Evidence of the relationship between approaches to learning and experiences of the teaching-learning environment at the group level › Quantitative studies

The interaction between students' approaches to learning and perceptions of the teaching-learning

environment Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

Professor, University of Helsinki, FinlandPresident of EARLI

Sari Lindblom-Ylänne 2

Outline of my presentation

Evidence of the relationship between approaches to learning and experiences of the teaching-learning environment at the group level› Quantitative studies

Preliminary results of the interaction at the individual level› Three cases

14.6.2010


My collaborators Anna Parpala Henna Rytkönen Erkki Komulainen Liisa Postareff Saara Repo Mia Ruohoniemi Anne Haarala-Muhonen Viivi Virtanen Nina Katajavuori Laura Hirsto Topi Litmanen

14.6.2010


Approaches to learning (e.g., Entwistle; Ramsden; Marton; Biggs)

Describe students’ aims and processes they apply when trying to reach their aims

Contextual and dynamic in nature Deep approach

› Intention to maximise understanding› Based on interest in the subject matter

Surface approach› Intention to coupe with the course requirements› Routine fact memorisation› Related to an experience of high workload

Organised studying› Strategic approach; organised studying and effort

management› Intention to succeed well

14.6.2010


Variation in approaches to learning

There is empirical evidence that approaches are related to› characteristics of the teaching-learning

environment› discipline of study› motivation to studying› regulation of studying› personal epistemology

14.6.2010

Correlations between approaches to learning and experiences of the teaching-learning environment scales (N=2509, p<0.000)

ScalesTeaching for understanding Alignment

Staff enthusiasm and support

Interest and relevance

Construct. feedback

Support from other students

Deep approach .37 .23 .29 .34 .27 .15

Intention to understand .25 .27 .20 .32 .24 .20

Organised studying .23 .30 .24 .42 .24 .20

Surface approach -.33 -.38 -.30 -.38 -.16 -.15

14.6.2010Sari Lindblom-Ylänne 6

Scale means by faculty (N=2509)

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

E1 Tea

ching

for u

nderst

andin

g

E2 Alig

men

t

E3 Sta

ff su

pport

and e

nthu

siam

E4 Int

eres

t and

releva

nce

E5 Con

stru

ctive

feedb

ack

E6 Supp

ort fr

om st

uden

ts

A1 D

eep

appro

ach

A2 Org

anised

study

ing

A3 Int

entio

n to u

nders

tand

A4 Surfa

ce a

pproa

ch

Agriculture Biosciences Pharmacy Science Veterinary med.

Arts Behavioural Sc. Law Social Sc. Theology

14.6.2010Sari Lindblom-Ylänne 7


The contextual variation of approaches to learning is complex in nature - and still largely unknown

Quantitative data show that the approaches do not change much (at least not easily) during Bachelor studies

Evidence of individual variation› Some students are “immune” to the

demands and characteristics of the teaching-learning environment

› Some students are easily affected by the environment

14.6.2010


Three cases: same course, same teacher, same study phase, same discipline, same level of motivation – different experiences and reactions

14.6.2010


EXAMPLE 1: Teaching impedes learning

I have a slow study pace and I need a long time to learn something. It’s a disappointment that courses are so short. I seem to be stuck in repetition and I never have enough time move to a critical and analytical level. The teacher was very sympathetic, but the course wasn’t a positive learning experience for me. There was such hurry all the time, the teacher hardly had time to breath. I attended all lectures, but could not follow. I totally lost it. I tried to read the course book alongside with the lectures, but I got mixed up. The teaching lacked a rhythm and a structure. It was very difficult for me to form a general picture. Had this course been longer, I would have learned better. Without reading the book I wouldn’t have learned anything. 14.6.2010


Example 1: more information

Compared to her average scores on the approaches to learning scales, Student 1 scored in this specific course› much lower on deep approach (3.75 → 2.50) › intention to understand almost the same

(4.25→4.0)› organised studying almost the same (3.25 →3.0)› much higher on surface approach (2.75 →4.25)

The teacher’s fast pace seemed to hinder learning

Destructive friction?14.6.2010


EXAMPLE 2: Teaching activates the student’s learning processes

I learn best when I’m able to listen and make notes at the same time. The best for me is if a teacher gives us the notes before the lecture so that I don’t have to write so much. Then I complete the teacher’s notes while listening. I usually go through my notes after the lecture; at least I glance through them. I have to say that this teacher’s notes were not very clear. They lacked structure, and it was unclear where one topic ended and the other begun. However, I like the way the teacher taught, his way of speaking. His talking was more understandable than his notes. I tried to complete his unclear notes by writing as much as possible during the lectures. I think it was even good for me that I had to be active and write myself, but the teacher could have taught in a slower pace. My general picture of the contents is not very coherent, at least it could be better.

14.6.2010



Compared to her average scores on the approaches to learning scales, Student 2 scored in this specific course› higher on deep approach (3.25 → 4.0) › higher on intention to understand (3.75 →5.0)› higher on organised studying (3.0→3.75)› much lower on surface approach (2.75 →1.5)

Teacher’s fast pace seemed to increase the student’s own activities and push her to high-quality learning

Constructive friction?14.6.2010


EXAMPLE 3: Teaching does not have a strong effect on the learning processes

A reason for me not to participate in lectures is too slow pace and too simple contents. I have a certain system, which I always follow: rule of three. First I listen in lectures, then I go through the notes at home and I don’t go to the next topic before I have understood it. Then I read the materials again before the exam. When I understand, I remember better. It is not memorising. This course was a pleasant experience. I participated in almost all lectures and really went through the contents at home. In addition to the teacher’s material, I made own notes, not everything, but the interesting ones. In this way I remember them better.

14.6.2010



Compared to his average scores on the approaches to learning scales, Student 3 scored in this specific course› much higher on deep approach (2.75 →

4.0) › intention to understand almost the same

(4.5 →4.75)› higher on organised studying (4.0→4.75)› surface approach almost the same (2.5

→2.25)

14.6.2010


Conclusions

Interaction between the learner and his or her teaching-learning environment is complex

At the group level approaches to learning seem more stable

At the individual level more contextual variation› More research is needed on the specific factors

affecting the interaction between approaches to learning and the teaching-learning environment

14.6.2010


References

Haarala-Muhonen, A., Ruohoniemi, M., Katajavuori, N. & Lindblom-Ylänne S. (in press). Comparison of students’ perceptions of their teaching-learning environments in three professional academic disciplines – a valuable tool for quality enhancement. Accepted for publication. Learning Environments Research.

Parpala, A, Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E. & Entwistle, N. (2010). Students’ experiences of the teaching-learning environment, approaches to learning and their relation in two different contexts. Manuscript under review.

Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E., Litmanen, T. & Hirsto, L. (in press). Students’ approaches to learning and their experiences of the teaching-learning environment in different disciplines. British Journal of Educational Psychology.

Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S. & Rytkönen, H. (in press). Students' conceptions of good teaching in three different disciplines. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education.

Ruohoniemi, M. & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2009). Student perspectives on factors enhancing and preventing their learning. International Journal of Academic Development, 14 (1), 69–81.

Ruohoniemi, M., Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S. & Katajavuori, N. (in press). Relationships between students’ approaches to learning, perceptions of the teaching-learning environment, and study success – a case study of third-year veterinary students. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education.

14.6.2010

Documents

Evidence of the relationship between approaches to learning and experiences of the teaching-learning environment at the group level › Quantitative studies