Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Effects of College Students’ Personal Values on Changes in Learning Approaches

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many studies of changes in learning approaches have used data from different age groups at one point in time only (Gow and Kember, High Educ 19:307–322, 1990; Watkins and Hattie, Br J Educ Psychol 51:384–393, 1981) or have analyzed the effects of just two or three factors using single level analytical techniques (Cano, Br J Educ Psychol 75:203–221, 2005; Duckwall et al., Res High Educ 32(1):1–13, 1991; Jay and Love, NCSSSMST J 7(2):4–8, 2002; Loo, Educ Psychol, 17(1/2), 1997; Watkins and Hattie, Hum Learn 4:127–141, 1985; Zeegers, Br J Educ Psychol 71:115–132, 2001). This study employs multilevel modeling as a more appropriate technique for the analysis of longitudinal data to examine factors influencing changes in the learning approaches of 153 international undergraduate students over a 3-year period. Specifically, using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), the effects of personal values (level-2) on learning approaches and changes in them over time (level-1) are examined. Results show no changes within students in the deep and surface approaches to learning but a significant decline for the achieving approach, particularly for students who previously experienced a more formal teaching authority. Furthermore, students’ personal values in terms of security, achievement and hedonism affect the achieving approach while no effects emerge for the personal values of tradition, conformity, universalism, self-direction and stimulation. Finally, these effects can be observed while no significant effects emerge for gender, discipline and ability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Compute each individual’s total score on all value items and divide by the total number of items (56 or 57). I call this the MRAT (Mean RATing for the particular individual). Center scores of each of the items for an individual around that individual’s MRAT. Then compute scores for the 10 values by taking the means of the centered items. Use these centered value scores in correlations.

References

  • Bardi, A., & Schwartz, S. H. (1996). Relations among socio-political values in Eastern Europe: Effects of the Communist experience? Political Psychology, 17(3), 525–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (1987a). Student approaches to learning and studying. (Research Monograph). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (1987b). Study process questionnaire manual. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (1996). Approaches to learning of Asian students, a multiple paradox. In J. Pandey & D. Sinha (Eds.), Asian contributions to cross-cultural psychology (pp. 180–199). New Delhi: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M., & Niemivirta, M. (2000). Self-regulated learning: Finding a balance between learning goals and ego-protective goals. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Theory, research and applications (pp. 417–450). San Diego, C.A: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1996). HLM: Hierarchical linear modelling with HLM/2L and HLM/3L programs. Chicago: Scientific Software International Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: Their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 203–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K. W. (2002). Students’ epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian association for research in education. Australia: Brisbane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conti, G. J. (1985). The relationship between teaching style and adult student learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 35(4), 220–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duckwall, J. M., Arnold, L., & Hayes, J. (1991). Approaches to learning by undergraduate students: A longitudinal study. Research in Higher Education, 32(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N., Hanley, M., & Hounsell, D. J. (1979). Identifying distinctive approaches to studying. Higher Education, 8, 365–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N., McCune, V., & Walker, P. (2001). Conceptions, styles and approaches within higher education: Analytic abstractions and everyday experience. In R. J. Sternberg & L. F. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 103–136). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. T. (1975). Values in education and society. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, R. A., McManus, I. C., & Winder, B. C. (2001). The shortened study process questionnaire: An investigation of its structure and longitudinal stability using confirmatory factor analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 511–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gow, L., & Kember, D. (1990). Does higher education promote independent learning? Higher Education, 19, 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2001). Cross-cultural response to failure: Considering outcome attributions with different goals. In F. Salili, C. Y. Chiu, & Y. Y. Hong (Eds.), Student motivation: The culture and context of learning (Plenum series on human exceptionality) (pp. 203–219). New York: Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasha, A. F. (1994). A matter of style: The teacher as expert, formal authority, personal model, facilitator and delegator. College Teaching, 42(4), 142–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hau, K.-T., & Salili, F. (1996). Achievement goals and causal attributions. In S. Lau (Ed.), Growing up the Chinese way (pp. 121–145). Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. (2002). Multilevel analysis. Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jay, T., & Love, B. L. (2002). NCSSSMST longitudinal study of graduates: A three-year analysis of college freshman and college seniors. NCSSSMST Journal, 7(2), 4–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., Reichard, C., & Mokhtari, K. (2003). Are students’ learning styles discipline specific? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 27, 363–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kember, D., Wong, A., & Leung, D. Y. P. (1999). Reconsidering the dimensions of approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 323–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, P., & Biggs, J. B. (1994). Who benefits from mastery learning? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(1), 13–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lietz, P. (1996). Changes in reading comprehension across cultures and over time. Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lietz, P., & Matthews, B. (2006, December). Are values more important than learning approaches? Factors influencing student performance at an international university. Paper Presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, The University of Adelaide, Australia. http://www.aare.edu.au/06pap/lie06070.pdf.

  • Loo, R. (1997). Evaluating change and stability in learning style scores: A methodological concern. Educational Psychology, 17(1/2).

  • Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences in learning––I, outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, T. C. (2005). From the Balkans to the Baltics: Challenges for civic education in two Eastern European countries. International Journal of Social Education, 20(2), 115–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, B. (2004). Life values and approaches to learning: A study of university students from Confucian heritage cultures. Flinders University Institute of International Education. Research Collection, Number 12. Adelaide: Shannon Research Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, B., Lietz, P., & Darmawan, I. G. N. (2007). Values and learning approaches of students at an international university. Social Psychology of Education, 10(2), 247–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosston, M., & Ashworth, S. (1989). The spectrum of teaching styles: From command to discovery. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • National University of Singapore (NUS). (2004). NUS students’ approaches to learning and studying using a modified study process questionnaire. Singapore: NUS Centre of the Development of Teaching and Learning.

  • Nelson Laird, T. F., Shoup, R., Kuh, G. D., & Schwarz, M. J. (2007). The effects of discipline on deep approaches to student learning and college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 46, 9–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, C. H., & Renshaw, P. D. (2002). Self-schema, motivation and learning: A cross-cultural comparison. In D. M. McInernay & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 55–87). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, C. H., & Renshaw, P. D. (2003). Motivation and school learning. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Handbook of educational research in the Asia–Pacific region (pp. 495–510). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norusis, M. (1993). SPSS for Windows, basic system user’s guide: Release 8.0. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, J. M., & Mooradian, T. A. (2002). Personality traits and personal values: A conceptual and empirical integration. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(1), 109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ong, A. S. J., & Ward, C. (2005). The construction and validation of a social support measure for sojourners. The index of Sojourner social support (ISSS) scale. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(6), 637–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2003). Typology of analytical and interpretational errors in quantitative and qualitative educational research. Current Issues in Education [On-line], 6(2). http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume6/number2/. Accessed 11 Oct 2007.

  • Oppenheim, A. N. (1992). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. London: Printer Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Picou, A., Gatlin-Watts, R., & Packer, J. (1998). A test for learning style differences for the U.S. border population. Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education, 3(2), 105–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & Zusho, A. (2002). Student motivation and self-regulated learning in the college classroom. In J. C. Smart & W. G. Tierney (Eds.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 55–128). Dordrecht: Kluwer. Chapter 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Provitera, M. J., & Esendal, E. (2008). Learning and teaching styles in management education: Identifying, analyzing, and facilitating. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 69–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyryt, M. C., Sandals, L. H., & Begoray, J. (1998). Learning style preferences of gifted, average-ability, and special needs students: A multivariate perspective. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 13(1), 71–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2000). Hierarchical linear models. Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Cal: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F., & Congdon, R. (2001). HLM5. Hierarchical linear and nonlinear models. Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse, K. A. G., & Austin, J. T. (2002). The relationship of gender and academic performance to motivation: Within-ethnic-group variations. The Urban Review, 34(4), 293–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugutt, J. K. (2001). A study of individual patterns of longitudinal academic change, Exploring the structural equation modelling (SEM) and Hierarchical linear modelling (HLM). Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, Washington, April 2001. Available full-text from ERIC (ED467836). Last Accessed 01 Oct 07.

  • Salili, F. (1996). Achievement motivation: A cross-cultural comparison of British and Chinese students. Educational Psychology, 16(8), 271–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salili, F., & Hoosain, R. (Eds.). (2003). Teaching, learning, and motivation in a multicultural context. Research in multicultural education and international perspectives. Greenwich, CT: Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1994a). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? Human values and social issues, current understanding and implications for the future. Journal of Social Issues, 50(4), 19–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1994b). Beyond individualism and collectivism, new cultural dimensions of values. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S.-C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism, theory, method and applications (pp. 85–119). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (2007). Draft users manual: Proper use of the Schwarz Value Survey, version 10 September 2007, compiled by Romie F. Littrell. Auckland, New Zealand: Centre for Cross Cultural Comparisons, http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com. Last Accessed 15 Jul 2008.

  • Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (1997). Influences of adaptation to Communist rule on value priorities in Eastern Europe. Political Psychology, 18(2), 385–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H., Bardi, A., & Bianchi, G. (2000). Value adaptation to the imposition and collapse of Communist regimes in East-Central Europe. In S. A. Renshon & J. Duckitt (Eds.), Political psychology: Cultural and cross-cultural foundations (pp. 217–237). Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 32(5), 519–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, J., Espin, C. A., Deno, S. L., & McConnell, S. (2004). Hierarchical linear modeling and curriculum-based measurement for assessing academic growth and instructional factors for students with learning difficulties. Asia Pacific Education Review, 5(2), 136–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S., & Miller, R. (2005). Learning approaches: Examination type, discipline of study, and gender. Educational Psychology, 25(1), 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spicer, D. P. (2004). The impact of approaches to learning and cognition on academic performance in business and management. Education and Training, 46(4), 194–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, D. L. (2003). Understanding learning styles and study strategies of Korean students in American colleges and universities: A research study with recommendations for faculty and academic advisors. ERIC document number ED478616. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/22/a1/9f.pdf. Accessed 08 May 2007.

  • van Rossum, E. J., & Schenk, S. M. (1984). The relationship between learning conception, study strategy and learning outcome. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 54(1), 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volet, S., & Renshaw, P. (1995). Cross-cultural differences in university students’ goals and perceptions of study settings for achieving their goals. Higher Education, 30, 407–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993). Where’s the “culture” in cross-cultural transition? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 24(2), 221–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D. A. (2003). Student learning: A cross-cultural perspective. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Handbook of educational research in the Asia–Pacific region (pp. 441–462). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D. A., & Hattie, J. (1981). The learning process of Australian university students: Investigations of contextual and personological factors. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 384–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D. A., & Hattie, J. (1985). A longitudinal study of the approaches to learning of Australian tertiary students. Human Learning, 4, 127–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilding, J., & Andrews, B. (2006). Life goals, approaches to study and performance in an undergraduate cohort. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 171–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P., & Hadwin, A. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 279–306). Hillsdale N.J.: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeegers, P. (2001). Approaches to learning in science: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 115–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeegers, P. (2002). A revision of the Biggs’ study process questionnaire (R-SPQ). Higher Education Research and Development, 21(1), 73–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Education Research Journal, 23, 614–628.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Australian Council for Educational Research, Adelaide Office, Level 10, 60, Waymouth Street, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia

    Petra Lietz

  2. School of Nursing, The Flinders University of South Australia, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia

    Bobbie Matthews

Authors
  1. Petra Lietz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bobbie Matthews
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Petra Lietz.

Appendix: The Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ, Biggs 1987b)

Appendix: The Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ, Biggs 1987b)

figure afigure afigure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lietz, P., Matthews, B. The Effects of College Students’ Personal Values on Changes in Learning Approaches. Res High Educ 51, 65–87 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9147-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9147-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation