Measuring perceptions of the learning environment and approaches to learning: validation of the learn questionnaire

Herrmann, Kim Jesper; Bager-Elsborg, Anna; Parpala, Anna

doi:10.1080/00313831.2016.1172497

Cited by 46 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These three items were thus removed from the final analysis. For the TLE, the exploratory factor analysis yielded a four-factor solution, which is in line with previous studies (e.g., Herrmann et al, 2016). The reliability of all these scales was above .60, which can be considered to be acceptable.…”

Section: Analysessupporting

confidence: 88%

How do self-regulation and self-efficacy beliefsassociate with law students’ experiences of teaching and learning?

Hyytinen

Haarala-Muhonen

Räisänen

2019

Uniped

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-regulation and self-efficacy beliefs are essential factors for university students' performance and academic success. Surprisingly, little is known about how these aspects are related to students' experiences of the teaching-learning environment. This study examines the relationship between self-regulation, self-efficacy beliefs, experiences of the teaching and learning among master's level law students (n=103) at a new course of legal methodologies (3 ECTS). Three different student groups with remarkable differences in selfregulation were detected. The groups differed in terms of their experiences of the teaching and learning environment, such as the relevance of this master's level course, as well as their descriptions of learning outcomes. Self-regulated students saw the teaching-learning environment in a mostly positive way, and they were able to elaborate their learning outcomes. However, there were no connections between the groups and self-efficacy beliefs. This study suggests that students' self-regulation should be taken into account when considering student-centred learning and teaching in higher education. Once there is an awareness of differences between students, pedagogical practices can be modified to suit the needs of those students who may or may not already have a more developed ability to regulate their learning processes.

show abstract

Section: Analysessupporting

confidence: 88%

How do self-regulation and self-efficacy beliefsassociate with law students’ experiences of teaching and learning?

Hyytinen

Haarala-Muhonen

Räisänen

2019

Uniped

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since approaches to learning are well-defined constructs (Herrmann et al, 2016;Parpala & Lindblom-Ylänne, 2012) and the scales' internal reliabilities (Cronbach's a) ranged from 0.71 to 0.78 (see Table 2), the conditions for mean substitution were satisfied. Also, no variables with extreme skewness (larger than numerical 3.0) were observed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first section of the Learn, thus, includes 12 items measuring three aspects of students' approaches: Deep approach ('I look at evidence carefully to reach my own conclusion about what I'm studying'), surface approach ('Even though I study some things over and over again to remember them, they do not make sense to me'), and organised effort ('I am generally systematic and organized in my studies' ). The 12 items were translated into Danish with minor modifications, and confirmatory factor analysis suggested that the three scales were applicable in the context of Danish higher education (Herrmann, Bager-Elsborg & Parpala, 2016).…”

Section: Instrument and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaches to learning as predictors of academic achievement: Results from a large scale, multi-level analysis

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationships between university students' academic achievement and their approaches to learning and studying continuously attract scholarly attention. We report the results of an analysis in which multilevel linear modelling was used to analyse data from 3,626 Danish university students. Controlling for the effects of age, gender, and progression, we found that the students' end-of-semester grade point averages were related negatively to a surface approach and positively to organised effort. Interestingly, the effect of the surface approach on academic achievement varied across programmes. While there has been considerable interest in the ways in which academic programmes shape learning and teaching, the effects of these contexts on the relationship between approaches to learning and academic outcomes is underresearched. The results are discussed in relation to findings from recent meta-analyses in the field.

show abstract

“…We used the most recent version of the HowULearn questionnaire in which the surface approach items concentrate on measuring only the first-mentioned factor reflecting the Fragmented knowledge and Memorising without understanding (see Table 1) because this four-item scale seems to be very robust (Parpala and Lindblom-Ylänne 2012). The reliabilities in the newest version of the instrument have been good, with a Cronbach's alpha over .70 (Hailikari and Parpala 2014;Herrmann, Bager-Elsborg, and Parpala 2017).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In addition, John Biggs designed the Study Process Questionnaire SPQ in 1987 and later published a revised version of it (R-SPQ-2F) together with his colleagues (Biggs, Kember, and Leung 2001). More recently, an instrument called HowULearn (Hailikari and Parpala 2014;Herrmann, Bager-Elsborg, and Parpala 2017;Parpala and Lindblom-Ylänne 2012) was developed on the basis of the ALSI and LSQ. Moreover, it uses some items from the Revised Learning Process Questionnaire (R-LPQ-2F), an instrument parallel to the R-SPQ-2F but designed especially for secondary education (Kember, Biggs, and Leung 2004), to measure deep approaches to learning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What constitutes the surface approach to learning in the light of new empirical evidence?

Lindblom‐Ylänne

Parpala

Postareff

2018

Studies in Higher Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims, firstly, to examine the nature of the surface approach to learning in today's university context, and secondly, to explore the factors that explain variations in the use of this approach. The 61 participants were studying in six Bachelor programmes representing various disciplines. These students scored above average on a surface approach scale and volunteered to be interviewed. One compulsory course was selected from each programme. Five surface approach profiles emerged showing variation from a full surface approach to a deep approach with memorisation. Despite very similar high scores on the surface approach scale, students varied in their use of surface-level processes. Thus, the inventory data did not capture the full variation in the students' use of the surface approach to learning. Rich research methods are therefore needed to better understand the nature of students' personal aims as well as their study processes and practices. KEYWORDSSurface approach to learning; approaches to learning; university; studying; variation in learning; qualitative method

show abstract

Measuring perceptions of the learning environment and approaches to learning: validation of the learn questionnaire

Cited by 46 publications

References 30 publications

How do self-regulation and self-efficacy beliefsassociate with law students’ experiences of teaching and learning?

How do self-regulation and self-efficacy beliefsassociate with law students’ experiences of teaching and learning?

Approaches to learning as predictors of academic achievement: Results from a large scale, multi-level analysis

What constitutes the surface approach to learning in the light of new empirical evidence?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About