Deep and Surface Approaches to Learning

Join Teachers.Net

Chatboards

Recent Groups

Professors

MEMBERS

2 Members

+ Join Group

Pinned Posts

ALLAll Teachers

Teachers.Net LIVE CHAT Support group - Tues eve!

Featured Jobs

Full-timeMontessori Teacher

Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada

TemporaryTeachers, rural schools

Peace River North School District

Full-timeHead Teacher: 2nd/3rd Grades – Mills College Children’s School

Mills College

Teaching Jobs on Teachers.Net

Featured Job special only $39!

https://teachers.net/jobs

Become a Teachers.Net sponsor!

College Professors Chatboard

Deep and Surface Approaches to Learning

by sleuth

May 14, 2009

Introduction

The concept of preferences to different individual learning styles was introduced in an accompanying document. (See learning styles). In this document you look at the associated concept of approaches to learning. The original work on approaches to learning was carried out by Marton and Saljo (1976). Their study explored students' approaches to learning a particular task. Students were given an academic text to read, and were told that they would subsequently be asked questions on that text. The students adopted two differing approaches to learning. The first group adopted an approach where they tried to understand the whole picture and tried to comprehend and understand the academic work. These students were identified with adopting a deep approach to learning. The second group tried to remember facts contained within the text, identifying and focusing on what they thought they would be asked later. They demonstrated an approach that we would recognize as rote lea...See More

Comment

(1)

report post

CSU Prof Nice explanation and is very similar to discussions in these two excellent books:

What the Best College Teachers Do, Ken Bain, Harvard University Press (2004), ISBN: 0674013255

This book is a very thoughtful study of over 65 college professors that have distinguished themselves with their students and others during their teaching ...See MoreNice explanation and is very similar to discussions in these two excellent books:

What the Best College Teachers Do, Ken Bain, Harvard University Press (2004), ISBN: 0674013255

This book is a very thoughtful study of over 65 college professors that have distinguished themselves with their students and others during their teaching career. A very insightful book and amazingly in harmony with Student Success in College mentioned below.

Student Success in College: Creating Conditions that Matter, George D. Kuh, et al, Jossey-Bass (2005), ISBN: 0787979147

The findings in this book are based on a study of 20 schools that stood out from among 700 institutions nationwide that had participated in the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). This study was part of DEEP (Documenting Educational Effectiveness Project). A well researched book.

I read the first book at the gym while I am on the treadmill. When I finish it I start over again. It always produces reflection and stimulates my thinking on how to improve my classes.

On 5/14/09, sleuth wrote: > Introduction > > The concept of preferences to different individual learning > styles was introduced in an accompanying document. (See > learning styles). In this document you look at the > associated concept of approaches to learning. The original > work on approaches to learning was carried out by Marton and > Saljo (1976). Their study explored students' approaches to > learning a particular task. Students were given an academic > text to read, and were told that they would subsequently be > asked questions on that text. The students adopted two > differing approaches to learning. The first group adopted an > approach where they tried to understand the whole picture > and tried to comprehend and understand the academic work. > These students were identified with adopting a deep approach > to learning. The second group tried to remember facts > contained within the text, identifying and focusing on what > they thought they would be asked later. They demonstrated an > approach that we would recognize as rote learning, or a > superficial, surface approach. > > Deep and Surface Approaches > > Deep and surface approaches to learning are words that most > academics will have heard. In fact the idea that students > can and do take a deep or surface approach to their learning > is probably one of the most used bits of educational > research in higher education. It is a very powerful and > useful principle that educators should apply most of the > time to the way they teach. It is particularly applicable in > any education, subject or degree, and failure to apply it > and apply it properly explains how an awful lot goes wrong > with the learning processes. > > Simply stated, deep learning involves the critical analysis > of new ideas, linking them to already known concepts and > principles, and leads to understanding and long-term > retention of concepts so that they can be used for problem > solving in unfamiliar contexts. Deep learning promotes > understanding and application for life. In contrast, surface > learning is the tacit acceptance of information and > memorization as isolated and unlinked facts. It leads to > superficial retention of material for examinations and does > not promote understanding or long-term retention of > knowledge and information. > > Critical to teachers understanding of this principle is that > they should not identify the student with a fixed approach > to learning, but it is the design of learning opportunity > that encourages students to adopt a particular approach. > > Designing for Deep Learning > > Very crudely: deep is good, surface is bad, and teacher > should teach in a way that encourages students to adopt a > deep approach; although achieving this is not so easy. > > Perhaps the major influence on the students' approach to > learning is the assessment methods. It is often argued that > the explicit setting of “straightforward” assessments > involving short questions testing separate ideas will > encourage surface learning. However, again this is not > necessarily the case as even the most apparently simple > assessment questions can require students to demonstrate > that their knowledge can be applied. For example, students > can be asked to apply the laws of Ohm, Kirchhoff etc. albeit > in simple cases rather than merely to quote them. (For > further information on the importance of application see > Laurillard (1993)). > > Basic Principles and the Approaches to Learning > > The evaluation of process is very valuable in determining > the depth of learning, but if we concentrate on process > alone we risk losing sight of the structure of the material > being learned. Intelligence, like mathematics and science, > is a hierarchical subject. As argued above, there is little > point in trying to comprehend Kirchhoff's 2nd Law without > first developing at least a working comprehension of > potential, potential difference, emf., current, etc. and the > ability to apply Ohm's Law reliably. This is not to say that > understanding of the subject proceeds in a simple linear > fashion (the naive bricks in the wall model of learning). > Working with the laws of Kirchhoff, Thévenin, Norton etc. > will undoubtedly lead to a deeper understanding of earlier > principles, but learning cannot start there. Attempting to > work with more complex principles without a good grasp of > the more basic principles from which they are built can only > lead to frustration and a surface learning approach in which > students attempt to memorize solutions to complex problems > they cannot understand. Encouraging students to practice the > application of basic principles will not force them adopt a > deep approach to learning, but it at least makes it possible. > > Putting theory into practice > > A particular example is to use problem based learning. > Rather than producing assessments that require rote > application of Kirchhoff's 2nd Law, such as working out the > current in an abstract network, we need to provide > assessments where students need to link multiple ideas and > concepts together, such as using Kirchhoff's Laws, Ohm's Law > and their understanding of electrical principals, to design > an amplifier for a particular purpose. > > Therefore, in order to encourage active learning educators > need to be positive about the study of subject matter. They > need to concentrate on the key concepts, not just in > isolation, but also by demonstrating the way that the > components link together. Educators can also see that over > reliance on traditional lectures, where students are > passively taking notes and not being required to engage > actively with material, will not encourage a deep approach. > Similarly, over assessment, through repeated testing, while > seen to regularly focus the learners on the material, is > likely to have the opposite effect to that desired by just > encouraging memorizing of facts. Fewer assessments in > general, and assessments that encourage and require students > to engage with problems, will also encourage the students to > use and apply their learning, facilitating the deep > approaches that teacher require. >

May 16, 2009

report post