University Students’ Approaches to Studying and their Academic Achievement

  • Mitiku Hambisa
  • Seleshi Zeleke
Keywords: Surface approach to studying, strategic approach to studying, deep approach to studying, academic achievement, study approach profiles

Abstract

The major purpose of this study was to examine Mizan-Tepi University Students’ approaches to studying. Questionnaire and interview were used to gather data from a sample of 220 (103 male and 117 female) second year students. Factor analysis, cluster analysis, discriminant analysis, ANOVA and regression analysis were used to analyze the quantitative data. Factor analysis indicated three major components (deep, surface and strategic) of the students’ approaches to studying. Cluster analysis revealed four study approach profiles: very poor (very low deep and strategic, and very high surface), poor (low deep and strategic, and high surface), moderate (average deep and strategic, and high surface) and good (very high deep and strategic, and very low surface) quality study approach groups. Most female students were found to adopt very poor quality study approaches. Students in the good quality study approach profile were noted to be the most academically successful. Practical and theoretical implications of the findings were discussed.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arambewela, R., Mulready, P. & Callaghan, B. (2007). Differences in Study Approaches and the Implications for Student Learning. Retrieved on October 21, 2011 from http:// www.deakin.edu.au/dro/eserv/DU:30008113/arambewela-differencesinstudy-2007.pdf Beckwith, M. (1991). Approaches to Learning, their Context and Relationship to Assessment Performance. Higher Education, 22 (1), 17-30.
Bergman, L.R. & Magnusson, D. (2001). Person-Centered Research. In Neil J. Semelser and Paul B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 16, pp.11333-11339). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Ltd. Biggs, J.B. (1994). Approaches to Learning: Nature and Measurement of. In T. Husen and T. N. Postlethwait (Eds.). The International Encyclopedia of Education. Vol. 6, pp. 318-322. London: Pergamon. Brace, N., Kemp, R. and Snelgar, R. (2006). SPSS for Psychologists: A Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS for Windows. (3rd ed.). Houndmills: Palgrave McMillan.
Burton, L. J., Taylor, A. J., Dowling, D. G. and Lawrence, J. (2009). Learning Approaches, Personality and Concepts of Knowledge of First-Year Students: Mature-Age versus School Leaver. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 6(1): 65-81. Retrieved on November 12, 2011 from http://sleid.cqu.edu/
Byrne, M., Flood, B. & Willis, P. (1999). Approaches to Learning of Irish Students Studying Accounting. Retrieved on December 11, 2011 from http://www.doras,dcu.ie/2222/1/DCUBS-Research-paper-series-36.pdf
Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction (1997). Scoring Key for the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST). Retrieved on October 21, 2011, from http://www.tla.ed.ac.uk/ete/questionnaires/ASSIST.pdf
Entwistle, N.J. (1992). Approaches to Learning. In H. Byrne, et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Learning and Memory. (pp. 63-64). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Entwistle, N. (1993). Styles of Learning and Teaching: An Integrated Outcome of Educational Psychology for Students, Teachers and Lecturers. London: David Fulton Publishers Ltd. Entwistle, N.J. (1994). Adult Study Strategies. In T. Husen and T. N. Postlethwait (Eds.), Vol. 6. The International Encyclopedia of Education (pp. 184-194). London: Pergamon. Felder, R.M. & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding Student Differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 94 (1), 57-72. Gadzella, B.M., Ginther, D.W. & Williamson, J.D. (1987). Study Skills, Learning Process and Academic Achievement. Psychological Reports, 61(1), 167-172. Grasha, A. F. (1995). Practical Applications of Psychology. (4th ed.). New York: HarperCollins College Publishers. Higher Education Relevance and Quality Agency (2006). Strategic Plan (2006-2009). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Hughes, J. & Peiris, D.R. (2006). ASSISTing CS1 Students to Learn: Learning Approaches and Object-Oriented Programming. Retrieved on April 22, 2011 from http://Citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.166.136.pdf
Kelly, M., Fujita, K., Itoh, H. & Otsuka, Y. (1990). Approaches to Study in Japanese Higher Education Students. Bulletin of the National Institute of Multimedia Education, 3: 203-254. Retrieved on November 22, 2011 from http://nels.nii.ac.jp/els/110007046421.pdf?id=ART0008973702&type=pdf&lang=en&host=cinii&order/no=&ppv/type=0&lang/sw=&no=1256811226&cp
Kline, P. (1994). An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis. London: Routledge, Inc.
Lublin, J. (2003). Deep, Surface and Strategic Approaches to Learning: Good Practice in Teaching and Learning. Retrieved on November 13, 2011 from http://www.ucd.ie/.../deep%20surface&strategic20%learningpdf Marton, F. & Saljo, R. (1976a). On Qualitative Differences in Learning-I: Outcome and Process. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4-11. Marton, F. & Saljo, R. (1976b). On Qualitative Differences in Learning-II: Outcomes as the Function of the Learner’s Conception of a Task. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(2), 115-127.
Marsh, D. (2006). Deep and Surface Approaches to Learning: An Introduction. Retrieved on November 12, 2011 from http://www.csap.bham.ac.uk/resources/guides/student/learning.htm Nist, S.K. & Simpson, M. (2002). College Studying: Reading Online. Retrieved on October 21, 2011 from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=handbook/nist/index.html Pedhazur, E.J. & Sckmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, Design and Analysis: An Integrated Approach. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Publishers. Prosser, M. & Triggwell, K. (1990). Student Evaluations of Teaching Courses: Student Study Strategies as a Criterion of Validity. Higher Education, 20(2), 135-142.
Ramsden, P. & Entwistle, N. J. (1981). Effects of Academic Departments on Students' Approaches to Studying. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(3), 368-383. Ratelle, C.F., Guay, F., Vallerand, R. J., Larose, S. & Senecal, C. (2007). Autonomous, Controlled, and Amotivated Types of Academic Motivation: A Person-Oriented Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 734–746. Richardson, J. E. (1997). Meaning Orientation and Reproducing Orientation: A Typology of Approaches to Studying in Higher Education? Educational Psychology, 17(3), 301-311. Richardson, J. E. (1993). Gender Differences in Responses to the Approaches to Studying Inventory. Studies in Higher Education, 18(1), 3-13. Ropo, E. (1993). Studying Technology: An Investigation of Approaches to Studying and Perception of Teaching in a Finnish University of Technology. Higher Education, 25(2), 111-132. Svensson, L. (1977). On Qualitative Differences in Learning-III: Study Skill and Learning. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47(3), 233-243. Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics. (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Watkins, D. (1986). Learning Process and Background Characteristics as Predictors of Tertiary Grades. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46(1), 199-203.
Published
2011-12-01