Option A and B in this question describe extremely surface and deep learning approaches
defined by John Biggs and his colleagues.
Through extensive qualitative and quantitative studies in different parts of the world,
educational researchers found that student intention in learning ranged from getting a degree
to looking for deep understanding.
In line with such intentions, students used different learning strategies.
The choice of strategy is a behavioural expression of student's learning motivation.
Student approach to learning therefore is defined in terms of motivation
and strategy components in the process of learning.
Option A in this question represents an extremely surface approach to learning.
Obtaining a qualification is the motivation component of this approach.
The learning is motivated by the fear of failure.
So learning strategies in this approach involve rote memorizing information needed for assessment,
sticking closely to the course requirements, doing the minimum for assessment,
focusing on discrete elements without integrating them,
and failure to distinguish principles from examples.
Option B represents an extremely deep approach to learning.
The motivation component of it is self-actualisation through learning.
This approach indicates an interest in the subject matter of study.
The intention is to understand the learning materials.
So learning strategies involve meaningfully memorizing information for later use,
relating new ideas to previous knowledge, relating concepts to everyday experience,
and relating evidence to conclusions.
This approach means extra time and work beyond course requirements until one can form one's
own conclusion or understanding.
Back to the question we asked, which of these approaches is more likely related to
higher quality learning outcomes?
Research has consistently demonstrated
the correlations between students' deeper approaches
to learning and higher quality learning outcomes.
However, it will become a bit tricky to answer this question
if we replace 'higher quality learning outcomes' in the question with 'higher scores',
because 'high scores' don't necessarily mean 'high quality learning'
unless they measure high quality learning.
For example, student X, who normally approaches learning by rote memorization,
may find the strategy won't work if the assessment involves
presenting one's own critical analysis on ideas.
So this student may go deep because of the demand of the learning environment.
He or she can only obtain 'higher scores' if he or she goes deep.
For another example, student Y is a student who normally engages deeply with learning
materials and searches for deep understanding.
He or she may choose strategically to recite the specific facts
when he or she finds that
the achievement will be measured based on the accuracy of his or her memory of the facts.
In this case, surface approach may be correlated with 'high score' instead of deep approach.
There can be many possible interactions between student and the learning environment.
In both examples, students decide to learn in certain ways as a result of their interpretations
of the learning environments.
That is why scholars in this field have reminded people
not to categorize student s as 'surface learner' or 'deep learner'.
Rather they should be seen as a function of individual characteristics and
the learning environment such as teacher's approach to teaching.
the demand of assessment, teacher expectations, and so on.
Now that we know deeper approach to learning was found to be related
with higher quality learning outcomes.
In your opinion, which of the following teaching approaches
is positively related to student deep approach to learning?
What is your choice?
Option A and B in this question describe two extreme categories of teaching approaches
proposed by Trigwell, Prosser and their colleagues.
Along the continuum between the two extremes, there are three other categories.
Similar to student approaches to learning,
each teaching approach has an intention and a strategy component.
Option A represents an extreme of information transmission or teacher-focused approach where
the intention is to transmit information to the students.
The teaching strategies involve a focus on detailed information
instead of the relationship between them,
and helping students to pass the formal assessment
instead of engaging them actively in learning.
Option B represents an extreme of conceptual change or student-focused approach.
The intention here is to help students change their conceptual understanding of the subject.
The teaching strategies involve a focus on helping students to construct their own knowledge.
Students are given the responsibility to produce new conceptions.
What the students are doing is considered more important than what a teacher is doing.
The other three approaches between these two extremes along the continuum are
teacher-focused strategy with the intention that students acquire the concepts of the discipline,
Teacher and student interaction strategy with the intention
that students acquire the concepts of the discipline, and
student-focused strategy aiming at helping
students to develop their conceptions.
Back to the question we asked, which of these approaches to teaching is positively related
to student deep approach to learning?
Research found more student-focused approach to teaching
was correlated with student deeper approach to learning.