E-Learning in Higher Education. Newcastle: Newcastle Business School.
7. Donnelly, R. (2006) Blended Problem-Based Learning For Teacher Education: Lessons Learnt, Learning, Media and Technology 31(2): 93-116.
8. Ellis, R.A. & Calvo, R.A. (2004) Learning Through Discussions in Blended Contexts, Educational Media International 40(1): 263-74.
9. Entwistle, N. & Ramsden, P. (1983) Understanding Student Learning. London: Croom Helm.
10. Entwistle, N., Tait, H. & McCune, V. (2000) Patterns of Response to an Approaches to Study Inventory Across Contrasting Groups and Contexts, European Journal of the Psychology of Education 15: 33-48.
11. Ford, N. (1995) Levels and Types of Mediation in Instructional Systems: An Individual Differences Approach, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43: 241-59.
12. Fuller, R. & Chambers, D. (1999) Approaches to Learning of TAFE and University Students, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Vocational Educational Research 10: 127-44.
13. Gerbic, P. & Stacey, E. (2005) A Purposive Approach to Content Analysis: Designing Analytical Frameworks, Internet and Higher Education 8: 45-59.
14. Goodyear, P., Asensio, M., Jones, C., Hodgson, V. & Steeples, C. (2003) Relationships Between Conceptions of Learning, Approaches to Study and Students' Judgements About the Value of their Experiences of Networked Learning, Association for Learning Technology Journal 11(1): 17-27.
15. Goodyear, P., Jones, C., Asenso, M., Hodgson, V. & Steeples, C. (2005) Networked Learning in Higher Education: Students' Expectations and Experiences, Higher Education 50: 473-508.
16. Haggis, T. (2003) Constructing Images of Ourselves? A Critical Investigation into Approaches to Learning Research in Higher Education, British Educational Research Journal 29(1): 89-104.
17. Heinze, A. & Proctor, C. (2004) 'Communication - A Challenge and an Enabler for Facilitating Blended Learning Community', Internal Report University of Salford.
18. Holmes, B. & Gardner, J. (2006) E Learning. Concepts and Practice. London: SAGE.
19. Honey, P. & Mumford, A. (1986) The Manual of Learning Styles. Maidenhead: Peter Honey Associates.
20. Jelfs, A. & Colbourn, C. (2002) Do Students' Approaches to Learning Affect their Perceptions of Using Computing and Information Technology?, Learning, Media and Technology 27(1): 41-53.
21. Johnson, G. (2006). A Theoretical Framework for Organizing the Effect of the Internet on Cognitive Development, in E. Pearson and P. Bohman (eds) Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2006, pp. 3041-8. Norfolk, VA: AACE.
22. Johnson, G.M. (2007) Learning Style Under Two Web-Based Study Conditions, Educational Psychology 27(5): 617-34.
23. Jones, C., Asensio, M., Goodyear, G., Hodgson, V. & Steeples, C. (2001) 'Final Report on the Field Studies', Networked Learning in Higher Education Project (JISC/CALT). Lancaster: CSALT (the Centre For Studies in Advanced Learning Technologies Lancaster University).
24. Kember, D., Leung, D.Y.P. & McNaught, C. (2008) A Workshop Activity to Demonstrate that Approaches to Learning Are Influenced by the Teaching and Learning Environment, Active Learning in Higher Education (1): 43-56.
25. Kirkwood, A. (2006) Getting Networked Learning in Context: Are On-Line Students' Technical and Information Literacy Skills Adequate and Appropriate?, Learning, Media and Technology 31(2): 117-31.
26. Kolb, D.A. (1985). Kolb Learning Style Inventory Version 3.1. Boston, MA: Hay Resources Direct.
27. Lizzio, A., Wilson, K. & Simmons, R. (2002) University Students' Perception of the Learning Environment and Academic Outcomes: Implications for Theory and Practice, Studies in Higher Education 27(1): 27-52.
28. Loomis, K. (2000). Learning Style and Asynchronous Learning: Comparing the LASSI Model to Classroom Performance, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4: http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v4n1/v4n1_loomis.asp [accessed 5 December 2007].
29. Marshall, D. & Case, J. (2005) Approaches to Learning Research in Higher Education: A Response to Haggis, British Educational Research Journal 31(2): 257-67.
30. Marton, F. & Saljo, R. (1976) On Qualitative Differences in Learning: I - Outcome and Process, British Journal of Educational Psychology 46: 4-11.
31. Molesworth, M. (2004) Collaboration, Reflection and Selective Neglect: Campus-Based Marketing Students' Experiences of Using A Virtual Learning Environment, Innovations in Education and Teaching International 41(1): 79-92.
32. Oliver, M. & Trigwell, K. (2005) Can Blended Learning Be Redeemed?, E-Learning 2(1): 17-26.
33. Prosser, M. & Trigwell, K. (1999) Understanding Learning and Teaching. Buckingham: Open University Press.
34. Rae, S. (2004) 'Comparison of CAU Access Rates to Various ICT Facilities-Courses Survey 2003 Data', Internal Report. Milton Keynes: Institute of Educational Technology, the Open University.
35. Ramsden, P. (1979) Student Learning and Perceptions of the Academic Environment, Higher Education 8: 411-27.
36. Ramsden, P. (1992) Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: Routledge.
37. Rothery, A. (2004). EUNIS European E-Learning Workshop Report: http://www.2.worc.ac.uk/euniselearning/index.php?option=displaypage&itemid=63&op=page&submenu= [accessed 12 October 2005].
38. Schmeck, R. (1988) Learning Strategies and Learning Styles. London: Plenum Press.
39. Selwyn, N. (2006) The Use of Computer Technology in University Teaching and Learning: A Critical Perspective, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 23(2): 83-94.
40. Selwyn, N. (2008) An Investigation of Differences in Undergraduates' Academic Use of the Internet, Active Learning in Higher Education 9(1): 11-22.
41. Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G. & Francis, R. (2006) The Undergraduate Experience of Blended E-Learning: A Review of UK Literature and Practice. York: Higher Education Academy.
42. Subrahmanyam, K., Kraut, R., Greenfield, P. & Gross, E. (2001) New Forms of Electronic Media: The Impact of Interactive Games and the Internet on Cognition, Socialization, and Behaviour, in D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (eds) Handbook of Children and the Media, pp. 73-99. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
43. Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C., eds (1998) Pragmatism and the Choice of Research Strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
44. Teaching With Independent Learning Technology Programme (2001) Overview of the TILT Project: http://www.elec.gla.ac.uk/TILT/TILT.html [accessed 29 May 2001].
45. Thorne, K. (2003) Blended Learning: How to Integrate Online and Traditional Learning. London: Kogan Page.
46. White, S. (2007) Critical Success Factors for E-learning and Institutional Change - Some Organisational Perspectives on Campus-Wide Learning, British Journal of Educational Technology 38(5): 840-50.