Students’ Approaches to Learning in an English-Medium Higher Education

Year 2013, Volume: 3 Issue: 2, 30 - 39, 14.07.2016

Yasemin Kırkgöz

Abstract

This in-depth, qualitative study examines perceptions of the learning approach that students receiving their higher education in the medium of English language adopt, factors that influence students to adopt a particular learning approach, and which approach tends to be more effective in terms of learning outcome. First and final-year students (n=151) responded to a survey questionnaire. Furthermore, interviews were held with volunteering students (n=48). Students’ responses indicated a tendency towards surface learning during the first-year and a mixture of surface and meaningful learning during the final-year. Various factors were identified affecting the students’ adoption of an approach. Deeper learning was achieved through the use of a strategic learning approach by the students’ jointly constructing disciplinary knowledge. Suggestions are proposed to promote students’ achievement of more effective learning of their disciplinary knowledge.

Keywords

English-medium higher education, acquisition of disciplinary knowledge, strategic learning, deep learning, surface learning, joint construction of disciplinary knowledge

References

• Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: An Empirical Evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 159-174.
• Ausubel. D. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune & Stratton.
• 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.
• Byrne, M., Flood, B. & Willis. P. (2009). An inter-institutional exploration of the learning approaches of students studying accounting. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20, 2, 155-167.
• Case, J., & Marshall, D. (2004). ‘Approaches to learning’ research in higher education: a response to Harris. British Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 257-267.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th Ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.
• Crawford, K., Gordon, S., Nicholas, J., & Prosser, M. (1998). Qualitatively different experiences of learning mathematics at university. Learning and Instruction, 8, 455-468.
• Diseth, A., & Martinsen, O. (2003). Approaches to learning, cognitive styles, and motives as predictors of academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 23,195-207.
• Ekinci, N. (2009). Learning approaches of university students. Education and Science, 34(151), 74-88.
• Entwistle, N. (2001). Styles of learning and approaches to studying in higher education. Kybernetes, 30(5/6), 593-602.
• Entwistle, N., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding Student Learning. London: Croon Helm.
• 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.
• Hacker, D.J. (1998). Definitions and empirical foundations. In: D.J. Hacker, J, Dunlosky & A.C. GRaesser (Eds.), Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice (pp. 1-23). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
• Haggis, T. (2003). Constructing images of ourselves? A Critical investigation into ‘approaches to learning’ research in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 29, 89-104.
• Jaeger, M., & Lauritzen, C. (1992). ‘The construction of meaning from experience’. A Paper presented at the 82nd annual convention national council of teachers of English. Louisville, Kentucky.
• Johnson, D.W., & Johnson F.P. (1991). Joining together - Group theory and group skills (4th Ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
• Kırkgöz, Y. (2005). Motivation and student perception of studying in an English-medium university. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 1(1), 101-123.
• Kırkgöz, Y. (2009). Students’ and lecturers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of foreign language instruction in an English-Medium university in Turkey. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(1), 81-93.
• Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177-200.
• Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.
• Marshall, D., & Case, J. (2005). ‘Approaches to learning’ research in higher education: a response to Harris. British Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 257-267.
• McCune, V., & Entwistle, N.J. (2000). “The deep approach to learning: Analytic abstraction and idiosyncratic development.” Paper presented at the Innovations in Higher Education Conference, Helsinki, Finland.
• Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.
• Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Relations between teachers' approaches to teaching and students’ approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37(1), 57-70.
• Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd edition). London: Routledge Farmer.
• Richardson, J. (2000). Researching student learning. Buckingham: Open University.
• Rollnick, S., Miller, W. R., & Butler, C. C. (2008). Motivational interviewing in health care. New York: Guilford Press.
• Senemoğlu, N. (2011). College of education students’ approaches to learning and study skills. Education and Science, 36(160), 65-80.
• Sert, N. (2008). The language of instruction dilemma in the Turkish context. System, 36, 156–171.
• Smith, N. S., & Miller, R. J. (2005). Learning approaches: examination type, discipline of study, and gender. Educational Psychology, 25(1), 43-53.
• Snelgrove, S., & Slater, J. (2003). Approaches to learning: Psychometric testing of a study process questionnaire. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 43(5), 496-505.
• Van Rossum, E.J., & Schenk, S.M. (1984). The relationship between learning conception, study strategy and outcome. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 73-83.
• Yüksek Öğretim Kurumu (YOK) Higher Education Council (2006). Selection and placement of students in higher education institutions in Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.yok.gov.tr/english/index_en.htm (Accessed 26 July 2012)
• Zeegers, P. (2001). Student learning in science: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology,71, 115-132.