Course experience, approaches to learning and academic achievement

Åge Diseth · Ståle Pallesen · Svein Larsen

109 citations0/0 files storedEducation + Training

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Evaluation of Teaching Practices Higher Education Research Studies Educational Outcomes and Influences

Abstract

Purpose The present study seeks to compare scores on factors from the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) with scores on an abbreviated version of the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST) and examination grade among undergraduate psychology students. The purpose is to investigate the relationship between course experience and approaches to learning, and to examine their relative importance as predictors of academic achievement. Design/methodology/approach Confirmatory factor analyses and structural equation modelling were utilised in order to find measurement models for each of the constructs and to test hypothesised structural relations between these constructs. Findings The original CEQ and ASSIST factors were reproduced. A model in which course experience factors predicted SAL was supported, but the same model did not provide evidence for any indirect or mediator effect between course experience, approaches to learning and academic achievement. Indirect empirical support for a hypothesised causal link between course experience and approaches to learning was found. Research limitations/implications Weak relations between the predictor variables (course experience/approaches to learning) and academic achievement limited the possibility of identifying mediator effects, and future research should address this issue. Practical implications Lecturers and course designers should take into account that students' approaches to learning are influenced by course experience, especially with respect to the adoption of a surface approach to learning. Originality/value This paper included a comparison between course experience, approaches to learning, and academic achievement, whereas most previous research has not included academic achievement. The utilisation of confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling gave a stronger test of construct validity than exploratory analyses, and it facilitated the testing of hypothesised structural models.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 109 citations exist upstream.

References

1992Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit 1990Comparative fit indexes in structural models.2000Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming 1995Testing Structural Equation Models.1999Teaching For Quality Learning At University 2003Learning to Teach in Higher Education 1976ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING: I—OUTCOME AND PROCESS*1984Understanding Student Learning

Cited by

2010The perception of workload and task complexity and its influence on students’ approaches to learning: a study in higher education 2011The role of social identification as university student in learning: relationships between students’ social identity, approaches to learning, and academic achievement 2015Chinese undergraduates’ perceptions of teaching quality and the effects on approaches to studying and course satisfaction 2016Quality in blended learning environments – Significant differences in how students approach learning collaborations 2009Undergraduates’ learning experience and learning process: quantitative evidence from the East

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.