The Interplay of Learning Approaches and Preferences for Methods of Assessment of Iranian EFL Learners in academic Context

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 3, 1952 - 1960, 13.05.2015

Mina Rastegar , Arezo Golestanian

Öz

Abstract. The present study aimed at making inquiries about the relationships between Iranian EFL students’ learning approaches, and their preferences for different modes of assessment. A sample of one hundred and ten junior and senior EFL students majoring in English Translation and English Literature at Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, participated in this study. Participants were both male and female. In order to gather required data, two questionnaires were used: The Revised two factors Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) by Biggs et al. (2001), Assessment Preferences Inventory (API) by Birenbaum (1994). As the results showed; first, deep learning approach had significant positive relationships with both summative and formative assessments; second, surface learning approach had significant positive relationship with summative method of assessment.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Learning approaches, Deep and Surface learning approaches, Assessment preferences, Summative and Formative assessment

Kaynakça

• Ary, D., Jacob, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (1972). Introduction to Research in Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
• Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
• Biggs, J.B. (1999). Assessing Student Approaches to Learning. Australian Psychologist, 23, 197-206.
• Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., & Leung, Y. P. (2001). The Revised Two- Factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133–149.
• Birenbaum, M. (1997). Assessment Preferences and their Relationship to Learning Strategies and Orientations. Higher Education, 33, 71-84.
• Byrne, M., Flood, B., & Willis, P. (2002). The Relationship between Learning Approaches and Learning Outcomes: A Study of Irish Accounting Students. Accounting Education, 11 (1), 27-42.
• Choy, F, O’Grady, G, & Rotgans, I. (2012). Is the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) a Good Predictor of Academic Achievement? Examining the Mediating Role of Achievement-related Classroom Behaviours. Instr Sci, 40, 159–172.
• Davies, A, & Le Mahieu, P. (2003). Assessment for Learning: Reconsidering Portfolios and Research Evidence. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 340-362.
• Dochy, F. and Mc-Dowell, L. (1997). Assessment as a Tool for Learning. Studies in ducational Evaluation, 23(4), 308-321.
• Dogan, A., Atmaca, N., & Yolcu, S. (2012). The Correlation between Learning Approaches and Assessment Preferences of Eighth-Grade Students. Elementary Education Online, 11(1), 264-272.
• Entwistle, N. J. & Entwistle, A. C. (1991). Contrasting Forms of Understanding for Degree Examinations: The Student Experience and its Implications. Higher Education, 22, 205-227.
• Gibbs, G. (1999). Using Assessment Strategically to Change the Way Student Learn. Assessment Matters in Higher Education, 10 (23), 235-249.
• Gielen, S., Dochy, F., & Dierick, S. (2003). Evaluating the Consequential Validity of New Modes of Assessment: The Influence of Assessment on Learning, Including pre-, post-task, and Assessment Effects. Higher Education, 32(4), 37–54.
• Gijbelsa, D., Van de Watering, G., Dochy, F., & Van de Bossche, P. (2005).The Relationship between Students' Approaches to Learning and the Assessment of Learning Outcomes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20 (4), 327-341.
• Gijbelsa, D. & Dochy, F. (2006). Students’ Assessment Preferences and Approaches to Learning: Can Formative Assessment Make a Difference? Educational Studies, 32(4), 399–409.
• Kember, D. (1996). The Intention to both Memorise and Understand: Another Approach to Learning? Higher Education, 31, 341-54.
• Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976). On Qualitative Differences in Learning: I. Outcome and Process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115-127.
• Marton, F. & Saljo, R. (1997). Approaches to Learning: The Experience of Learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
• Nijhuis, J. F. H., Segers, M. S. R. & Gijselaers, W. H. (2005). Influence of Redesigning a Learning Environment on Student Perceptions and Learning Strategies. Learning Environment Research, 8(1), 67–93.
• Ramsden, P., and Entwistle, N.J. (1981). Effects of Academic Departments on Students’ Approaches to Studying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 368-383.
• Ramsden, P. (1979). Student Learning and Perceptions of the Academic Environment. Higher Education, 8, 411-27.
• Scouller, K. (1998). The Influence of Assessment Method on Students’ Learning Approaches: Multiple Choice Question Examination versus Assignment Essay. Higher Education, 35, 453–472.
• Segers, M., Fan, X., Thomson, B., & Wang, L. (2006). Assessment in a Problem-based Economics Curriculum: Alternatives in Assessment of Achievements, Learning Processes and Prior Learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 201–226.
• Struyven, K., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2006). Students’ Perceptions About Evaluation and Assessment in higher Education: A Review of Assessment and Evaluation, Higher Education, 30(4), 331-347.
• Van de Watering, M., Smith, D., & Jassens, S. (2008). Students’ Assessment Preferences, Perceptions of Assessment and their Relationship to Study Results. High Education, 56, 645-658.