Students’ adoption of course-specific approaches to learning in two parallel courses

European Journal of Psychology of Education

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 209-223

  Öhrstedt, Maria ^a   Lindfors, Petra ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Approaches to learning; Higher education; Student variation; Swedish psychology students

Indexed keywords

EID: 84961135561     PISSN: 02562928     EISSN: 18785174     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10212-015-0256-7     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Andreou, E., Vlachos, F., & Andreou, G. (2006). Approaches to studying among Greek university students: the impact of gender, age, academic discipline and handedness. Educational Research, 48(3), 301–311. doi:10.1080/00131880600992363.
2. Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 243–260. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.06.001.
3. Biggs, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
4. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.
5. Diseth, Å. (2001). Validation of a Norwegian version of the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST): application of structural equation modelling. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 45(4), 381–394. doi:10.1080/00313830120096789.
6. Eley, M. G. (1992). Differential adoption of study approaches within individual students. Higher Education, 23(3), 231–254.
7. Entwistle, N., & McCune, V. (2004). The conceptual bases of study strategy inventories. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 325–345. doi:10.1007/s10648-004-0003-0.
8. Entwistle, N., & McCune, V. (2013). The disposition to understand for oneself at university: integrating learning processes with motivation and metacognition. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 267–279. doi:10.1111/bjep.12010.
9. Entwistle, N. J., McCune, V., & Tait, H. (2013). Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST). Report of the development and use of the inventories. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260291730_Approaches_and_Study_Skills_Inventory_for_Students_%28ASSIST%29_%28incorporating_the_Revised_Approaches_to_Studying_Inventory_-_RASI%29?ev=prf_pub. Accessed 16 June 2014.
10. Entwistle, N. J., & Peterson, E. R. (2004). Conceptions of learning and knowledge in higher education: relationships with study behaviour and influences of learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(6), 407–428. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.009.
11. Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.
12. 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 Psychology of Education, 15, 33–48.
13. Gijbels, D., Segers, M., & Struyf, E. (2008). Constructivist learning environments and the (im)possibility to change students’ perceptions of assessment demands and approaches to learning. Instructional Science, 36(5–6), 431–443. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9064-7.
14. Gijbels, D., Van de Watering, G., Dochy, F., & Van den Bossche, P. (2005). The relationship between students’ approaches to learning and the assessment of learning outcomes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20(4), 327–341.
15. Jones, C. (2002). Biggs’s 3P model of learning: the role of personal characteristics and environmental influences on approaches to learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation; Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
16. Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Parpala, A., & Postareff, L. (2014). Challenges in analysing change in students’ approaches to learning. In D. Gijbels, V. Donche, J. T. E. Richardson, & J. Vermunt (Eds.), Learning patterns in higher education: dimensions and research perspectives (pp. 232–248). Abingdon: Routledge.
17. Lowyck, J., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2004). Instructional conceptions: analysis from an instructional design perspective. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(6), 429–444. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.010.
18. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences in learning. I. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4–11.
19. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976b). On qualitative differences in learning. II. Outcome as a function of the learner’s conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115–127.
20. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1997). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. J. Hounsell, & N. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (2nd ed., pp. 39–58). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic.
21. Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2008). The extent of variability in learning strategies and students’ perceptions of the learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 18(2), 121–134. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.009.
22. Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E., Litmanen, T., & Hirsto, L. (2010). Students’ approaches to learning and their experiences of the teaching-learning environment in different disciplines. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 269–282. doi:10.1348/000709909X476946.
23. Richardson, J. T. E. (2004). Methodological issues in questionnaire-based research on student learning in higher education. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 347–358. doi:10.1007/s10648-004-0004-z.
24. Scouller, K. M. (1998). The influence of assessment method on students’ learning approaches: multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education, 35, 453–472.
25. Struyven, K., Dochy, F., Janssens, S., & Gielen, S. (2006). On the dynamics of students’ approaches to learning: the effects of the teaching/learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 16(4), 279–294. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.07.001.
26. Tait, H., Entwistle, N. J., & McCune, V. (1998). ASSIST: a reconceptualisation of the approaches to studying inventory. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving students as learners. Oxford: The Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford Brookes University.
27. Vanthournout, G., Donche, V., Gijbels, D., & Van Petegem, P. (2014). (Dis)similarities in research on learning approaches and learning patterns. In D. Gijbels, V. Donche, J. T. E. Richardson, & J. Vermunt (Eds.), Learning patterns in higher education: dimensions and research perspectives (pp. 11–32). Abingdon: Routledge.
28. Vermetten, Y. J., Lodewijks, H. G., & Vermunt, J. D. (1999). Consistency and variability of learning strategies in different university courses. Higher Education, 37(1), 1–21.
29. Wilson, K., & Fowler, J. (2005). Assessing the impact of learning environments on students’ approaches to learning: comparing conventional and action learning designs. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(1), 87–101. doi:10.1080/0260293042000251770.