Higher Education

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 169–194 | Cite as

Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments

  • Noel Entwistle
  • Hilary Tait
Article

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that the academic environments provided by departments in higher education have direct effects on students' approaches to studying. But other studies have indicated that these effects are mediated by the students' own perceptions of those environments. Here two studies are reported which explore the relationships between approaches to learning, or study orientations, and perceptions of the academic environment. Those perceptions are measured in two distinct ways, one which minimises the effects of differential perceptions, and one which highlights them. Factor analyses of the responses of three groups of students taking engineering and psychology are used to clarify the nature of the relationships between study orientations and perceptions of the academic environment. It is found, as in earlier studies, that there are relationships which associate deep approaches with perceptions of relevance, and surface approaches with a heavy workload. But here it is also shown that students with contrasting study orientations are likely to define effective teaching in ways which reflect those orientations. Implications both for the design of feedback questionnaires and for the improvement of teaching and learning in higher education are discussed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  2. Cohen, P. A. (1981). ‘Student ratings of instruction and student achievement: A meta-analysis on multisection validity studies’. Review of Educational Research, 51, 281–309.Google Scholar
  3. Eizenberg, N. (1988). ‘Approaches to learning anatomy: developing a programme for preclinical medical students’. In P. Ramsden (Ed.), Improving Learning: New Perspectives. London: Kogan Page (pp. 178–198).Google Scholar
  4. Entwistle, N. J. (1987). ‘A model of the teaching-learning process’. In J. T. E. Richardson, M. W. Eysenck, & D. Warren Piper (Eds.). Student Learning: Research in Education and Cognitive Psychology. London: S.R.H.E./Open University Press (pp. 13–28).Google Scholar
  5. Entwistle, N. J. (1989). ‘Approaches to studying and course perceptions: The case of the disappearing relationship’. Studies in Higher Education, 14, 156–157.Google Scholar
  6. Entwistle, N. J. & Entwistle, D. M. (1970). ‘The relationships between personality, study methods and academic performance’. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 40, 132–141.Google Scholar
  7. Entwistle, N. J. & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding Student Learning. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  8. Entwistle, N. J. & Tait, H. (1989). ‘Factors influencing academic performance in electrical engineering: Expectations, approaches and perceptions’. Paper presented at the Third Conference of the European Association for Research in Learning and Instruction, Madrid, September, 1989.Google Scholar
  9. Janssen, P. J. (1989). ‘Task, development and process in student learning: Towards an integrated theory of studying’. European Journal of the Psychology of Education (in press).Google Scholar
  10. Hounsell, D. J. (1984). ‘Understanding teaching and teaching for understanding’. In F. Marton, D. J. Hounsell & N. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The Experience of Learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press (pp. 189–210).Google Scholar
  11. Marsh, H. W. (1987). ‘Students’ evaluations of university teaching' research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research’. International Journal of Educational Research, 11 (3) (whole issue).Google Scholar
  12. Marton, F. (1976). ‘What does it take to learn? Some implications of an alternative view of learning’. In N. J. Entwistle (Ed.), Strategies for Research and Development in Higher Education. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  13. Marton, F. & Saljo, R. (1984). ‘Approaches to learning’. In F. Marton, D. J. Hounsell & N. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The Experience of Learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press (pp. 36–55).Google Scholar
  14. Meyer, J. H. F. (1988). ‘Student perceptions of learning context and approaches to studying’. South African Journal of Higher Education, 20, 532–534.Google Scholar
  15. Meyer, J. H. F., and Parsons, P. (1989). ‘Approaches to studying and course perceptions using the Lancaster Inventory’. Studies in Higher Education, 14, 137–155.Google Scholar
  16. Murray (1986). ‘Classroom teaching behaviors and student instructional ratings: New evidence on an old problem’. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April, 1986.Google Scholar
  17. Newble, D. & Clarke, R. (1987). ‘Approaches to learning in a traditional and an innovative medical school’. In J. T. E. Richardson, M. W. Eysenck, & D. Warren Piper (Eds.). Student Learning: Research in Education and Cognitive Psychology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press (pp. 39–48).Google Scholar
  18. Nie, N. J., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., & Bent, D. H. (1975). Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  19. Pask, G. (1988). ‘Learning strategies, teaching strategies and conceptual or learning style’. In R. R. Schmeck (Ed.) Learning Styles and Strategies. New York: Plenum Press (pp. 83–100).Google Scholar
  20. Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A Scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  21. Ramsden, P. (1981). A Study of the Relationship between Student Learning and Its Academic Context. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Lancaster.Google Scholar
  22. Ramsden, P. & Marton, F. (1988). ‘What does it take to improve learning?’ In P. Ramsden (Ed.) Improving Learning: New Perspectives. London: Kogan Page (pp. 268–278).Google Scholar
  23. Thomas, P. (1986). The Structures and Stability of Learning Approaches. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Queensland, Australia.Google Scholar
  24. Van Rossum, E. J. & Taylor, I. P. (1987). The relationship between conceptions of learning and good teaching: A scheme of cognitive development’. Paper presented at the AERA Annual Meeting in Washington, April, 1987.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Noel Entwistle
    • 1
  • Hilary Tait
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghScotland

Personalised recommendations