learning-styles
learning-styles
learning-styles
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Some learners use both types of strategy in<br />
a ‘versatile’ approach.<br />
The theoretical dichotomy between holist and<br />
serialist strategies was not enough to identify the<br />
<strong>styles</strong> empirically, leading Pask to invent two tests<br />
that aimed to measure them: the Spy Ring History Test<br />
and the Smuggler’s Test. Although Pask’s work has<br />
been influential in this family of <strong>learning</strong> <strong>styles</strong>,<br />
both in concepts and methodology, his two tests<br />
have not gained credence as reliable or easily usable<br />
instruments outside science disciplines (see Entwistle<br />
1978b for a summary of the original tests and problems<br />
with them). We have not therefore analysed the tests<br />
in this report as a discrete model of <strong>learning</strong> <strong>styles</strong>.<br />
Another crucial influence in this family is the work<br />
of Marton and Säljö who identified (1976, 7–8) two<br />
different levels of processing in terms of the <strong>learning</strong><br />
material on which students’ attention is focused:<br />
in the case of surface-level processing, the student<br />
directs his (sic) attention towards <strong>learning</strong> the test<br />
itself (the sign), ie., he has a reproductive conception<br />
of <strong>learning</strong> which means he is more or less forced to<br />
keep to a rote-<strong>learning</strong> strategy. In the case of deep-level<br />
processing, on the other hand, the student is directed<br />
towards the intentional content of the <strong>learning</strong><br />
material (what is signified), ie. he is directed towards<br />
comprehending what the author wants to say, for<br />
instance, a certain scientific problem or principle.<br />
It is important to distinguish between a logical<br />
and an empirical association between approaches<br />
and outcomes for students’ <strong>learning</strong>. Although it<br />
is possible to present a clear theoretical case that<br />
certain approaches affect <strong>learning</strong> outcomes,<br />
unexpected or idiosyncratic contextual factors may<br />
disrupt this theoretical association. According to<br />
Ramsden (1983), empirical study of different contexts<br />
of <strong>learning</strong> highlights the effects of individuals’<br />
decisions and previous experiences on their<br />
approaches and strategies. He argues that some<br />
students reveal a capacity to adapt to or shape the<br />
environment more effectively so that the capacity<br />
is learnable. In terms of pedagogy, ‘students who<br />
are aware of their own <strong>learning</strong> strategies and the<br />
variety of strategies available to them, and who<br />
are skilled at making the right choices, can be said<br />
to be responding intelligently … or metacognitively<br />
in that context’ (1983, 178).<br />
7.1<br />
Entwistle’s Approaches and Study Skills Inventory<br />
for Students (ASSIST)<br />
Introduction<br />
Working largely within the field of educational<br />
psychology, Noel Entwistle and his colleagues at<br />
Lancaster University and the University of Edinburgh<br />
have developed a conceptual model and a quantitative<br />
and qualitative methodology. These aim to capture<br />
students’ approaches to <strong>learning</strong>, their intellectual<br />
development, a subject knowledge base and the<br />
skills and attitudes needed for effective approaches<br />
to <strong>learning</strong>. The purpose of this work is to produce:<br />
A heuristic model of the teaching-<strong>learning</strong> process<br />
[which can] guide departments and institutions wanting<br />
to engage in a process of critical reflection on current<br />
practice … [so that] the whole <strong>learning</strong> milieu within<br />
a particular department or institution can be redesigned<br />
to ensure improvement in the quality of student <strong>learning</strong><br />
(Entwistle 1990, 680)<br />
During its evolution over 30 years, the model has<br />
sought to encompass the complex ‘web of influence’<br />
that connects motivation, study methods and academic<br />
performance with the subtle effects of teaching,<br />
course design, environment and assessment methods<br />
on intentions and approaches to <strong>learning</strong>. The model<br />
has also been influenced by parallel work in Australia,<br />
the Netherlands and the US (see Entwistle and<br />
McCune 2003 for a detailed account of these links<br />
and their impact on the concepts and measures used<br />
in Entwistle’s work). Five versions of an inventory have<br />
evolved, aiming to measure undergraduate students’<br />
approaches to <strong>learning</strong> and their perceptions about<br />
the impact of course organisation and teaching:<br />
the Approaches to Studying Inventory (ASI) in 1981<br />
the Course Perception Questionnaire (CPQ) in 1981<br />
the Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory (RASI)<br />
in 1995<br />
the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students<br />
(ASSIST) in 1997<br />
the Approaches to Learning and Studying Inventory<br />
(ALSI) (currently being developed).<br />
There is a strong emphasis on development in<br />
Entwistle’s work, both in relation to the underlying<br />
concepts and the inventories used. The ASSIST<br />
was derived from evaluations of other measures –<br />
the ASI, CPQ and RASI (for an account of this evolution,<br />
see Entwistle and McCune 2003; Entwistle and<br />
Peterson 2003). More than 100 studies have addressed<br />
the theoretical and empirical tasks of evaluating the<br />
effectiveness of the inventories and their implications<br />
for pedagogy in universities. The studies can<br />
be categorised broadly as being concerned with: