Abstract
This study investigated the relationship between learning approach, time spent studying and grades awarded. A class of mechanical engineering students (N=34; male) were asked to keep an hour-by-hour study diary for one week. The Biggs' Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) provided measures of these students' approach to study tasks. Use of a surface approach to learning was found to be positively correlated with both high attendance in class and greater hours of independent study time. The former is explained by the surface learner's need for the lecturer to define the course; the latter by the inefficiency of a surface approach. Poor grades in spite of long study hours mirror an inefficient surface approach. This finding suggests the need for individual study counselling. Case studies show that the use of a deep approach does not result in good grades unless accompanied by sufficient work. The diary method in conjunction with the SPQ appears to be a promising method for researching workload, study times and other related variables.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Biggs, J. (1987).Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Biggs, J. (1989). ‘Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching’,Higher Education Research and Development 8, 7–25.
Biggs, J. (1992).Why and how do Hong Kong students learn? Using the Learning and Study Process Questionnaires. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University.
Bowden, J. (1988). ‘Achieving change in teaching practices’ in Ramsden, P. (ed.),Improving learning. London: Kogan Page.
Chambers, E. (1992). ‘Work-load and the quality of student learning’,Studies in Higher Education 17, 141–153.
Dahlgren, L.O. (1984). ‘Outcomes of learning’, in Marton, F., Hounsell, D. and Entwistle, N. (eds.),The experience of learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
Ellison, G. (1990). The future of first degree courses in engineering.Proposals of the (U.K.) Engineering Professors' Conference Working Party.
Entwistle, N.J. and Entwistle, D. (1970). ‘The relationship between personality, study methods and academic performance’,British Journal of Educational Psychology 40, 132–143.
Entwistle, N.J. and Tait, H. (1990). ‘Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching and preferences for contrasting academic environments’,Higher Education 19, 169–194.
Gow, L., Kember, D. and Chow, R. (1991). ‘The effects of English language ability on approaches to learning’,RELC Journal 22(1), 49–68.
Kember, D. and Gow, L. (1990). ‘Cultural specificity of approaches to study’,British Journal of Educational Psychology 60, 356–363.
Kember, D. and Gow, L. (1991). ‘A challenge to the anecdotal stereotype of the Asian student’,Studies in Higher Education 16 117–128.
La Palio, L.R. (1981). ‘Time study of students and house staff on a university medical service’,Journal of Medical Education 56, 61–63.
Lee N.Y.A., (1991) The impact of the time factor on student approaches to learning in continuing education. Unpublished MEd Thesis, University of Hong Kong.
Marton, F. and Säljö, R. (1984). ‘Approaches to learning’, in Marton, F., Hounsell, D. and Entwistle, N. (eds.),The experience of learnign. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
McKay, R. (1978). ‘Effectiveness of learning: the place of study’, in Warren Piper, D. (ed.),The efficiency and effectiveness of teaching in higher education. London: University of London, Institute of Education.
Parer, M. and Benson, R. (1989).Professional training by distance education. Victoria, Australia: Centre for Distance Learning, Gippsland Institute.
Ramsden, P. and Entwistle, N.J. (1981). ‘Effects of academic departments on students' approaches to studying’,British Journal of Educational Psychology 51, 368–383.
Sparkes, J.J. (1989). Quality in engineering education.(U.K.) Engineering Professors' Conference Occasional Paper, No. 1.
Svensson, L. (1977). ‘On qualitative differences in learning: III study skill and learning’,British Journal of Educational Psychology 47, 233–243.
Thomas, P.R. and Bain, J.D. (1984). ‘Contextual differences of learning, approaches: the effects of assessments’,Human Learning 3, 277–240.
Wade, B.K. (1991). A profile of the real world of undergraduate students and how they spend discretionary time. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Watkins, D. and Hattie, J. (1981). ‘The learning processes of Australian university students: investigations of contextual and personological factors’,British Journal of Educational Psychology 51, 384–393.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kember, D., Jamieson, Q.W., Pomfret, M. et al. Learning approaches, study time and academic performance. High Educ 29, 329–343 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01384497
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01384497