Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Learning in First-Year Biology: Approaches of Distance and On-Campus Students

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper aims to extend previous research into learning of tertiary biology, by exploring the learning approaches adopted by two groups of students studying the same first-year biology topic in either on-campus or off-campus “distance” modes. The research involved 302 participants, who responded to a topic-specific version of the Study Process Questionnaire, and in-depth interviews with 16 of these students. Several quantitative analytic techniques, including cluster analysis and Rasch differential item functioning analysis, showed that the younger, on-campus cohort made less use of deep approaches, and more use of surface approaches than the older, off-campus group. At a finer scale, clusters of students within these categories demonstrated different patterns of learning approach. Students’ descriptions of their learning approaches at interview provided richer complementary descriptions of the approach they took to their study in the topic, showing how deep and surface approaches were manifested in the study context. These findings are critically analysed in terms of recent literature questioning the applicability of learning approaches theory in mass education, and their implications for teaching and research in undergraduate biology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, R. & Khoo, S.-T. (1993). Quest: the interactive test analysis system. Melbourne: The Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrich, D. (1988). Rasch models for measurement. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, R., Abrami, P., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., et al. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1993). From theory to practice: a cognitive systems approach. Higher Education Research and Development, 12(1), 73–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1999). What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research and Development, 18(1), 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, T. G. & Fox, C. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, K., Gordon, S., Nicholas, J., & Prosser, M. (1998a). Qualitatively different experiences of learning mathematics at university. Learning and Instruction, 8(5), 455–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, K., Gordon, S., Nicholas, J., & Prosser, M. (1998b). University mathematics students' conceptions of mathematics. Studies in Higher Education, 23, 87–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuthbert, P. (2005). The student learning process: learning styles or learning approaches? Teaching in Higher Education, 10(2), 235–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dart, B. & Boulton-Lewis, G. (1998). Teaching and learning in higher education. Melbourne: Australian Council for Eductional Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson. I. (2007). Sustaining science: university science in the twenty-first century. A study commissioned by the Australian council of deans of science: centre for population & urban research, Monash University & the educational policy institute Pty ltd.

  • Eizenberg, N. (1988). Approaches to learning anatomy: Developing a programme for preclinical medical students. In P. Ramsden (Ed.), Improving learning: New perspectives (pp. 178–198). London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. & Marton, F. (1984). Changing conceptions of learning and research. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 211–228). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N., Meyer, J., & Tait, H. (1991). Student failure: disintegrated patterns of study strategies and perceptions of the learning environment. Higher Education, 21, 246–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorard, S., See, B. H., Smith, E., & White, P. (2006). Teacher supply: The key issues. London: Continuum International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haggis, T. (2003). Constructing images of ourselves? A critical investigation into 'Approaches to Learning' research in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 29(1), 89–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, G. & Kember, D. (1986). Approaches to study of distance education students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 212–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, G. & Kember, D. (1989). Interpretation of factor analyses from the approaches to studying inventory. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 66–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K.-L. & Farrell, K. (2007). The science shortfall: an analysis of the shortage of suitably qualified science teachers in Australian schools and the policy implications for universities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29(2), 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. & Watkins, D. (1981). Australian and Filipino investigations of the internal structure of Biggs' new study process questionnaire. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 241–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazel, E., Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (2002). Variation in learning orchestration in university biology courses. International Journal of Science Education, 24(7), 737–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kember, D. (1990). The intention to both memorise and understand: another approach to learning? Higher Education, 31, 341–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, W. (2003). Dissonance detected by cluster analysis of responses to the approaches and study skills inventory for students. Studies in Higher Education, 28(1), 21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, T. (2006). The puzzle of falling enrolments in physics and chemistry: putting some pieces together. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 285–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. H. F. (2000). The modelling of 'dissonant' study orchestration in higher education. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15(1), 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. H. F. & Shanahan, M. (2003). Dissonant forms of 'memorising' and 'repetition'. Studies in Higher Education, 28(1), 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. & Huberman, A. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moin, L., Dorfield, J., & Schunn, C. (2005). Where can we find future K-12 science and math teachers? A search by academic year, discipline, and academic performance level. Science Education, 89(6), 980–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual. A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. Chicago: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M. & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M., Trigwell, K., Hazel, E., & Gallagher, P. (1994). Students' experiences of teaching and learning at the topic level. Research and Development in Higher Education, 16, 285–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M., Walker, P., & Millar, R. (1995). Differences in students perceptions of learning physics. Physics Education, 31, 43–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M., Hazel, E., Trigwell, K., & Lyons, F. (1996). Qualitative and quantitative indicators of students' understanding of physics concepts. Research and Development in Higher Education, 19, 670–675.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, F. (2006a). Engaging from a distance and on-campus with an introductory biology unit. Paper presented at the 9th International Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference - “Engaging Students”, 12–14 July 2006.

  • Quinn, F. (2006b). Learning approaches and outcomes in a first–year biology topic: A relational study involving distance and on–campus students. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of New England, Armidale.

  • Quinn, F., & Callingham, R. (2005). A Rasch measurement analysis of learning approaches: Internal and external students studying a first-year biology topic. Poster presentation. Paper presented at the Activity session, HERDSA conference, 3–6 July 2005.

  • Ramsden, P. (1984). The context of learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 198–216). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, P. (1991). A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education: the course experience questionnaire. Studies in Higher Education, 16(2), 129–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (1994a). Cultural specificity of approaches to studying in higher education: A literature survey. Higher Education, 27, 449–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (1994b). Mature students in higher education: I. A literature survey on approaches to studying. Studies in Higher Education, 19(3), 309–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (1994c). Using questionnaires to evaluate student learning: Some health warnings. In G. Gibbs (Ed.), Improving student learning—theory and practice (pp. 73–88). Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (1998). Dispelling some myths about mature students in higher education: Study skills, approaches to studying, and intellectual ability. In P. Sutherland (Ed.), Adult learning: A reader (pp. 166–174). London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (2000). Researching student learning: Approaches to studying in campus-based and distance education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (2004). Methodological issues in questionnaire-based research on student learning in higher education. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 347–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E., Morgan, A., & Woodley, A. (1999). Approaches to studying in distance education. Higher Education, 37, 23–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowntree, D. (1987). Assessing students: How shall we know them? London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS. (2005). SPSS 12.0 Base System: SPSS Inc.

  • Tabachnick, B. & Fidell, L. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trigwell, K. & Prosser, M. (1997). Towards an understanding of individual acts of teaching and learning. Higher Education Research and Development, 16(2), 241–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37, 57–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D. (1996). Learning theories and approaches to research: A cross-cultural perspective. In D. Watkins & J. Biggs (Eds.), The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological and contextual influences (pp. 3–24). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre and The Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D. & Hattie, J. (1981). The learning processes of Australian university students: investigations of contextual and personological factors. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 384–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watters, D. & Watters, J. (2007). Approaches to learning by students in the biological sciences: implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 29(1), 19–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. & Masters, G. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeegers, P. (1999). Student learning in science: a longitudinal study using the Biggs SPQ. Paper presented at the HERDSA annual international conference 12–15 July 1999, Melbourne.

  • Zeegers, P. (2001). Approaches to learning in science: a longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 115–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I gratefully acknowledge the comments and suggestions of John Pegg and Sarah Stein, and Rosemary Callingham for assistance with Rasch measurement modelling. My thanks are also extended to Michael Prosser for permission to use the topic-specific version of the SPQ and advice during the course of this study, and Erik Meyer for useful discussion on cluster analysis. Finally I am very grateful to the staff of the First Year Biology Teaching unit who facilitated the research, and to the students who generously gave their time to participate in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, 2350, Australia

    Frances Catherine Quinn

Authors
  1. Frances Catherine Quinn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frances Catherine Quinn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Quinn, F.C. Learning in First-Year Biology: Approaches of Distance and On-Campus Students. Res Sci Educ 41, 99–121 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9148-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9148-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation