Differential Use of Study Approaches by Students of Different Achievement Levels

被引:24
|
作者
Bunce, Diane M. [1 ]
Komperda, Regis [2 ]
Schroeder, Maria J. [3 ]
Dillner, Debra K. [3 ]
Lin, Shirley [3 ]
Teicher, Melonie A. [3 ]
Hartman, JudithAnn R. [3 ]
机构
[1] Catholic Univ Amer, Washington, DC 20064 USA
[2] Portland State Univ, Portland, OR 97207 USA
[3] US Naval Acad, Annapolis, MD 21402 USA
关键词
First Year Undergraduate/General; Chemical Education Research; Testing/Assessment; Student-Centered Learning; LATENT VARIABLE MEANS; GENERAL-CHEMISTRY; QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES; FIT INDEXES; INVENTORIES;
D O I
10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00202
中图分类号
O6 [化学];
学科分类号
0703 ;
摘要
This study examined similarities and differences in study approaches reported by general chemistry students performing at different achievement levels. The study population consisted of freshmen enrolled in a required yearlong general chemistry course at the U.S. Naval Academy. Students in the first and second semesters of the course were surveyed using a modified version of the published Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST) referred to as the M-ASSIST (Modified Approaches and Study Skills Inventory). Responses to items associated with using deep or surface approaches to studying were examined for students of three achievement levels (A/B, C, and D/F course grades) using both ANOVA and Structured Means Modeling to look for differences in study approaches between achievement levels. Results show that, with only 12 items, the M-ASSIST can be used to measure differences in reported use of deep and surface approaches by students in different achievement groups; that Structured Means Modeling can uncover significant differences that are not apparent with an ANOVA analysis of the same data; and that A/B and D/F students can be classified as reporting using either using primarily deep (A/B students) or primarily surface (D/F) study approaches. C students reported study approaches characteristic of both the A/B and D/F groups, leading to the interpretation that C students may be in an intermediate and possibly transitional state between the higher- and lower grade groups. These results suggest a new understanding of C students as those who may not fully implement deep approaches to studying but, in general, demonstrate less reliance on surface approaches than lower-achieving students.
引用
收藏
页码:1415 / 1424
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Effects of the handheld technology instructional approach on performances of students of different achievement levels
    Tan, Choo-Kim
    Tan, Choo-Peng
    COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2015, 82 : 306 - 314
  • [12] Subjective Well-Being of Primary School Students with Different Achievement Levels
    Kanonire, T.
    PSYCHOLOGY-JOURNAL OF THE HIGHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS, 2019, 16 (02): : 378 - 390
  • [13] ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING FOR ALL STUDENTS K-12 AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT
    ABBOTT, J
    AMERICAN BIOLOGY TEACHER, 1975, 37 (06): : 372 - 372
  • [14] DIFFERENTIAL ADOPTION OF STUDY APPROACHES WITHIN INDIVIDUAL STUDENTS
    ELEY, MG
    HIGHER EDUCATION, 1992, 23 (03) : 231 - 254
  • [15] Approaches to learning and academic achievement of Filipino students
    Bernardo, ABI
    JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY, 2003, 164 (01): : 101 - 114
  • [16] Approaches to study across four year-levels of undergraduate occupational therapy students: Similar or different?
    Brown, Ted
    Murdolo, Yuki
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, 2016, 79 (12) : 752 - 761
  • [17] Differential effects of private tutoring on facets of students' mathematics achievement: A longitudinal study
    Zhang, Yuhuan
    Chen, Shuang
    Cui, Chengcheng
    He, Yahan
    Wang, Lidong
    LEARNING AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2023, 105
  • [18] Relations between mathematics achievement and motivation in students of diverse achievement levels
    Prast, Emilie J.
    Van de Weijer-Bergsma, Eva
    Miocevic, Milica
    Kroesbergen, Evelyn H.
    Van Luit, Johannes E. H.
    CONTEMPORARY EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 55 : 84 - 96
  • [19] THE USE OF ACHIEVEMENT TESTS IN SECTIONING STUDENTS
    Seibert, Louise C.
    Goddard, Eunice R.
    MODERN LANGUAGE JOURNAL, 1934, 18 (05): : 289 - 298
  • [20] METHODS FOR EVALUATING THE USE OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES OF ORGANIZING THE PROCESS OF TEACHING STUDENTS
    Ziborova, Viktorija
    Katalnikova, Sabina
    Zagulova, Diana
    Prokofjeva, Natalya
    SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION, VOL. II: HIGHER EDUCATION, 2020, : 484 - 491