Complete thesis - Murdoch University

of student learning: study approaches or orientations are formed in the interaction betweenindividuals and their environment, and are not ‘innate’.In order to gain some insight into this aspect of learning, and as a follow-up to some of theissues identified above, the shortened version of the Approaches to Study Inventory (ASI) byEntwistle and Ramsden (1983) 3 was administered to the student cohort, at the completionof ENG260 in 2003. The results are as indicated in Figure 7.19 (note that some studentsdeclined to complete the survey).Figure 7.19: Results of the ASI applied to the 2003 cohort of ENG260This post-hoc ASI showed that students were very much sitting on the fence between learningfor meaning (MO) (mean 2.53, standard deviation 0.43) and learning for reproduction (RO)(mean 2.56, standard deviation 0.41). This confirms the students’ ‘fence-sitting’ with regardsto their perception that they had learnt more or less from this approach (compare with Figure7.18).A correlation between a high(er) score for meaning orientation and final result did not exist –of the students who completed the ASI (88%), 41% showed same or higher Meaning Orientationto Reproduction Orientation. Of these, 28.5% achieved each of a H(igh) D(istinction), ora C(redit), while 14% achieved each of a D(istinction), a P(ass) or a fail (N). This latter studentindicated close orientations (MO 2.65, RO 2.38) All other students who failed exhibitedmuch higher ROs to MOs (between 0.43 and 0.81 difference). Of the students who indicatedhigher ROs, 62.5% achieved a P(ass) or lower. Raw exam results show a different picture: of3 as previously noted, this 32-item instrument has been confirmed by Richardson (1990)’s work to possessadequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability319