los, r. learning approaches and memory in academia · 2016-01-31 · learning approaches and memory...

Learning Approaches 1

Running Head: LEARNING APPROACHES AND MEMORY

Learning Approaches and Memory in Academia

Ryan E.B. Los

University of Winnipeg

(May 1, 2009)


Abstract

Learning Approaches may mediate the significant relationship between Academic Aptitude (AA)

and Academic Performance (AP). To test this hypothesis, 127 university students completed the

Wonderlic Personnel Test-Revised (WPT-R, a short measure of AA), the Approaches and Study

Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST), a self-report academic history (one measure of AP), and

a passage comprehension measure (a second measure of AP). As predicted, both measures of AP

were positively correlated with AA and with different learning approaches (surface, strategic,

and deep approach). However, controlling statistically for ASSIST strategies did not reduce the

relationship between AA and AP, as expected given the mediation hypothesis. This occurred

because there was no relationship between AA and the learning approaches. Findings suggest

further examination is needed of the relationships between IQ, Learning Approaches, and AP.


Learning Approaches and Memory in Academia The influence of academic aptitude (AA) on academic performance (AP) is significant

and substantial, especially in grades where restriction of range is not an issue; however, there is

limited understanding of this relationship, specifically how academic aptitude affects AP.

Learning approaches, which vary among individuals, may explain the relationship between AA

and AP. In essence, the learning approach used by people could further our understanding of the

relationship between AA and AP if learning approaches served as a mediating variable.

Early research on the relationship between AA and AP began with the introduction of the

Binet-Scales and the development of the intelligence quotient (IQ). Through these measures,

Binet (1903) determined that AA could predict people’s AP. According to Chamorro-Premuzic

and Furnham (2006), the best way to validate an IQ score to ensure intelligence is being

measured is to determine if test results correlate with AP outcomes. By combining overall

performance on essay marks and exams, an individuals’ AP can be determined; essentially, this

is the average grade across all academic courses, also known as the grade point average (GPA).

Chamorro-Premuzic and Furnham (2006) stated that the impressive evidence for IQ

predicting school, university, and occupational success leaves little doubt that IQ is a major

predictor of AP.

The present study measured AA or IQ with the Wonderlic Personnel Test – Revised.

Dodrill (1981) tested the validity of the WPT-R and the highly respected Wechsler Adult

Intelligence Scale (WAIS) (Wechsler, 1997). The study found that IQ measured by the WPT-R

only differed by .21 of a single point when compared to the WAIS, and that the correlation

between the two tests was .93 (Dodrill, 1981). Based on these findings, an IQ conversion table

between the WPT-R and WAIS was developed, where the WAIS’s familiar mean of 100,


indicated average intelligence. The efficiency of the WPT-R comes at a price. Specifically, the

results of the WPT-R provide less detail than the WAIS and other longer IQ measures. The

WAIS provides data on various types of intelligence not offered in the WPT-R. Despite this

shortcoming, the WPT-R is still a very accurate indicator of overall AA (Dodrill, 1981).

Although IQ accounts for a considerable proportion of the variance in AP scores

(Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2006), IQ does not account for all the variance; therefore,

other determinants of AP must exist. Moreover, it remains unclear why AA is such a strong

predictor of AP without further information about factors that might mediate this relationship.

To establish mediating connections between AA and AP involves several tests. First, a

connection must be established between the mediating contributor and AP. Once sufficient

evidence has been presented to support this connection, another connection is required between

AA and the potential mediator. Finally, controlling statistically for the mediating variable should

weaken the contribution of AA relative to its contribution to AP when alone.

One possible mediator of the AA � AP connection is learning approach (LA). Brown

and Holtzman (1966) developed one of the first learning inventories, the Brown-Holtzman

Inventory. The measure contained four subscales: work methods (effective study procedures),

delay avoidance (promptness in completing work), teacher approval (favorable opinions about

teachers), and educational acceptance (approval of educational objectives) (as stated in Entwistle

& McCune, 2004).

Entwistle and Entwistle (1970) added an academic motivation scale to the Brown-

Holtzman Inventory. The academic motivation scale measures a competitive and self-confident

form of achievement motivation, based on research by Atkinson and Feather (1966). As well,

Entwistle included the factor of personality, as he believed and provided evidence that students


with differing personality types and motivation were likely to study using contrasting approaches

(Entwistle, Thompson, & Wilson, 1974). But the primary finding was that deep and surface

approaches to learning were established.

Marton and Saljo (1976) clarified the deep and surface approaches to learning. An

intention and attempt to understand course material is a defining feature of the deep learning

approach. In contrast, the surface approach is characterized by an intention to simply reproduce

the material. The deep and surface approaches to learning use intention as a fundamental

criterion for different learning processes (Marton and Saljo, 1997). Based on Marton and Saljo’s

(1976) contributions in defining the deep and surface approach, Entwistle modified his previous

theory by comparing everyday experiences to studying. Everyday experiences to studying is the

ability of individuals to adapt to the environment and current task at hand to the best suited

approach. According to Entwistle, Hanley, and Hounsell (1979) the deep and surface approaches

are activated during different tasks.

Further modifications of this inventory led to the addition of a new category, the strategic

approach. The strategic approach is an awareness and achievement of study requirements.

Essentially, individuals who used this strategy were able to define what counts in getting high

marks. As implied by its name, individuals use the strategic approach to take a systematic or

strategic approach in organizing details that are required for memorization. Therefore, the

strategic approach is not the specific act of studying, but rather a method of studying the absolute

essentials for academic success (Entwistle & McCune, 2004). This led to a new assessment tool

called the Approaches to Studying Inventory (ASI) (Entwistle & Ramsden, 1983).

Tait, Entwistle, and McCune (1998) further divided the three main learning approaches.

The deep approach is comprised of seeking meaning, relating ideas, using evidence, interest in


ideas, preferences for different types of courses and teaching, and supporting understanding. The

strategic approach is comprised of organized studying, time management, alertness to assessment

demands, achieving, and monitoring effectiveness. The surface approach is comprised of a lack

of purpose, unrelated memorizing, syllabus-boundness, and fear of failure (see Appendix A)

(Tait et al, 1998).

Wilding and Andrews (2006) demonstrated that the deep approach was associated with

altruistic life goals, the surface approach was associated with wealth and status life goals, and the

strategic approach was related to both types of life goals.

Diseth and Martinsen (2003) proposed that learning approaches could contribute to the

variance in AP. Participants completed a learning approach inventory called the Approaches and

Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST) and an examination that measured AP. The results

confirmed relationships between the learning approaches (deep, strategic, and surface) and AP.

Further support of the relationship between learning approaches and AP was shown by

Brackney and Karabenick (1995). It was found that individuals with well-developed

comprehension monitoring skills understood better when material was insufficiently understood;

thus, they demonstrated a greater likelihood of using an advanced (deep and strategic) learning

approach. AP was directly related to the use of an advanced learning approach. (Brackney &

Karabenick, 1995).

Schutz (1997) also observed a significant relationship between learning approach and AP.

He found that valuing educational goals was related positively to cognitive variables, specifically

the learning approach used and AP.

Riding and Rayner (1998) raised an important issue regarding the learning approaches

measured by the ASSIST, whether the learning approaches are stable and consistent over time.


The researchers proposed that different learning approaches may be adopted as a response to

environmental demands. The effects of habituation allow individuals to develop a consistent

study approach across time and environmental demands that they are most comfortable with;

however, this does not necessarily mean they will make use of the learning approach that is best

suited for them and that will offer the best possible AP outcome.

The other connection proposed by the hypothesis that learning approaches mediate the

AA� AP connection is a relationship between intelligence and learning approaches, AA � LA.

However, I have found no empirical evidence supporting a relationship between AA and learning

approaches. Research has focused primarily on learning approaches as determinants of AP, as

opposed to identifying the determinants of learning approaches and whether they are influenced

by AA. Research is required to identify and establish this relationship in order to complete the

proposed mediational model: AA � LA � AP.

The purpose of the present study was to further our understanding of the relationship

between AA and AP. Based on past research, the role of learning approaches in mediating the

relationship between AA and AP was examined.

The hypotheses underlying the present study are summarized here. The study first

examined if IQ would predict AP; individuals with higher IQ scores should score higher in

academic performance. The study also examined if different learning approaches would predict

AP. AP should correlate positively with a deep approach to learning and negatively with a

surface approach. The strategic approach should also correlate positively with AP. Finally,

mediational analysis examined whether the contribution of AA to AP weakened when learning

approach was controlled in a regression analysis. AP was measured by the Academic Index and a


Memory Task. If IQ scores contribute to AP, then controlling for a specific learning approach

should reduce and perhaps eliminate the contribution of IQ to AP.

Method

Participants

The participants were 127 students, M age=19.58, from the University of Winnipeg who

volunteered for partial fulfillment of the requirements of Introductory Psychology. The sample

was made up of 77 females, 45 males, and 5 participants who did not answer the gender item.

All participants read and signed a Consent Form and participants under 18 years of age

were required to present a signed Parent Consent Form before beginning the experiment.

Completed assessment forms were held in a secure area separate from the consent forms. Upon

completion of the experiment, participants were given a debriefing statement that provided

information about the study.

Materials

The study used the following measures: the Wonderlic Personnel Test Revised (WPT-R),

the ACT Reading Passages and Questionnaire, The Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for

Students (ASSIST), and an Academic Index Questionnaire.

The Wonderlic Personnel Test (Wonderlic, 1973) consists of 50 cognitive items that

make use of diverse subject matter: general information, similarities and differences in verbal

and nonverbal materials, vocabulary, visual-spatial tasks, reasoning, abstraction, and problems in

calculation. The quantitative questions are based on fractions and decimals, algebra, and basic

math problems. The vocabulary questions are based on spelling and proper language use, as well

as general logic (see Appendix B) (Hawkins, Faraone, Pepple, Seidman, & Tsuang, 1990). The


final score of the Wonderlic Personnel test is the proportion of items correctly answered in the

12-minute time span allotted to complete the test.

The ACT Reading Passages and Questionnaire (The American College Testing Program,

1990) is a memory assessment that incorporates three reading passages with diverse writing

styles. Following each reading passage, six multiple choice questions were presented to assess

several different areas of reading comprehension and memory, including s��

�� , c��, p�� , and c�� (Loken,

Radlinski, Crespi, Millet, & Cushing, 2004) (see Appendix D)��questions focused on the

kinds of information that students must extract when studying written materials across a broad

range of subject areas. The kinds of information measured included: determining main ideas,

locating and interpreting significant details, understanding sequences of events, making

comparisons, comprehending cause-effect relationships, determining the meaning of context-

dependent words, drawing generalizations, and analyzing the author's or narrator's voice and

method (ACT Inc. Test Prep, 2009).

The writing styles included were in the areas of Social Science (see Appendix C),

Humanities, and Natural Science. The selection of different writing styles reduced the likelihood

of students being able to score high on all three passages because they were related to their own

field of study.

The social science passage was based on a typical nonfiction reading. The question

categories included one question from each of the following types: specific detail, inference,

main idea and argument, cause-effect, point of view, and comparison (The American College

Testing Program, 1990)��


The humanities passage generally dealt with a topic of cultural interest. The questions

included two questions on s��

�� The American College

Testing Program, 1990)��

The natural science passage was based heavily on scientific facts, argument, cause-effect

logic, and details. The questions included one question from each of the following types: s��

�� The

Natural science passage contained the largest number of facts compared to the other two

passages; thus, many of the questions related to this passage tested if individuals were able to

learn and remember facts. Questions following the natural science passage also asked individuals

to further develop information read in the passage, while identifying the cause and effect

relationships (The American College Testing Program, 1990).

The Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (Tait et al. 1998), more

commonly known as the ASSIST, was used to measure study approaches. Vermunt (1996) noted

that as study approach inventories become longer in length and time, the less care students take

in completing it. The most effective and efficient length is 50 questions that can be completed in

under 15 minutes, the same number of questions used by the ASSIST.

There are three main learning approaches used during studying: deep, strategic, and

surface (Tait et al., 1998). The three main learning approaches are comprised of several sub-

categories. The deep approach consists of: seeking meaning, relating ideas, use of evidence,

interest in ideas, preferences for different types of course and teaching, and supporting

understanding. The strategic approach consists of: organized studying, time management,

alertness to assessment demands, achieving and monitoring effectiveness. Contrary to the deep


and strategic approaches, the surface apathetic approach consists of: lack of purpose, unrelated

memorizing, syllabus-boundness, preferences for different types of course and teaching, fear of

failure, preferences for different types of course and teaching and transmitting information (Tait,

et al., 1998).

The final measure was an Academic Index questionaire. Participants used a Likert-scale

to rate their self-perceived evaluation of their AP in high school: comparison to peers and

number of classes where the participant was the top student in the class. Students were also

asked about their University performance: the number of credits already obtained, their

approximate grade point average, their expected letter grade in Introductory Psychology, and a

self-perceived overall grade of how the participant perceived themselves as University students

based on their self-reported grades (see Appendix E).

Design and Procedure

Participants were given three minutes to read over the first page of the WPT-R, which

included directions and three sample questions. Participants were asked if there were any

questions regarding the instructions. Once all participants had read the instructions, participants

were instructed to turn the page and begin the Wonderlic Personnel Test. Participants had 12

minutes to complete the test.

Upon completion of the WPT-R, participants were asked to proceed to the next page and

read the instructions for the Memory Task. Participants were asked if there were any questions

regarding the instructions. Once all participants had read the instructions, participants were

instructed to turn the page and begin the Memory Task, which contained 3 different sections on

social science, humanities, and natural sciences. Following the eight minutes allocated to read

each passage, participants were asked six questions about each passage.


Once the Memory Task was finished, participants completed a short questionaire titled,

How you Studied. Participants rated how knowledgeable they were about the subject matter of

the passages before they read them, and also rated their agreement with several specific

statements about how they had studied each reading passage. When all participants had

completed this questionaire, they proceeded to the next page and began reading instructions for

the next task, the ASSIST.

Participants were able to ask the Principle Investigator any questions regarding the

ASSIST and were informed that this test was untimed. On the first page of this task, the

participants were asked for their age, gender, and year of study. Following the ASSIST,

participants answered several questions about their AP, as described earlier.


Results

Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1. Letter grades reported by participants in

the Academic Index questions were converted into a numerical scale, ranging from 0 to 9. Z-

scores were computed for each of the six variables, and then averaged to produce an Academic

Index (AI) score. Cronbach’s alpha for the AI was good (see Table 1). The Memory Task (M =

.591, SD = .175), developed by computing the proportion of correct answers across all passages

and questions, indicated that 59.1% of questions were answered correctly with moderate

reliability. The WPT-R (M = .464, SD = .113), developed by computing the proportion of correct

answers, indicated that 46.4% of questions were answered correctly with good reliability. Thus,

the average traditional IQ score of all participants was about 105. Factor analysis of the ASSIST

confirmed the three expected factors. Factor scores were generated for the deep approach, the

surface approach, and the strategic approach. As shown in Table 1, reliabilities were good for all

three scales. No significant effects involving sex or age were found in subsequent analyses; thus,

these variables will not be reported.

Table 1

Descriptive Statistics and Reliabilities Variables

Variable M SD Cronbach’s Alpha

Academic Index -.001 .781 .834

Memory Task .591 .175 .638

Wonderlic Personnel Test-Revised .464 .113 .796

Assist - Deep Approach .0 1.0 .881

Assist - Strategic Approach .0 1.0 .892

Assist - Surface Approach .0 1.0 .778

Note. N = 127.


Correlations between the variables are shown in Table 2. The two measures of Academic

Performance, AI and MT, correlated modestly with one another. As expected the two measures

of AP (AI and MT) correlated well with WPT-R, the measure of academic aptitude. Correlations

involving the study strategy measures were more complex.

Table 2

Correlation of Variables

Subscale 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Academic Index - .279** .411** .346** .140.. -.287**

2. Memory Task - .525** -.140… .191* -.210*..

3. Wonderlic Personnel Test-Revised - -.126… .061.. -.104…

4. Assist - Deep Approach - .000.. .000…

5. Assist - Strategic Approach - .000…

6. Assist - Surface Approach -

Note. N = 127. * p < .05 ** p < .01

The data of the Academic Index and Memory Task were analyzed separately in three

ways: prediction by the WPT-R, prediction by ASSIST scores, and through mediational analysis

where ASSIST scores were added as predictors in addition to WPT-R. This was done to see if

learning approach weakened the contribution of WPT-R to AI and the memory task.

Subsequently, the relationship between WPT-R and the learning approaches was examined using

multiple regression.

Academic Index

The WPT-R was a reliable predictor of Academic Index, t(127) = 4.88, p = .001,

predicting 16.89% of the variability in AI (see Table 2). Figure 1 shows that the relationship was

essentially linear.


To examine the relationship between study strategy and AI, AI was regressed on the three

study strategy factors. The three ASSIST study approaches predicted 22.1% (R = .47) of the

variability in the Academic Index measure, F(2, 127) = 11.66, p = .001. See Table 3 for the

individual contribution of the ASSIST study approaches. The deep approach was a

nonsignificant predictor, t(127) = 1.381, p = .17 and accounted for just 1.91% of the variability

in the AI measure. The strategic approach showed a significant relationship, t(127) = 4.33, p =

.001 and accounted for 11.97% of the variability. The surface approach also showed a significant

relationship; however, it was negative, as expected, t(127) = -3.42, p = .001, and accounted for

8.23% of the variability in AI.

In the mediational analysis, adding the ASSIST learning approaches did not reduce the

contribution of WPT-R to AP. This is shown in Table 4 where there was no change in

significance (p=.001) when ASSIST scores were added to WTP-R. The strategic and surface

study approaches also remained significant, upon adding the ASSIST study approaches to WPT-

R. The results show that the deep approach had a nonsignificant relationship, t(127) = 1.61, p =

.110, the strategic approach had a significant relationship, t(127) = 5.655, p = .001, and the

surface approach had a significant, negative relationship, t(127) = -3.44, p = .001 (see Table 4).

Table 3

Academic Index Predicted by ASSIST

Variable B SE B �

Step 1

Assist - Deep Approach .090 .065 .113..

Assist - Strategy Approach .271 .062 .354*

Assist - Surface Approach -.212 .062 -.279*

Note. N = 127. * p < .05.


The four predictors accounted for a substantial 40% (R = .63) of the total variability in AI, F(3,

127) = 20.342, p = .001.

Memory Task

The WPT-R was a reliable predictor of the Memory Task, t(127) = 6.719, p = .001,

predicting 27.56% of the variability in the Memory Task (see Table 5). Figure 2 shows that the

relationship was essentially linear.

To examine the relationship between study strategy and the Memory Task, the Memory

Task was regressed on the three study strategy factors. The three ASSIST scores predicted 10.1%

(R = .31) of the variability in the Memory Task measure, F(2, 127) = 4.582 p = .004. See Table 5

for the individual contribution of the ASSIST study approaches. The deep approach was a

marginally significant predictor, t(127) = 1.98, p = .082 and accounted for 3.64% of the

variability in the Memory Task. The strategic approach showed a nonsignificant negative

relationship, t(127) = -1.52, p = .129 and accounted for just 1.96% of the variability in the

Table 4

Academic Index Mediational Analysis: Effects of Adding ASSIST to WPT-R

Variable B SE B �

Step 1

Wonderlic Personnel Test-Revised 2.843 .564 .411*

Step 2

Wonderlic Personnel Test-Revised 2.968 .492 .429*


Assist - Strategy Approach .312 .055 .400*


Note. N = 127. * p < .05.


Memory Task. The surface approach also showed a significant negative relationship t(127) = -

2.24, p = .027 and accounted for 4.41% of the variability in the Memory Task.

In the mediational analysis, adding the ASSIST learning approaches did not reduce the

contribution of WPT-R to academic performance. This is shown in Table 6 where there was no

change in significance (p = .001) when adding ASSIST to WTP-R. The deep and surface study

approaches also remained significant, upon adding the ASSIST study approaches to WPT-R. The

results show that the deep approach had a significant relationship, t(127) = 2.178, p = .031, the

strategic approach had a nonsignificant negative relationship t(127) = -1.052, p = .295, and the

surface approach shows a significant negative relationship, t(127) = -2.146, p = .034 (see Table

6). The four predictors accounted for a substantial 33.2% (R = .57) of the total variability in the

Memory Task, F(3, 127) = 15.154, p = .001.

Table 5

Memory Task Predicted by ASSIST

Variable B SE B �

Step 1


Assist - Strategy Approach -.023 .015 -.135..


Note. N = 127. * p < .05.


Relationship Between WPT-R and Study Approaches

The results of the mediation analyses were inconsistent with the hypothesis that study

approach would mediate the AA � AP relationship. As shown in Tables 2 and 7, the WPT-R

and the ASSIST Study Approaches are independent of one other. WPT-R is independent of the

Study Approaches taken individually (Table 2) and collectively (Table 7).

Table 7

WPT-R Regressed on Study Approaches

Variable B SE B �

Assist - Deep Approach -.014 .010 -.126

Assist - Strategy Approach .007 .010 .061

Assist - Surface Approach -.011 .010 -.104

Note. N = 127.

Table 6

Memory Task Mediational Analysis: Effects of Adding ASSIST to WPT-R

Variable B SE B �

Step 1

Wonderlic Personnel Test-Revised .813 .118 .525*

Step 2

Wonderlic Personnel Test-Revised .757 .116 .489*

Assist - Deep Approach .028 .013 .161*

Assist - Strategy Approach -.014 .013 -.078..


Note. N = 127. * p < .05.


Discussion

The purpose of the present study was to shed light on the AA � AP relationship and was

based on the prediction that learning approaches would mediate the relationship, at least in part.

Although elements of the predicted pattern were confirmed, a critical result was not obtained.

The study first examined whether IQ predicted AP. The hypothesis stated that individuals

with a higher IQ would show better academic performance and individuals with a lower IQ

would show lower academic performance. The results confirmed the first hypothesis. AA,

measured by the WPT-R, was a reliable predictor of AP, whether measured by the self-report AI

or MT. Therefore, the present study showed similar results to many prior studies (e.g.,

Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2006). In a 2 year longitudinal study, Chamorro-Premuzic and

Furnham (2006) found that AP, comprised of a combination of seminar performance, overall

essay marks, and exam performance, was best predicted by IQ (AA). Much other research has

also obtained this finding.

The second hypothesis stated that learning approach would predict AP; where individuals

using deep or strategic approaches to learning would demonstrate better AP, and individuals

using a surface approach would demonstrate poorer AP. Learning approach was a reliable

predictor of AP for both AI and MT, although not in a completely consistent manner.

Most consistently, the surface approach had a negative affect on both the Memory Task

and the Academic Index. This is because the surface approach has the characteristic of being

associated with pass only aspirations; thus, people using this approach make use of minimal

effort and minimal deep or strategic processing. Minimal effort produces minimal learning

results, as shown in the results of the present study. Biggs (1987) also found that the surface

approach correlated negatively with AP.


Marton and Saljo (1997) discussed possible explanations for the negative effect of the

surface approach and discovered that the main characteristic of the surface approach was the

intention to simply reproduce the material. The complete lack of a desire to understand the

material contrasts the surface approach with deep and strategic approaches to studying.

The strategic approach was strongly associated with higher self-reported academic index

scores, but not with higher MT scores. In the current study, the strategic approach displayed a

highly significant prediction with the academic index due to how the strategic approach attempts

to maximize success with a flexible approach that will make use of either the deep or surface

approaches; as one is always more appropriate to the demands of the task (Wilding & Andrews,

2006).

Essentially, the strategic approach enables the activation during different tasks of surface

or deep approaches, depending on which is more relevant (Entwistle, Hanley, & Hounsell, 1979).

Furthermore, the effective ability of individuals who use the strategic approach to understand

what specific material counts in receiving high grades further contributes to the success shown in

AP (Entwistle & McCune, 2004) and in the results of the present study.

The deep approach showed opposite results, predicting MT performance (albeit weakly)

but not the AI score. The study showed similar results with the experiment mentioned earlier by

Wilding and Andrews (2006), which offers a possible explanation as to why individuals using

the deep approach showed nonsignificant results for the academic index. It was found that the

deep approach was associated with altruistic life goals and not wealth and status life goals that

are associated with the surface approach. Significant results on the memory task are explained by

the deep approach, which is characterized by an individual’s attempt to find out as much as

possible about a topic (Wilding & Andrews, 2006).


Reid, Duvall, and Evans (2007) had second year medical students complete the ASSIST

measure and obtained results very similar to the present study with respect to the relationship

between the deep and surface learning approaches. Their results showed a positive correlation

between the deep and strategic approach and both were negatively correlated with the surface

approach. In the present study, factor scores for the ASSIST ensured that deep and strategic

factors were uncorrelated, perhaps weakening the effect of one at the expense of the other.

The mediational hypothesis predicted that the independent (unique) contribution of IQ to

AP would weaken when learning approach was controlled with regression analysis. If IQ scores

contributed to AP only or in part because of the use of specific learning approaches, then

controlling for this learning approach should weaken the contribution of intelligence to AP. The

results showed that this hypothesis was not correct. First, adding the ASSIST learning approach

to the mediational analysis of academic index and WPT-R did not reduce the contribution of

WPT-R to AP. Second, adding the ASSIST learning approach to the mediational analysis of the

memory task and WPT-R did not reduce the contribution of WPT-R to AP. These results

contradict the predicted pattern.

The weakness in the proposed model was at the AA � LA relationship. Contrary to

expectation, there was no relationship between AA and learning approach. Instead of learning

approach mediating the relationship between AA and AP, learning approach and AA appear to

predict AP independently of one another.

A study mentioned earlier by Brackney and Karabenick (1995) found that individuals

with high comprehension monitoring skills will understand when material is insufficiently

understood and have a greater likelihood of using an advanced learning approach (deep and

strategic) to resolve the lack of a complete understanding of the material. The results found in the


present study do not disagree with those of Brackney and Karabenick; as the only measure the

present study used in determining AA was IQ. Thus, the lack of a relationship between AA and

learning approach in the present study may be because the present study only measured IQ and

not other skills that form the complete AA factor. Furthermore, this may also explain why

learning approach did not mediate the relationship between AA and AP, as aptitude can be

defined as an innate, acquired, or learned component of a competency; thus, the AA factor

cannot simply consist of IQ alone.

AA and learning approach were able to predict AP independently of one another as they

are partial contributors to AP (Rosenholtz & Simpson, 1984). If IQ is the only variable

representing the AA factor and the relationship between AA and learning approach are added to

AP, the incomplete factor of AA will lead to a breakdown in the proposed model: AA � LA �

AP.

This study adds to an often disregarded relationship between three important variables in

education: AA, learning approach, and AP. The results of this study, as well as other current

research, offered greater understanding of the relationship between AA and AP. Implications of

this study can assist in the development of a questionnaire that individuals entering higher

education could take; the results would then be interpreted and possible studying suggestions

could be made to students based on the results of the questionnaire.

There were several limitations to the present study. Even though the experiment was not

a genuine test, in terms of the final outcome having an effect on participant’s GPA, anxiety and

learning disabilities could have altered results. However; data was not collected regarding

anxiety and learning disabilities; thus, the potential effects of these variables are unknown.


Coping strategies used to alleviate test anxiety may have affected the learning approach

used by participants in the present study (Stowell, Tumminaro, & Attarwala, 2008). The

avoidance coping strategy allows individuals to form a buffer from experiencing a more

profound negative mood. Use of this coping strategy will have counteractive effects that lead to

poor AP and greater perceived stress (Stowell, et al., 2008).

The Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI) could be used in future studies. The TAI was

developed to measure individual differences in test anxiety as a situation-specific personality

trait. The TAI reports how frequently individuals experience specific symptoms of anxiety

before, during, and after tests and examinations. The TAI functions by assessing an individuals

worry and emotionality (Taylor & Deane, 2002). Given that anxiety levels differ in individuals,

being able to identify these levels can allow experimenters to control and manipulate this

variable, to prevent anxiety levels from acting as a confounding variable.

Perhaps the largest limitation to the study is that participants did not have any type of

external reinforcement to encourage them to do their best on the assessments used in the

experiment; specifically, the may have lacked incentives to elicit achievement motivation.

Participants were simply doing the experiment as part of a requirement to complete the

Introduction to Psychology course and the results from the experiment held no significance in

terms of marks or GPA to the participants.

One possible explanation for the independence of IQ and learning approach is that high

IQ individuals may be able to store information effectively without adopting special learning

approaches. Future research could test this hypothesis or attempt to identify other variables that

mediate the relationship between AA and AP.


A factor that was not discussed or tested in the present study is attentional capacity.

When comparing high IQ individuals and average IQ individuals for attention capacity, high IQ

individuals scored much higher than their theoretical mental capacity, when compared to average

IQ individuals who scored closer to their theoretical mental capacity (Navarro, Ramiro, Lopez,

Aguilar, Acosta, & Montero, 2006). These results show empirical evidence of a larger mental

capacity in high IQ individuals, which may allow them to use superior learning strategies, not

mentioned in the ASSIST.

Another assessment that could be used in future research could be based on the Expert-

Novice Paradigm, which concentrates on learning and knowledge acquisition processes. This

paradigm ignores knowledge or specific skills; instead, an individual’s learning potential and

competencies are measured (Heller, 1993). Individuals who possess an expertise must be able to

demonstrate a learning potential to enable them to modify their technique upon meeting a

challenge that forces them to deviate from their norm. By using this type of measure, IQ would

not measure traditional IQ, but how individuals are able to modify and adapt a learning

approach.

A subscore of the strategic approach to learning called ‘Intention to achieve the highest

possible grades’ exists, as shown in Appendix A. This provides a suggestion for future research

by expanding upon the data from the ASSIST measure and using all subscores. This new

research could make use of a Cognitive-Neurological approach to further examine the

relationship between AA and AP.

Achievement motivation is vital to the strategic learning approach. Thus, future research

could examine the effects of the Mesolimbic Dopamine System, which is the brain system that

controls motivation. Dopamine plays an important role in modulating incentive motivation, and


individual differences in the degree of positive incentive motivation that may be related to

functional variation in the ventral tegmental area, which are dopamine projections that mediate a

motivated approach of goal directed behaviours (Tomer, Goldstein, Wang, Wong, & Volkow,

2008).

Another neurological factor that could be examined in future research is fear of failure.

This is part of the subscores of the surface approach to learning and physically resides in the

brain’s fear center, the amygdala. The amygdala sends information to structures that mediate

fear. This creates interactions between the amygdala and the medial prefrontal cortext, which are

involved in the extinction of conditioned fear (Likhtik, Pelletier, Paz, & Pare, 2005).

In conclusion, the present study furthers our understanding of two important determinants

of academic performance, namely, aptitude and learning approaches. The results show that both

measures of AP were positively correlated with AA and with the learning approaches examined.

Moreover, there was no reduction in the relationship between AA and AP when learning

approaches were controlled due to no apparent relationship between AA and the learning

approach factors. Future research should examine these variables further, as well as other

variables that might shed light on why some students excel more at school than others.


References

Atkinson, J.W., & Feather, N.T. (1966). A theory of achievement motivation, Wiley, New York.

Biggs, J. B. (1987). The Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ): Manual. Hawthorn, Victoria:

Australian Council for Educational Research.

Binet, A. (1903). L’etude experimental de’l intelligence [Experimental study of intelligence].

Paris: Schleicher.

Brackney, B., & Karabenick, S. (1995). Psychopathology and academic performance: The role of

motivation and learning strategies. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 456-465.

Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2006). Self-assessed intelligence and academic

performance. Educational Psychology, 26, 769-779.

Diseth, Å., & Martinsen, O. (2003). Approaches to learning, cognitive style, and motives as

predictors of academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 23, 195-207.

Dodrill, C. (1981). An economical method for the evaluation of general intelligence in adults.

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 668-673.

Entwistle, N.J., & Entwistle, D.M. (1970). The relationships between personality, study methods

and academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 40, 132-141.

Entwistle, N.J., Thompson, J.B., & Wilson, J.D. (1974). Motivation and study methods. Higher

Education, 3, 379-396.

Entwistle, N.J., Hanley, M., & Hounsell, D.J. (1979). Identifying distinctive approaches to

studying, Higher Education, 8, 365-380.

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

Entwistle, N.J., & McCune, V. (2004). The conceptual bases of study strategy inventories.

Educational Psychology Review, 16, 325-345.


Hawkins, K., Faraone, S., Pepple, J., Seidman, L., & Tsuang, M. (1990). WAIS--R validation of

the Wonderlic Personnel Test as a brief intelligence measure in a psychiatric sample.

Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2, 198-201.

Heller, K. (1993). Structural tendencies and issues of research on giftedness and talent. In K. A.

Heller, F. J. Mönks, & A. H. Passow (Eds.), International Handbook of Research and

Development of Giftedness and Talent (pp. 49-67). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.

Likhtik, E., Pelletier, J., Paz, R., & Paré, D. (2005). Prefrontal control of the amygdala. Journal

of Neuroscience, 25, 7429-7437.

Loken, E., Radlinski, F., Crespi, V., Millet, J., & Cushing, L. (2004). Online study behavior of

100,000 students preparing for the SAT, ACT, and GRE. Journal of Educational

Computing Research, 30, 255-262.

Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I. Outcome and process.

British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.

Navarro, J., Ramiro, P., Lopez, J., Aguilar, M., Acosta, M., & Montero, J. (2006). Mental

attention in gifted and nongifted children. European Journal of Psychology of Education,

21, 401-411.

Ramsden, P. (1988). Situational influences on learning. In R.R. Schmeck (Ed.), Learning

strategies and learning styles (pp. 159-184). New York: Plenum Press.

Reid, W., Duvall, E., & Evans, P. (2007). Relationship between assessment results and

approaches to learning and studying in year two medical students. Medical Education,

41, 754-762.

Rosenholtz, S., & Simpson, C. (1984). Classroom organization and student stratification.

Elementary School Journal, 85, 21–38.


Schutz, P. (1997). Educational goals, strategies use and the academic performance of high school

students. The High School Journal, 80, 193-201.

Stowell, J., Tumminaro, T., & Attarwala, M. (2008). Moderating effects of coping on the

relationship between test anxiety and negative mood. Stress and Health: Journal of the

International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 24, 313-321.

Tait, H., Entwistle, N. J., & McCune, V. (1998). ASSIST: a reconceptualisation of the

Approaches to Studying inventory. In: C. Rust, Editor, Improving student learning:

Improving students as learners (pp. 262-271). Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning

Development, Oxford.

Taylor, J., & Deane, F. (2002). Development of a short form of the Test Anxiety Inventory

(TAI). Journal of General Psychology, 129, 127-136.

The American College Testing Program. (1990). The ACT assessment. Iowa City: American

College Testing.

The Three Nonfiction Passages. (2009). ACT SparkNotes test prep. Retrieved April 5, 2009,

from http://www.sparknotes.com/testprep/books/act/chapter13section2.rhtml

Tomer, R., Goldstein, R., Wang, G., Wong, C., & Volkow, N. (2008). Incentive motivation is

associated with striatal dopamine asymmetry. Biological Psychology, 77, 98-101.

Vermunt, J.D. (1996). Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and

strategies: A phenomenographic analysis. Higher Education, 31, 25-50.

Wechsler, D. (1997). WAIS–III: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—third edition administration

and scoring manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

Wonderlic, E. F. (1973). Wonderlic Personnel Test: Manual. Los Angeles: Western

Psychological Services.


Appendix A

Mapping Components of the ASSIST

.377 .507 .363 .384 .3 .435


Appendix B

Wonderlic Example Questions

17. Arrange the following words so that they make a true statement. Print the last letter of the last word as the answer. always A verb sentence a has

24. A watch lost 1 minute 18 seconds in 39 days. How many seconds did it lose per day? 25. CANVASS CANVAS – Do these words

1 have similar meanings, 2 have contradictory meanings, 3 mean neither the same nor opposite?

45. In the following set of words, which word is different from the other?

1 colony, 2 companion, 3 covey, 4 crew, 5 constellation 50. In printing an article of 30,000 words a printer decides to use two sizes of type. Using the

larger type, a printed page contains 1,200 words. Using the smaller type, a page contains 1,500 words. The article is alloted 22 pages in a magazine. How many pages must be in the smaller type?


Appendix C

ACT Reading Passage 1: An Essay on Malcolm X

During 1963 the nation became aware of a civil rights leader making a dramatic impact on the black community. Malcolm X, the charismatic, ferociously eloquent preacher and organizer for the Nation of Islam, had been preaching his message to (usually poor) black communities since the early 1950s. Malcolm X was a "black Muslim," a member of a small but crucial religious organization that proved instrumental in giving birth to the modern Black Power Movement. The Nation of Islam, led by Elijah Muhammed, believed that whites had systematically and immorally denied blacks their rights and that blacks therefore had no reason to act peacefully or lovingly towards whites. Instead of supporting the philosophy of non-violence embraced by Martin Luther King, Jr., the Nation of Islam believed that whites should repay blacks for slavery and allow them to set up their own nation within America. Until that day arrived, the Nation encouraged blacks to defend themselves against white supremacy "by any means necessary."

The membership and influence of the Nation of Islam grew tremendously during the late 1950s and early 1960s, in large part due to the dedication and speaking skills of Malcolm X. Like King, Malcolm X mobilized the people, leading them in rallies, protest marches, and demonstrations. Though he was widely known among the black underclass and in civil rights circles, it was not until his famous "Chickens Coming Home to Roost" speech on December 1, 1963, that he truly blasted his way into the consciousness of most Americans. X gave the speech in reference to the November 22 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, and described the killing as "chickens coming home to roost." The media, which had negatively portrayed the Nation of Islam in general and Malcolm X in particular, jumped on the speech immediately, claiming it as an example of Malcolm X's divisive hatred and blatant disrespect for the U.S. government. In the face of public reaction, officials within the Nation silenced X for 90 days. The speech not only brought Malcolm X to the forefront of the civil rights struggle but also highlighted and helped solidify a strand of civil rights activism that found inadequate the non-violent policies the movement had so far used.

Malcolm X is a highly controversial figure in black history. Many see him as a spouter of hatred and divisiveness. Certainly it is true that a fair portion of X's rhetoric --his references to "white devils" and "Uncle Tomming Negro leaders" --was angry and inflammatory, and did little to promote the cause of integration. However, X represented an element of black consciousness that white people refused to face: the incredible rage that most black people felt after suffering so many years of oppression.

For all of his fame, it is interesting to note that his mobilization and participation in the civil rights movement was actually fairly slim. He respected some civil rights leaders (King, for example), though for much of his life he believed that the idea of integration was merely playing into the hands of the white man. For the most part, Malcolm X's role in the civil rights movement was merely to preach, to pass on the crucial message of black rage to white America, and to become a role model for those who began the Black Power Movement a few years later. He is vitally important not because of what he actually did, but because of what he said and how he said it.

Malcolm X's own biography reveals that he was more nuanced and interesting than the simple role of black rage that he was sometimes assigned by both whites who held him up as an example of rage gone wild, and blacks who saw him as a warrior willing to express that which most blacks could not. After years of service, X eventually broke with the Nation of Islam. Then, after a life-changing visit to Mecca in 1964, he broke with his own previous thought and began preaching a message of cross-cultural unity, and founded the Organization for Afro-American Unity. With his fire-and-brimstone oratory, broad base of black community support, and knack for attracting media attention, X's new path might have forged major interracial inroads. But before he could follow this new path of more general inclusion, X was assassinated on February 21, 1965, shot as he was giving a speech in New York. The perpetrators have never been found, though many presume the Nation of Islam to have been responsible. X's autobiography, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, is an abiding document of both his own personal journey and of his time.


Appendix D

ACT Reading Passage 1: Questions

Specific Detail Question: 1. According to the passage, some critics of Malcolm X censured him for being:

A. an "Uncle Tomming Negro leader." B. an example of rage gone wild. C. a warrior for African-Americans. D. a civil rights leader.

�

Inference Question: 2. One can reasonably infer from the passage that the Nation of Islam is widely thought responsible for Malcolm X's assassination because:

A. X broke with the group politically and philosophically. B. X gave a controversial speech after Kennedy's assassination. C. X visited Mecca in 1964. D. X began to write an autobiography.

�

Main Idea and Argument Question: 3. The author's purpose in writing this passage seems to be:

A. to portray Malcolm X as the man responsible for the civil rights movement. B. to reveal an overlooked event in Malcolm X's life. C. to give a relatively balanced account of the positive and negative sides of Malcolm X's career. D. to expose the Nation of Islam's role in the assassination of Malcolm X.

�

Cause-Effect Question: 4. According to the passage, Malcolm X came to the forefront of the American civil rights struggle because:

A. of his "Chickens Coming Home to Roost" speech, which generated a media frenzy. B. he was silenced by the Nation of Islam for 90 days. C. he rejected King's nonviolent message. D. he founded the Organization for Afro-American Unity.

�

Point of View Question: 5. The attitude of the author of the passage toward Malcolm X is apparently one of:

A. anger. B. ambivalence. C. disapproval. D. respect.

�

Comparison Question: 6. The author's comparison of Malcolm X to Martin Luther King Jr. focuses primarily on:

A. their stances on integration and violence against whites. B. their leadership of the civil rights movement. C. their roles in the Nation of Islam. D. their influences on future black leaders.


Appendix E

Academic Index Questionnaire

During your final year of High School, where do you think you would rank among all graduating

students?

1. Top third of graduating students

2. Middle third of graduating students

3. Bottom third of graduating students

In how many of your high school classes would you have been one of the top students in the

class?

1. All of my classes

2. Most of my classes

3. Some of my classes

4. None of my classes

How many university courses have you already obtained credit for? ______

What is your approximate grade point average in your university courses? ______

What is your expected letter grade in Introductory Psychology? ______

Based on your marks how would you grade yourself as a University student (circle a letter

grade)?

A+ A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D or lower


Figure Captions

Figure 1. Academic index as predicted by the WPT-R.

Figure 2. Memory task as predicted by the WPT-R.


Figure 1.


100806040200

WPT-R (% Correct)

100

80

60

40

20

0

Mem

ory

Task

(% C

orre

ct)

R Sq Linear = 0.276

Figure 2.

los, r. learning approaches and memory in academia · 2016-01-31 · learning approaches and memory...

Documents