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.
LSRC reference Section 7<br />
page 102/103<br />
These features and the high output of work by<br />
Entwistle and his colleagues have made it credible<br />
with practitioners and staff developers within<br />
UK higher education. It has provided a model of <strong>learning</strong><br />
with which academics who wish to be good teachers<br />
can engage: this is absent in teacher training for the<br />
further and adult education sectors, and for work-based<br />
trainers, where there is no influential theory of <strong>learning</strong><br />
that could improve professional understanding and<br />
skills. Nevertheless, it is perhaps worth reiterating<br />
Haggis’s warning (2003) that the model runs the risk<br />
of becoming a rigid framework that excludes social<br />
models of <strong>learning</strong>.<br />
Finally, although Entwistle and his colleagues argue<br />
that researchers need to build up case studies<br />
by observing students studying and interviewing them<br />
about their approaches, it is not clear how far ASSIST<br />
is usable by university lecturers. Entwistle’s concern<br />
to safeguard ideas about <strong>learning</strong> approaches from<br />
oversimplification in general use might be a reason<br />
for this. Nevertheless, notions such as ‘deep’, ‘surface’<br />
and ‘strategic’ approaches to <strong>learning</strong> are now part<br />
of the everyday vocabulary of many HE teachers<br />
and the wealth of books on teaching techniques that<br />
draw directly on many of the concepts reviewed here<br />
is testimony to Entwistle’s continuing influence on<br />
pedagogy in higher education. To use a term coined<br />
by Entwistle himself, the model has proved to be<br />
‘pedagogically fertile’ in generating new ideas about<br />
teaching and <strong>learning</strong> in higher education.<br />
Table 34<br />
Entwistle’s Approaches<br />
and Study Skills<br />
Inventory for Students<br />
(ASSIST)<br />
General<br />
Strengths<br />
Model aims to encompass approaches<br />
to <strong>learning</strong>, study strategies, intellectual<br />
development skills and attitudes in<br />
higher education.<br />
Weaknesses<br />
Complexity of the developing model<br />
and instruments is not easy for<br />
non-specialists to access.<br />
Design of the model<br />
Assesses study/<strong>learning</strong> orientations,<br />
approaches to study and preferences<br />
for course organisation and instruction.<br />
There are dangers if the model<br />
is used by teachers without in-depth<br />
understanding of its underlying<br />
implications.<br />
Reliability<br />
Internal and external evaluations<br />
suggest satisfactory reliability and<br />
internal consistency.<br />
Many of the sub-scales are less reliable.<br />
Test–retest reliability not shown.<br />
Validity<br />
Extensive testing by authors<br />
of construct validity.<br />
Validity of deep, surface and<br />
strategic approaches confirmed<br />
by external analysis.<br />
Construct and predictive validity have<br />
been challenged by external studies.<br />
Unquestioned preference for deep<br />
approaches, but strategic and even<br />
surface approaches may be effective<br />
in some contexts.<br />
Rather weak relationships between<br />
approaches and attainment.<br />
Implications<br />
for pedagogy<br />
Teachers and learners can share ideas<br />
about effective and ineffective<br />
strategies for <strong>learning</strong>.<br />
Course teams and managers can use<br />
approaches as a basis for redesigning<br />
instruction and assessment.<br />
Model can inform the redesign<br />
of <strong>learning</strong> milieux within departments<br />
and courses.<br />
The scope for manoeuvre in<br />
course design is variable outside<br />
the relative autonomy of higher<br />
education, especially in relation<br />
to assessment regimes.<br />
There is a large gap between using<br />
the instrument and transforming the<br />
pedagogic environment.<br />
As the terms ‘deep’ and ‘surface’<br />
become popular, they become attached<br />
to individuals rather than behaviours,<br />
against the author’s intention.<br />
Evidence of<br />
pedagogical impact<br />
Has been influential in training<br />
courses and staff development in<br />
British universities.<br />
Not tested directly as a basis<br />
for pedagogical interventions.<br />
Overall assessment<br />
Key source<br />
Potentially useful model and instrument for some post-16 contexts outside the<br />
success it has had in higher education, but significant development and testing<br />
will be needed.<br />
Entwistle 1998