Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A 32-item short version of the Approaches to Studying Inventory (ASI) was administered to all students (years 1–6) at an Australian university medical school (return rate 77% = 806 students). The aim was to assess the ASI's psychometric characteristics and to examine any differences in scale scores between students in different enrolment years. The analysis of the ASI was based on 806 students; factor analyses were conducted on (1) eight subscales and (2) the 32 ASI items, followed by a second-order analysis of the correlations among the Just-order factors. The analyses confirmed the theoretical distinction between the meaning (deep learning;) and reproducing (surface learning) orientations, with both showing satisfactory internal consistency reliability for group comparisons. The failing students did not show any disintegration in their responses to the ASI. This short-version ASI is recommended as a practical tool for curriculum committees and individual teachers to use as an entry point for discussions aimed at changing major contextual factors at the institutional level with a view to improving teaching and learning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stiernborg et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: