Students bring with them into tertiary study attitudes about the discipline, beliefs about learning and preferences for approaches to learning. During their university study, approaches to learning might evolve because of the learning environment they experience. 

The main goal of this symposium is to gain insight in how freshman approach their learning, the influence of individual variables during their university career and the impact of  teaching approaches.

The studies of Sainsbury, Smith & Krass, Nijhuis & Segers and Mc Cune address the influence of individual variables on learning approaches. Sainsbury et al. investigated students’ preferred  learning approaches during their university study,  the relation with academic performance, and the influence of gender and domain of learning. Nijhuis & Segers focus on the interplay of students’ attitude to the course, perceptions of the learning environment and learning strategies.  The McCune study explores students’ approaches to learning as the willingness to engage actively or to work within the ways of thinking and practising of the subject area to. The study aims to identify the main themes in the final year biosciences students’ accounts of what influenced their enthusiasm for their studies and their willingness to engage actively with the subject matter.

The Zoller study aims to explore how students can be supported in the development of specific approaches to learning, referred to as higher-order cognitive skills (HOCS) via the tandem implementation of appropriate ‘HOCS promoting’ teaching strategies and HOCS-level assessment.

Background, aims

As an institution responsible for the teaching of future health professionals, the University of Sydney is committed to providing an environment in which students can develop skills and behaviours which will allow them to adapt to a rapidly changing health milieu in future years. Consequently, learning and teaching strategies which focus on problem-solving, independent and critical thinking, communication of ideas, self-evaluation and reflection have become common in both undergraduate and postgraduate programs. However, in recent years, concerns have been expressed by academic and clinical staff of the Faculty of Pharmacy about students’ willingness to engage appropriately in desired skills and behaviours. One potential reason for this unwillingness may be that students hold beliefs about learning and prefer to use strategies which are inconsistent with the goals of the learning activities. For example, anecdotal evidence suggests that many students prefer to adopt surface learning strategies in situations which are designed for mastery goals, while others struggle to draw connections between concepts and experience. Other potential reasons may include a lack of alignment between learning goals and methods of assessment, and a heavy workload: these issues have been identified as problematic from student feedback over a number of years. This study was carried out to provide insight into these concerns, from the students’ perspective, by probing their preferences for approaches to learning. A particular focus was to investigate any changes that were apparent over the course of the four year undergraduate program. The results are to be used in the context of a major curriculum review of the undergraduate programs of the Faculty of Pharmacy.

Methodology

Vermunt’s Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS) was administered twice within the same academic year to 759 students enrolled in all four undergraduate years of the Bachelor of Pharmacy at the University of Sydney. The first occasion was within the first three weeks of the year and the second occasion within the final three weeks of the year. All students were allocated to one of two groups with each group asked to complete the instrument in relation either to physical science subjects or social science subjects. Socio-demographic data were collected including age, gender, background and language diversity together with the pathway of entry to pharmacy. The ILS data was aggregated according to Vermunt’s four learning styles: meaning-directed, application-directed, reproduction-directed and undirected. Repeated measures ANOVA was performed to determine changes over time and between year groups (including interactions), and all pairwise comparisons were corrected for familywise error using the Bonferroni adjustment. A multiple regression procedure was performed to determine the extent to which learning style contributed to academic performance as indicated by scores in an end-of-year individual assessment.

Findings

The response rate ranged from 87% in first year to 52% in fourth year. Significant changes were found (i) over time (between the beginning and end of academic year) for the entire sample; (ii) between the four learning styles for the entire sample; (iii) between the four learning styles across the different year groups; (iv) over time, as a function of learning style for the entire sample, and (v) over time, as a function of learning style and year group. No gender or subject differences were seen in any year group at either time. In each year students displayed the highest preference for application-directed styles, suggesting a strong vocational and professional focus and a belief that learning involves the use of knowledge. No differences were observed in the strength of this preference between students in the four years, suggesting that the degree program appears to attract students who prefer this approach. However, students across all years also scored strongly on the undirected style, which suggests that many were ambivalent about their motivations for learning and continued to rely on external sources of help, guidance and regulation. Again no difference was observed between the years in the strength of this preference. The highest preferences for a meaning-directed style – one which is characterised by a preference of deep learning strategies and a belief that learning involves knowledge construction – were observed in first and fourth year students, with significantly lower scores for second and third years. Preference for a reproduction-directed style, which was initially the second highest in first year, declined to the lowest score in subsequent years although the difference was not statistically significant. Significant changes from the beginning to the end of the academic year were seen with first, third and fourth years. First year students indicated a reduced preference for both meaning-directed and reproduction-directed styles, while third and fourth years indicated a reduced preference for application-directed. Only a modest amount of variance (16.8%) of variation in academic performance was explained by the learning styles data, although significant relationships were observed. A positive relationship with performance was observed for both application-directed and undirected styles, while a negative relationship was found for meaning-directed and reproduction-directed.

Theoretical and educational significance

Recent research has demonstrated associations between the teaching/learning environment and approaches to learning in university student cohorts (Wilson & Fowler, 2005; Struyven, Dochy, Janssens & Gielen, 2006), with some environments appearing to promote productive approaches and others appearing to influence students to adopt less productive approaches. The current study is providing valuable input into an extensive review of the undergraduate curriculum by identifying current student preferences and their relationship to the existing curriculum. The results clearly suggest that pharmacy students begin their degree with a set of beliefs and strategies, which do not appear to mature appreciably over their tertiary experience. The results also confirm the concerns expressed by teaching staff about the low levels of self-direction and reflection in learning demonstrated by many students even in their final year. From a curriculum design perspective, it is apparent that learning activities must include opportunities for students to learn and apply approaches and skills perceived as important for their future careers as health professionals. Further, assessments need to be appropriately aligned with the goals and aims of the learning environments, and should foster development of meaning rather than reproduction.

Previous research on student learning has examined the relationships between the perceptions of the learning environment and learning strategies. However, learner related characteristics are also relevant. In this respect the attitude to the discipline in terms of, affection, cognitive competence, value and difficulty could be a relevant variable in explaining students’ learning strategies. To date the influence of this factor on both students’ perceptions and their learning strategies has received little attention. This study will focus on the joint relationships between students’ attitude to the discipline, their perceptions of the learning environment, and the learning strategies they used. The study was conducted in an International Business program, with 350 students participating in the research project. Three questionnaires were administered; an adapted version of the Survey of Attitudes Towards Statistics (now focussed on the discipline Strategy) (Gal, Schau, Ginsburg, 1997), the Course Experiences Questionnaire measuring the perception of the learning environment (Ramsden, 1997) and Study Process Questionnaire for measuring learning strategies (Biggs, 1987). Linear regression was conducted to assess the nature of the relationships between attitude to the discipline, perceptions of the learning environment, and learning strategies. Both attitude to the discipline and perceptions of the learning environment are related to learning strategies. Multiple regression analysis revealed that only a limited number of variables are related to learning strategies.

Theoretical framework

Since Marton and Säljö (1976) introduced the constructs of deep and surface approaches to learning, educators in Higher Education have been interested in developing and redesigning learning environments to stimulate deep learning. However, former research indicated that not the design as such but students’ perceptions of the environment influence student learning (Nijhuis, Segers, Gijselaers, 2005). Moreover, students’ characteristics seem to play a role (Biggs, 1993; Prosser & Trigwell, 1999). Especially in the field of mathematics, the role of affective factors as a student characteristic, more specifically the student’ s attitude towards the discipline, has been studied for many years. To an increasing extent, also in other disciplines, the influence of affective factors on student learning is receiving attention ( Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Richardson, 2004; Anders & Berg, 2005). However, the influence of the student’s attitude to a discipline on both his perceptions of the learning environment and  learning strategies has received little attention. As Lizzio et al., (2002) indicated “..studies to date have also not included a direct test of the relative influence of personal and perceived situational presage factors” (p. 31).Therefore the aim of this study is to gain more insight in student’s learning strategies by investigating the influence of students’ attitude to the discipline and their perceptions of the learning environment.

Research question

The main research question is: what are the separate and joint relationships between students’ attitude to the discipline, perceptions of the learning environment and their learning strategies?

Methodology

Sample

The sample consists of 350 second year university students attending a course international business strategy. This course is part of a Dutch International Business program which has a problem-based learning approach. Students are familiar with the discipline as they already followed an introduction course during their first year of study.

Instruments

Attitude to the course was measured by using an adapted version of the Survey of Attitudes Towards Statistics (SATS) (Schau et al., 1995). This survey measures four constructs: Affect, Cognitive competence, Value, and (a lack of ) Difficulty of the discipline. Perception of the learning environment was measured using the Course Experience Questionnaire (Wilson et al, 1997), measuring students’ perceptions of the quality of the teaching, the clarity of the goals,  the appropriateness of the assessment and of the workload, the extent of independent learning. Learning strategies were measured by the Study Process Questionnaire (Biggs, 1987).

Methods of analysis

In order to analyse the relationships between these variables both simple and stepwise multiple regression analyses have been applied.

Results

Affection (dealing with the feelings concerning the course) has a positive effect on deep learning. Furthermore, the higher the students show affection the less surface learning. Cognitive competence is negatively related to surface learning. So, the higher the knowledge of the discipline under study in the course is valued, the less surface learning. The higher the students appraise the value of the discipline in terms of its usefulness the more deep learning they show and the less surface learning. Finally, their perception of a lack of difficulty of the discipline results in lower levels of surface learning.

         Concerning the relationships between perception of the learning environment and learning strategies there are several significant relationships. Deep learning is influenced by all five factors of the learning environment: good teaching, clear goals, appropriate assessment, appropriate workload and independent learning. Surface learning is negatively influenced by both appropriate assessment and appropriate workload. Furthermore, the higher the level of independent learning, the higher the level of surface learning.

         All four attitude scales are related to the perceptions of the learning environment. Affection is positively related to: good teaching, clear goals, appropriate assessment and appropriate workload. Cognitive competence is only related to appropriate workload. Value is positively related three aspects of the learning environment: good teaching, clear goals and appropriate assessment. Finally, the less difficulty student encounter when studying strategy, the more they see the workload as appropriate.

The regression model with the three predictors independent learning, value and clear goals is significantly related to the criterion variable deep learning, F(3,306) = 17,20 p < .01. The three predictors account for about 14 % of the variance in the criterion variable deep learning. About 9 % of the variation can be explained by the regression model with one predictor, independent learning and 12% by the regression model with two predictors, independent learning and value.

The proportion of the variation in the criterion variable surface learning explained by the regression model with the four predictors appropriate assessment, cognitive competence, independent learning and appropriate workload is about 16% (F(4,305)= 15.17). About 7 % of the variation can be explained by the regression model with one predictor, appropriate assessment, 11% by the regression model with two predictors, appropriate assessment and cognitive competence and 14% by the regression model with three predictors appropriate assessment, cognitive competence and independent learning.

Discussion

The current study demonstrated that the attitude to the discipline is one of the factors that influence learning strategies. Furthermore, it is also related to perception of the learning environment. As such, attitude to the discipline has a direct and indirect effect on learning strategies. Comparison with other findings is not possible, as this information is not available. Our findings concerning the relationships between learning environment and learning strategies are in line with theory. Concerning the joint relationships we see both factors play a role which are partly in line with theory but also bring new insights.

References

Anders, Berg, (2005) Factors related to observed attitude change toward chemistry among university students, Chemistry Education Research and Practice 6(1) 1-18.

Eccles, Wigfield (2002) Motivational Beliefs, Values and Goals, Annual Review Psychology,

Biggs, (1987). The study Process questionnaire (SPQ), Manual, Hawthorn,Vic.: Australian Council for Educational Research, 53:109-32.

Schau, Stevens, Dauphinee, Vecchio (1995) The development and validation of the survey of attitudes toward statistics, Educational and Psychological Measurement 55 (5) 868-868-875

Wilson, Lizzio, Ramsden (1997), The development, validation and application of the course experience questionnaire, Studies in Higher Education, 22 (1), 33-53.

This paper focuses on investigating what underpins experienced biosciences students’ willingness to engage actively with their studies. In the context of this analysis, active engagement is seen as being situated within specific disciplinary contexts and communities. Thus active engagement implies students working within the ways of thinking and practising (WTP) of the subject area. The interview transcripts which form the basis of this analysis are a subset of the data from the Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments in Undergraduate Courses (ETL) Project, a large-scale project which was funded from 2001-2005 by the UK Economic and Social Research Council.  The data set used in this paper comprises transcripts from 19 semi-structured group interviews with 59 students from 3 contrasting types of university in the UK. A rigorous thematic analysis of the data, using HyperRESEARCH (version 2.6.1 from Researchware, Inc.), resulted in a multi-faceted conceptual model of the influences on the students’ willingness to engage. This model describes the interplay between aspects of students’ identities and facets of their learning contexts in university and on work placement. The analysis suggests that no single influence can explain the extent of the students’ engagement but, for some students, identification with the role of ‘scientist’ seemed particularly important. The notion of ‘authentic learning experiences’ is used to draw together the students’ perspectives on how key learning experiences influenced their identity development and willingness to engage with their studies.

Aims

The aim of the study was to identify the main themes in the final year biosciences students’ accounts of what influenced their enthusiasm for their studies and their willingness to engage actively with the subject matter. These themes were then integrated into a conceptual model.

Methodology and analysis process

The data set used in this paper comprises full transcripts from 19 semi-structured group interviews with 59 students from 3 contrasting types of university in the UK. These are a subset of the data from the Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments in Undergraduate Courses (ETL) Project, a large-scale project which was funded from 2001-2005 by the UK Economic and Social Research Council.

These data were subjected to a rigorous thematic analysis using HyperRESEARCH (version 2.6.1 from Researchware, Inc.). The inter-relationships between the themes were then expressed through a conceptual model. The findings from the analysis were thoroughly checked to rule out potential problems, such as missing themes or counter-examples, which had not been considered in the initial analysis.

Findings

Overall, the ways in which these students accounted for their willingness to engage with their studies described an interplay between aspects of their identities and facets of their learning contexts in university and on work placement. These are represented within a conceptual model which suggests that constructive friction (Vermunt and Verloop, 1999) between students-as-learners and their teaching-learning environments can influence the extent to which a given learning experience is perceived as authentic. Parallels are drawn with Stein, Isaacs and Andrews (2004) work on the nature of authentic learning opportunities. These authentic experiences are seen as impacting on students’ willingness to engage actively with the ‘ways of thinking and practising’ (WTP) (McCune and Hounsell, 2005) of their subject area. The students’ accounts suggested that no single influence was sufficient in itself to explain the extent of their engagement but, for some students, developing confidence to identify with the role of ‘scientist’ seemed particularly important. The students’ accounts of authentic learning experiences described some of the ways in which they were given opportunities to develop their identities in the direction of greater confidence and identification with the scientist role.

Theoretical and Educational Significance

The analysis reported in this paper builds on earlier analyses of data from these final year biosciences students, which highlighted the different facets of WTP relevant for these contexts and drew attention to the impact of teaching-learning environments on students’ understandings of WTP (McCune and Hounsell, 2005). The present paper developed on this earlier work by returning to this data set with a somewhat different focus, concentrating on students’ willingness to engage actively with the WTP of their subject area. The review and analysis presented in this paper draw together perspectives from research focusing on students’ perceptions and understandings of their day-to-day experiences in Higher Education settings (for example Marton, Hounsell and Entwistle, 1997; Prosser and Trigwell, 1999) with work in more social constructivist or sociocultural traditions (Bobbit Nolen et al, 2005; Wenger, 1998). In considering the students’ experiences in this way the analysis presented here has parallels with Volet’s (2001) theoretical review of the literature in which she presents a multi-level model of influences on students’ motivation, drawing together more cognitive perspectives on student learning with work from socio-cultural perspectives. The present paper is more modest in its ambitions focusing on the experiences of specific groups of students in a small number of contexts.

The findings from this study, in combination with the wider literature, suggest that there may be considerable potential in exploring further how higher education learning experiences can best be designed to offer students authentic engagement with the practices of their subject areas. It is suggested that it may be helpful to consider the extent to which a given learning environment provides such opportunities, rather than expecting that it will often be possible or desirable for students to engage fully with communities of practice beyond the university setting.

Neither the literature focusing on students’ perceptions of teaching-learning environments in higher education, nor the literature on authentic learning tasks, focus very directly on the potential of learning experiences as vehicles for students to develop new dimensions of their identities in ways which might support them to more fully engage with their studies. It is argued that a greater focus on identity development and the social processes through which students come to understand themselves as learners, as implied by research in the socio-cultural or social constructivist traditions, may draw attention to fruitful ways of understanding students’ engagement with their learning, which tend not to be addressed so directly elsewhere.

References

Bobbitt Nolen, S., Seidel Horn, I., Ward, C. J., Stevens, R. R. and Estacio, K. (2005). When worlds collide: negotiating competing views of teaching across social contexts and the effect on student teachers’ motivation to learn. Paper presented at the 11^th European Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, August 23^rd to 27^th, Nicosia, Cyprus.

F. Marton, D. J. Hounsell and N. J. Entwistle (Eds.) (1997), The experience of learning (2^nd Edn.). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press

McCune, V. and Hounsell, D. (2005). The development of students' ways of thinking and practising in three final-year biology courses. Higher Education, 49, 255-289.

Prosser, M., and Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: the experience in higher education. Buckingham: SRHE and OUP.

Stein, S., Isaacs, G. and Andrews, T. (2004). Incorporating authentic learning experiences within a university course. Studies in Higher Education, 29(2), 239-258.

Vermunt, J. D. & Verloop, N. (1999). Congruence and friction between learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 9, 257-280.

Volet, S. E. (2001). Understanding learning and motivation in context: A multi-dimensional and multi-level cognitive-situative perspective. In S. E. Volet & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and methodological implications (pp. 57-82). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Given the current striving for sustainability and the corresponding paradigms shift in science, technology, R&D, environment perception, economy and politics; e.g., from unlimited growth-to-sustainable development, correction-to-prevention and passive consumption of “goods”, culture and education-to-active participation, all in the science-technology-environment-society-economy-policy (S-T-E-S-E-P) context, the corresponding paradigms shift in higher education is unavoidable. This means a shift from the currently dominating lower-order cognitive skills (LOCS) algorithmic teaching, to HOCS-promoting deep learning, typified by students’ evaluative thinking and transfer capabilities. Our active research in STESEP-oriented science teaching in higher education, was targeted at the development of students’ HOCS such as critical thinking, question asking, and problem solving, within ‘traditional’ science courses. Within a pre-post research design, our intervention focused on the implementation, in science courses, of non-traditional teaching strategies and HOCS’ level examinations (containing HOCS- and HOCS/LOCS-requiring questions), selected representative examples of which will be presented and critically discussed. The main findings of our research, in the context of higher education chemistry/science instruction, are: (a) the HOCS capabilities of question asking and critical thinking-problem solving, are enhanced (pre-post gains) via the tandem implementation of appropriate ‘HOCS promoting’ teaching strategies and HOCS-level assessment; (b) HOCS enhancement requires time; it is not achievable via a single-shot short exercise; and (c) assessment needs not only be consistent with the instructional objectives, but also capable of their promotion in order to achieve them. The educational significance and implications are: (1) Deep learning through HOCS-level assessment is attainable, suggesting (2) HOCS development is contextually-not discipline content-bound. Thus, HOCS enhancement not only can be done; it should be done, across the board, in higher education.

Given the current striving for sustainability and the corresponding paradigms shift in science, technology, R&D, environment perception, economy and politics; e.g., from unlimited growth-to-sustainable development, correction-to-prevention, and passive consumption of culture and education-to-active participation in the science-technology-environment-society-economy-policy (S-T-E-S-E-P) context, the corresponding paradigms shift in higher education is unavoidable. This means a shift from the currently dominating lower-order cognitive skills (LOCS) algorithmic teaching, to HOCS-promoting deep learning, typified by students’ enhanced capabilities of evaluative thinking and transfer. Our activity in this context was targeted at the development of students’ HOCS of critical thinking (CT), question asking (QA), and problem solving (PS), in ongoing ‘traditional’ science courses.

Aims and Questions

Guided by our goal of developing these HOCS, our aims in conducting this active research were: (a) contributing to the body of knowledge on these HOCS in college teaching and; (b) fostering the shift from algorithmic teaching and assessment to a higher level of cognitive, deep learning.

Accordingly, our study aimed at obtaining research-based answers to the following questions:

1. Does traditional college science instruction, into which CT, PS, and QA promoting teaching strategies and HOCS-requiring exam questions are purposely “sneaked”, provide gains in these students' capabilities?

2. What are freshman science students' views concerning their capability of solving HOCS-requiring problems? 

3. What can be learned from students' responses to HOCS-requiring problems, to be used  for  promoting  their  generic  or disciplinary  CT, PS, QA and other HOCS  capabilities?

Methodology

Within a pre-post research design of three case studies, our intervention focused on (a) the implementation, in traditional freshman chemistry courses, non-traditional HOCS-promoting teaching strategies and HOCS’ level-requiring examinations; i.e., containing HOCS- and HOCS/LOCS-requiring questions; and (b) the purposed development of science teachers’ generic HOCS, particularly QA and PS as well as their respective reflective metacognition, via HOCS-centered learning.

In the first study, the California Critical Thinking Test (CCTST) was pre-post, administered to freshman biology majors (N=38), followed by analysis of results and drawing of conclusions. The second study conducted within a freshman (N=47) general and inorganic chemistry course, consisted, weekly, of two lectures, one recitation and three laboratory session hours, respectively, throughout two semesters. Traditional instruction was accom-panied by HOCS-promoting teaching strategies, occasionally “sneaked” into the course practice and problems (not exercises!) into its ‘open book’ examinations. The pre- and post-test examinations consisted of four and five problems specifically developed for this study, emphasizing critical/evaluative thinking and transfer within chemistry/science teaching and life situations. Each problem contained four sub-questions, having HOCS, LOCS and mixed cognitive level which served for grading students’ responses and their analysis.

A 1-to-4 scale Likert-type HOCS views questionnaire was administered for assessing students’ views concerning their capability of solving HOCS-requiring questions and self-confidence in doing that.

         The following research tools were used in the specially designed HOCS-centered, Masters’ science teachers (N=26; 20F, 6M) course: (a) pre-post HOCS-evaluation questionnaires; (b) CT-promoting assignments; and, (c) self-, peer-, and non-traditional assessment strategies.  A pre- post skills questionnaire was used  for assessing their post gains in QA, PS, and metacognition. Additionally, participants reflected on their own HOCS development throughout the course, including self-grading.

 Findings

         Concerning CT (first study): Although there are some pre-post score increases, they are not statistically significant. Apparently, developing students’ CT, merely via “sneaking in” HOCS-promoting teaching/assessment strategies, is not sufficient; the small pre-post “HOCS gain” may be accounted for by either the course time shortage, or the insufficiency of just “sneaking in” HOCS-promoting strategies. However, the 20.7% pre-post gain in the HOCS/LOCS category suggests, that traditional science instruction in higher education, accompanied by infusion of HOCS-promoting strategies, is capable of producing gains in students’ PS capabilities. Students believe in their PS capability, but are less confident in the “correctness” of their solutions. The significant students’ HOCS gains (third study) suggest that, by incorporating ‘HOCS instruction’ into professional development courses, participants’ HOCS are expected to be enhanced and HOCS-learning transferred into their classroom practice.

 Education Significance/Conclusions

 (a) HOCS capabilities are enhanced via tandem implementation of ‘HOCS promoting’ teaching strategies and HOCS-level assessment; (b) Such enhancement requires time; it is not achievable via a single-shot short exercise; (c) assessment needs not only to be consistent with the instructional objectives, but also capable of their promotion. Educational significance: Deep learning through HOCS-promoting instruction and HOCS-level assessment is attainable, suggesting that HOCS development is contextually- not discipline content-bound. Thus, HOCS enhancement not only can be done; it should be done!