Abstract
In distinguishing deep and surface approaches, an important determinant is the intentions to understand and memorise respectively. A student adopting a surface approach does not seek understanding and, therefore, relies upon memorisation. Understanding and memorising are, then, seen as almost mutually exclusive as far as intent is concerned, although those seeking understanding may make some strategic use of memorisation for particular tasks. This paper reviews emerging evidence of an approach which combines memorising and understanding. The research has been conducted in the Asian region, and so provides part of the explanation for the “paradox” of the Asian student. There has been widespread anecdotal evidence of “rote-learning” and yet Asian students are often high achievers. Several plausible explanations for the occurrence of the approach are advanced. These include limited ability in the language of study leading to a narrow systematic pattern of study, cultural traditions respecting order and diligent study, and the need for children to learn the language characters.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational psychology. A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Ballard, B. and Clanchy, J. (1984). Study abroad: A manual for Asian students. Kuala Lumpur: Longmans.
Biggs, J.B. (1978). ‘Individual and group differences in study processes’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 48, 266–279.
Biggs, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Biggs, J. (1993). ‘What do inventories of students' learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 63, 3–19.
Biggs, J.B. (1994). ‘What are effective schools? Lessons from East and West’, Australian Educational Researcher 21, 19–39.
Carrell, P. L., Devine, J.,& Eskey, D. (Eds.) (1988). Interactive approaches to second language reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dunbar, R. (1988). ‘Culture-based learning problems of asian students: some implications for Australian distance educators’, ASPESA Papers 5, 10–21.
Education Department, Hong Kong. (1989). Report of the working group set up to review language improvement measures. Hong Kong: Education Department.
Entwistle, N. (1987). ‘A model of the teaching-learning process’, in Richardson, J.T.E., Eysenk, M.W. and Warren Piper, D. (eds.), Student learning: Research in education and cognitive psychology. Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open University Press, pp. 13–28.
Entwistle, N.J. & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.
Ford, N. (1981). ‘Recent approaches to the study and teaching of effective learning in higher education’, Review of Educational Research 51, 345–377.
Gibbs, G. (1981). Teaching students to learn: a student-centred approach. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Goodman, K. S. (1970). ‘Behind the eye: what happens in reading’, in Goodman, K. S. and Niles, O. S. (Eds.), Reading: Process and program. Urbana, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of English, pp. 3–38.
Gow, L., Balla, J., Kember, D. and Hau, K.T. (in press). ‘Learning approaches of Chinese people: A function of socialisation processes and the context of learning?’, in Bond, M. (ed.), A handbook of Chinese psychology. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Gow, L. & Kember, D. (1990). ‘Does higher education promote independent learning?’ Higher Education 19, 307–322.
Harper, G. & Kember, D. (1989). ‘Interpretation of factor analyses from the approaches to studying inventory’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 59, 66–74.
Hess, R.D. and Azuma, M. (1991). Cultural support for schooling: Contrasts between Japan and the United States, Educational Researcher 20, 2–8.
Ho, D.Y.F. (1986). ‘Chinese patterns of socialisation: a critical review’, in Bond, M.H. (Ed.), The psychology of the Chinese people. London: Oxford University Press.
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) (1988). Science achievement in seventeen countries: A preliminary report. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kember, D. and Gow, L. (1990). ‘Cultural specificity of approaches to study’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 60, 356–363.
Kember, D. and Gow, L. (1991). ‘A challenge to the anecdotal stereotype of the Asian student’, Studies in Higher Education 16, 117–128.
Kember, D. and Gow, L. (1994). ‘An examination of the interactive model of ESL reading from the perspective of approaches to studying’, Regional English Language Centre Journal 25, 1–25.
Kember, D., Charlesworth, M., Davies, H., McKay, J. and Sivan, A. (1994). Establishing the effectiveness of educational innovations: Using the Study Process Questionnaire to show that meaningful learning occurs. Hong Kong: Action Learning Project.
Lai, T. (1989). Effects of study strategies, orientating aids and concept maps as advance graphic organisers on learning from text. Unpublished Masters degree thesis, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Luke, K.K. and Richards, J. (1981). English in Hong Kong: functions and status. Paper presented at the RELC 16th Regional Seminar: Varieties of English and their implications for English language teaching in Southeast Asia, Singapore, April 21–24.
Marton, R, Dall'Alba, G. and Tse, K-T. (1992). The paradox of the Chinese learner. Paper given at a symposium on student learning in a cross cultural context. 4th. S.E. Asian Regional Conference, the International Association of Cross Cultural Psychology, Nepal.
Marton, F. and Säljö, R. (1976). ‘On qualitative differences in learning, outcome and process I’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 46, 4–11.
Medrich, E. and Griffith, J. (1992). International mathematics and science assessments: What have we learned? Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.
Norusis, M.J. (1988). SPSS-X advanced statistics guide. Chicago: SPSS.
O'Neil, M.J. & Child, D. (1984). ‘Biggs’ SPQ: a British study of its internal structure’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 54, 228–234.
Ramsden, P. & Entwistle, N. J. (1981). ‘Effects of academic departments on students' approaches to studying’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 51, 368–383.
Richardson, J.T.E. (1994a). ‘Cultural specificity of approaches to studying in higher education: A literature survey’. Higher Education 27, 449–468.
Richardson, J.T.E. (1994b). ‘Mature students in higher education: A literature survey on approaches to studying’, Studies in Higher Education 19, 309–325.
Rumelhart, D.E. (1977). ‘Toward an interactive model of reading’, in Dornie, S. (ed.), Attention and performance. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, pp. 573–603.
Schmeck, R.R. (1983). ‘Learning styles of college students’, in Dillon., R. and Schmeck, R.R. (eds.), Individual differences in cognition. Volume 1. New York: Academic Press.
Tang, K.C.C. (1991). Effects of different assessment methods on tertiary students' approaches to studying. Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Hong Kong.
Tang, T. (1993). ‘Inside the classroom: The students' view’, in Biggs, J.B. and Watkins, D.A. (eds.), Learning and teaching in Hong Kong: What is and what might be. Hong Kong: Faculty of Education, Hong Kong.
Thomas, P. and Bain, J. (1984). ‘Contextual differences of learning approaches: the effects of assessments’. Human Learning 3, 227–240.
Watkins, D. (1994). Memorising and understanding: The keys to solving the mysteries of the Chinese learner. Conference of the International Association of Applied Psychology, Madrid, 1994.
Wittrock, M.C. (1974). ‘Learning as a generative process’, Educational Psychologist 11, 87- 95.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kember, D. The intention to both memorise and understand: Another approach to learning?. High Educ 31, 341–354 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128436
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128436