Characteristics of deep and surface approaches to learning. 

Approach to Learning	
Deep	Surface	
•	An intention to understand material for oneself
•	Vigorous and critical interaction with knowledge content
•	Relating ideas to one’s previous knowledge and experience
•	Discovering and using organizing principles to integrate ideas
•	Relating evidence to conclusions 
•	Examining the logic of arguments	•	An intention simply to reproduce parts of the content
•	Ideas and information accepted passively
•	Concentrating only on what is required for assessment
•	Not reflecting on purpose or strategies
•	Memorising facts and procedures routinely
•	Failing to distinguish guiding principles or patterns	

From Suzanne Shale and Keith Trigwell (2003). Student Approaches to Learning. Available at:
http://www.learning.ox.ac.uk/iaul/IAUL+1+2+2+main.asp#The idea of deep and surface approaches to learning 

Some Models of Student Approaches to Learning

Biggs’ (1993) Presage-Product-Process model.

Prosser and Trigwell’s (1999) Constitutionalist Model of Student Learning. 

Pintrich and Shrauben’s (1992) Socio-Cognitive Model of Classroom Learning.

Example Questionnaire Items

The Study Process Questionnaire (Biggs, 1987) and the 
Approaches to Studying Inventory (Entwistle et al., 1979)

Deep Approach
I try to relate ideas in one subject to those in others, whenever possible.	
I usually set out to understand thoroughly the meaning of what I am asked to read.	
In trying to understand new ideas, I often try to relate them to real-life situations to which they might apply.	
When I’m tackling a new topic, I often ask myself questions about it which the new information should answer.	
In reading new material I often find that I’m continually reminded of material I already know and see the latter in a new light.	
I spend a lot of my free time finding out more about interesting topics which have been discussed in classes. 	

Surface Approach
I find I have to concentrate on memorising a good deal of what we have to learn. 	
I usually don’t have time to think about the implications of what I have read. 	
Although I generally remember facts and details, I find it difficult to fit them together into an overall picture. 	
I find I tend to remember things best if I concentrate on the order in which the lecturer presented them.	
I tend to choose subjects with a lot of factual content rather than theoretical kinds of subjects.	
I find it best to accept the statements and ideas of my lecturers and question them only under special circumstances. 	

Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia & McKeachie,1991).

Motivational Components (Goal Orientation)

Extrinsic Goal Orientation
Getting a good grade in third class is the most satisfying thing for me right now.	
The most important thing for me right now is improving my overall grade point average, so my main concern in this class is getting a good grade.	
If I can, I want to get better grades in this class than most of the other students.	
I want to do well in this class because it is important to show my ability to my family, friends, employers or others.	

Intrinsic Goal Orientation
In a class like this, I prefer course material that really challenges me so I can learn new things.	
In a class like this, I prefer course material that arouses my curiosity, even if it is difficult to learn.	
The most satisfying thing for me in this course is trying to understand the content as thoroughly as possible.	
When I have the opportunity in this class, I choose course assignments that I can learn from even if they don’t guarantee a good grade.	

Cognitive Components (Cognitive Strategies)

Critical Thinking
I often find myself questioning things I hear or read in this course to decide if I find them convincing.	
When a theory, interpretation, or conclusion is presented in class or in the readings, I try to decide if there is good supporting evidence.	
I treat the course material as a starting point and try to develop my own ideas about it.	

Elaboration
I try to relate ideas in this subject to those in other courses whenever possible.   	
When reading for this class, I try to relate the material to what I already know.	
I try to understand the material in this class by making connections between the readings and the concepts from the lectures.	

Organisation
When I study the readings for this course, I outline the material to help me organise my thoughts.	
When I study for this course, I go through the readings and my class notes and try to find the most important ideas.	
When I study for this course, I go over my class notes and make an outline of important concepts.	

Rehearsal
When I study for this class, I practice saying the material to myself over and over.	
I memorise key words to remind me of important concepts in this class.	
I make lists of important items for this course and memorise the lists.	

Self Regulation
When reading for this course, I make up questions to help focus my reading.	
When I become confused about something I’m reading for this class, I go back and try to figure it out.	
I ask myself questions to make sure I understand the material I have been studying in this class.	
I often find that I have been reading for this class but don’t know what it was all about.	
I try to think through a topic and decide what I am supposed to learn from it rather than just reading it over when studying for this course.	

Selected Reference List

Biggs, J. (1979). Individual differences in study processes and the quality of learning outcomes. Higher Education, 8, 381-394.
Biggs, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Australian Council for Educational Research. Melbourne, Australia. 
Biggs, J. (1993). What do inventories of students’ learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 3-19. 
Craik, F. & Lockhart, R. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684. 
Entwistle, N. & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.
Entwistle, N. (1981). Styles of learning and teaching. New York: John Wiley. 
Entwistle, N., Hanley, M. & Hounsell, D. (1979). Identifying distinctive approaches to studying. Higher Education, 8, 365-380. 
Haggis, T. (2003). Constructing images of ourselves? A critical investigation into ‘approaches to learning’ research in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 29.1.
Marton, F. & Säljö, R (1976b). On the qualitative difference in learning II—Outcome as a function of the Learner’s conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115-127.
Marton, F. & Säljö, R. (1976a). On the qualitative difference in learning I—Outcome and Process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11. 
Marton, F., Hounsell, D. & Entwistle, N. (Eds.). The experience of learning. Edinburgh. Scottish Academic Press. 
Pintrich, P.R. & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students’ motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. In D.H. Schunk & J.L. Meece (Eds.) Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 149-183). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum. 
Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D., Garcia T. & McKeachie, W. (1991). The motivated strategies for learning questionnaires (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan. 
Prosser, M. & Trigwell , K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching. The experience in higher education. Buckingham. Open University Press. 
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London. Routledge. 

A discussion between a researcher from a social-cognition [SC] tradition and one from a relational phenomenography [RC] tradition. 

SC: 	Is a students “approach to learning” a characteristic of a student?
RP:	NO!
SC	OK… so does it describe a relationship between the student and the learning context?
RP:	YES but it also includes what they bring to it.
SC: 	What they bring to it? 
RP: 	Yeah, like their prior knowledge and perceptions and expectations given the context.
SC:	So should we focus on the student or the context?
RP:	Both! Both need to be considered because both are simultaneously present in students’ awareness.
SC	But what if I say “Here’s a context”, articulate it clearly and take it as given or read can we focus on the student then?
RP:	NO!
SC:	Why not?. 
RP:	Because it doesn’t do justice to the dynamic and relational nature of students’ approaches to learning and it implies and information processing approach. 
SC:	But research using a model of Social Cognition actively attempts to analyse cognitive processing as contingent on the (social) perception of context. 
RP:	But it’s still broadly cognitive.
SC	But is not pure cognitivism, it social cognitivism. 
And by the way your mates working on that Predispositions stuff are pretty damn close to it and are about as contextual or relational as my Social Cognitive approach would be. 
Have you heard of Paul Pintrich?