Understanding How Students Study: The Genealogy and Conceptual Basis of A Widely Used Pedagogical Research Tool, Biggs’ Study Process Questionnaire

Abstract

The Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) continues to be applied in a wide range of pedagogical situations. However, the question remains as to how well a researcher understands the conceptual basis behind the tool they choose. This essay provides a compact and comprehensive view of the conceptual basis for the development of the original SPQ, and the later revised version (R-SPQ-2F), and offers a way for a researcher to quickly be informed on the concepts underpinning the tool, enabling the opportunity to quickly assess whether the R-SPQ-2F is an appropriate tool to be using in there study. In this essay we look at the earliest stages in the development of the SPQ, through to the development of the revised Study Process Questionnaire unpacking the underlying conceptual model.

Main individual factors influencing the learning approaches: The first-year students’ perspective

“…Our theoretical framework is based on the SAL as defined by the designer of the instrument. The R-SPQ-2F is less bulky in its current form [25] and it has shown a great importance and a global use [27] in different contexts. The SAL quantitative data of 150 students (99 males and 51 females) taken randomly were analyzed and evaluated during the beginning of the second semester of 2018.…”

Pendekatan Proses Belajar dalam kalangan Murid Sejarah: Permukaan atau Dalaman?

“…Tambahan pula, menurut Biggs (1987), pendekatan proses belajar terdiri daripada dua konstruk utama iaitu konstruk motif iaitu merujuk kepada mengapa murid mengaplikasikan pendekatan proses belajar dan konstruk strategi iaitu bagaimana murid mengaplikasikan pendekatan proses belajar tersebut. Ciri-ciri pendekatan proses belajar permukaan dan proses belajar dalaman (Entwistle, 1987;Entwistle & Tait, 1990;Yesilyurt, 2013;Lake, Boyd & Boyd, 2017;Ahamed et al, 2017) Walau bagaimanapun, adalah tidak dinafikan bahawa proses belajar adalah berteraskan kepada Teori Pembelajaran Konstruktivisme yang menyediakan murid sebagai pembina pengetahuan secara aktif dan bukannya sebagai penerima pengetahuan, di samping menyediakan peluang kepada murid untuk membina pengetahuan tentang topik yang dipelajari dengan cara mengaitkannya dengan pengetahuan atau pengalaman sedia ada (Noriati et al, 2009;Duffy & Cunningham, 1996;Gagnon & Collay, 2001;Fourie, 2003).…”

Exploring Variation in Student Academic Performance: Can Achievement in an Immersive Case Study Project Predict Exam Score in an Introductory Accounting Course?

“…Earlier studies suggest that RSPQ2F adequately measures the task perception of students who adopt surface versus deep(er) approaches to learning in general (Justicia et al, 2008;Lake et al, 2017). While scholars have translated it for non-native English students (e.g., Bati et al, 2010;Stes et al, 2013;Mirghani et al, 2014;Zakariya et al, 2020), the instrument's applicability to students beyond the Hong Kong study population highlighted in Biggs et al (2001) is questionable (Immekus & Imbrie, 2010).…”