He Students’ Experience of Deep and Surface Learning Approaches in Higher Education

INTRODUCTION

This research will investigate the students’ experience of deep and surface learning approaches in higher education. This topic was selected as it closely relates to researcher’s personal experience. This study is particularly important, as the use of deep and surface learning strategies is a common debate in the academic world. For example, Beattie et al (1997) study shows that broader evaluation of higher education in several countries have called for a greater degree of deep learning relative to surface learning. It could be said that the particular strategy used by students will influence their approach and attitude to their studies. For example, students aim towards understanding using the deep strategy and a surface approach is where they regurgitate the information in a test or exam rather than interpret it (The Higher Education Academy, 2008). According to Mayya et al (2004) factors, which determine students learning approach, are characteristics of teaching, the course and the student. Their research showed a clear positive association between the surface approach and various problems for learners. This research is therefore significant as it would investigate students’ rationale for deep and surface learning strategies and may provide with a better understanding for higher educational institutions to ameliorate learning approach in students.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

- To investigate students’ experience of deep and surface learning strategies.

- To identify the type of learning most used by the students.

- To understand the factors influencing the students’ decision to using different approaches.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What experience do KICL students have of deep and surface learning?

2. Which type of learning do KICL students use the most?

3. What are the factors that influence their decision to use deep and surface learning approach?

LITERATURE REVIEW

Deep learning approach is based more on understanding, analyzing and linking the data provided, whereas, surface learning approach is more based on memorizing and acceptance of already stated facts. For example, a study conducted by Scouller in 1998 shows positive relation between performance level of deep surface learning to essay assignment and surface learning approach to end-of-course multiple choice questions. Case and Marshall (2004) research shows that deep or surface learning approaches used by students are adaptations to particular course context and if the course focus towards a procedural deep objective, it might preclude the adoption of a deep approach. Similarly, another study conducted by Chan and Chan (2010) support this notion that learning approaches can closely relate to the subject area. A weakness of the research by Case and Marshall (2004) is that the sample was composed of undergraduate students whereas this study will focus more on postgraduate students. However, their study was conducted partly in the UK and is therefore highly relevant to this research. A strength of the study by Chan

and Chan (2010) is that it is very recent research and may therefore closely reflect today’s learning experience of students.

Felder and Brent (2005) defines learning style are “characteristic cognitive, affective, and psychological behaviors that serve as relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment”. Deep learning is linked more to understanding the data actively and surface learning is linked more to understanding the data passively. A study made in 2009 by Floyd et al shows that a student strategy for learning is affected by the pedagogy approach. There is a direct relationship between the perceived course values, student engagement to deep and surface learning strategies. A tasks meaningfulness and personal relevance to course is intrinsic in deciding students’ strategy to deep and surface approach. A strength of this study is that it is based on a broad spectrum of 191 students in eight different courses. However, the finding lack persuasiveness because it was spread out over a long period of time, which can affect the students’ perceptual experience and students’ engagement to the content of the course. Also, a strength of this study is this that it shows that a students learning approach is directly related to their engagement in learning process, which proves a negative correlation between deep and surface learning approach.

The concept of deep learning approach and surface learning approach was first developed in 1970s and 1980s. The way students approach learning plays an important role in determining the outcome of educational behavior (Mayya et al, 2004). The students perception of learning environment include overload of work, students perception of the relevance of the content, assessment process, poor teaching, poor

student teacher interpersonal relationships and lack of opportunity of self-management. One of the most important findings by researcher Mayya, S et al (2004) on 164 students shows a positive correlation between student learning approaches and perception of the teaching environment. In addition, another researcher Beattle et al (1997) supports interrelationship between teacher-learning environments. However, the study conducted by Beattle et al aimed at accounting education and was done more than a decade earlier, which may not relate to today’s educational structure. Also, the study by Mayya et al (2004) is comparatively less in accordance to current time and concentrates solely on undergraduate students in physiotherapy.

METHODOLOGY RESEARCH DESIGN

- The researcher uses a qualitative design.

- It is a more interactive approach and would help study behavioral human approach of learning, that is, why and what are the reasons for individual student to chose deep or surface learning

approach.

- This design is chosen as research focuses more on

sample research participants experience, their in- depth understanding and then analyzing the data obtained.

- Use of non-random and purposive non-probability strategy.

RESEARCH METHODS

- To collection of data in a standardized form, questionnaire method would be most appropriate form for this research.

- Questionnaires are time and cost effective, easy analysis and research participants can complete it according to their convenience.

- As all KICL students have a different and busy schedule, they could answer in their free time.

- A sample size of 50 questions would be used, thereby helping in deeper understanding of small size research participants.

- A set of open questions to focus more on personal choice, along with closed questions using a meaningful scale and avoiding escape routes.