Characterizing Learning Environments Capable of Nurturing Generic Capabilities in Higher Education

There has been wide recognition that today’s graduates need the type of generic capabilities necessary for lifelong learning. However, the mechanism by which universities can develop these generic skills is not clearly established. This study aimed to investigate the mechanism for their development. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test a hypothesized model of capability development through a suitable learning environment with 1756 undergraduates at a university in Hong Kong. To triangulate against this model and more fully characterize the learning environment, focus group interviews were held with five to six students from three programs with good records of capability development. Analysis of the interview data resulted in a set of categories, describing a learning environment, which were consistent with the SEM model. The learning environment which seemed conducive to capability development aimed for understanding of key concepts through a variety of assessment methods and active engagement in learning activities. Teacher–student relationships were developed through interaction, feedback and assistance. The promotion of peer–student relationships led to a high degree of collaborative learning.

[1]  P. Bentler,et al.  Comparative fit indexes in structural models. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  Michael Prosser,et al.  Understanding Learning And Teaching , 1999 .

[3]  Paul Ramsden,et al.  Improving teaching and learning in higher education: The case for a relational perspective , 1987 .

[4]  Janet Leckey,et al.  Right Tracks—Wrong Rails: The Development of Generic Skills in Higher Education , 1997 .

[5]  Ron Oliver,et al.  Exploring the practice and development of generic skills through Web-based learning , 2001 .

[6]  John D. Bain,et al.  Contextual dependence of learning approaches: The effects of assessments. , 1984 .

[7]  John Medlin,et al.  Using diverse professional teams and a graduate qualities framework to develop generic skills within a commerce degree , 2003 .

[8]  David Kember,et al.  The influence of active learning experiences on the development of graduate capabilities , 2005 .

[9]  D. Kember,et al.  Avoider and Engager Approaches by Out-of-Class Groups: The Group Equivalent to Individual Learning Approaches. , 2004 .

[10]  Penelope Curtin,et al.  Employability skills for the future , 2004 .

[11]  M. J. Norušis,et al.  SPSS 13.0 Guide to Data Analysis , 2000 .

[12]  H. O'Neil.  Review of workforce readiness theoretical frameworks , 1997 .

[13]  William T. Daly.  Teaching and Scholarship: Adapting American Higher Education to Hard Times. , 1994 .

[14]  D. Kember,et al.  Engager and avoider behaviour in types of activities performed by out-of-class learning groups , 2004 .

[15]  Barry J. Fraser,et al.  The Birth of a New Journal: Editor's Introduction , 1998 .

[16]  Ernest T. Pascarella,et al.  How college affects students : findings and insights from twenty years of research , 1992 .

[17]  K. Trigwell,et al.  Understanding Learning and Teaching: the experience in higher education , 1999 .

[18]  P. Pintrich,et al.  Student Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning in the College Classroom , 2002 .

[19]  N. Schmitt.  Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. , 1996 .

[20]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[21]  David Kember,et al.  The Influence of the Teaching and Learning Environment on the Development of Generic Capabilities Needed for a Knowledge-Based Society , 2005 .

[22]  J. C. Smart,et al.  Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research , 2001, Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research.

[23]  K. Feldman.  The superior college teacher from the students' view , 1976 .

[24]  David Kember,et al.  The influence of the part time study experience on the development of generic capabilities , 2005 .

[25]  Norman Jackson,et al.  Programme specification and its role in promoting an outcomes model of learning , 2000 .

[26]  J. Biggs.  What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning , 1999 .

[27]  Harold F. O'Neil,et al.  Workforce Readiness: Competencies and Assessment. , 1997 .

[28]  J. S. Long,et al.  Testing Structural Equation Models , 1993 .

[29]  John B. Biggs,et al.  Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does , 1999 .

[30]  M. Browne,et al.  Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit , 1992 .

[31]  Philip C. Candy,et al.  Lifelong Learning: An Enduring Mandate for Higher Education , 1991 .

[32]  N. Purdie,et al.  Effects of Learning Skills Interventions on Student Learning: A Meta-Analysis , 1996 .

[33]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .

[34]  A. Kelly.  The Curriculum: Theory and Practice , 1977 .

[35]  S. Barrie.  A research‐based approach to generic graduate attributes policy , 2004 .

[36]  H. Tait,et al.  Defining and Assessing Competence in Generic Skills , 1999 .

[37]  P. Abrami,et al.  Students' Evaluations of University Teaching: Research Findings, Methodological Issues, and Directions for Future Research , 1987 .

[38]  P. Pintrich.  Understanding self‐regulated learning , 1995 .

[39]  K. Feldman.  Identifying exemplary teaching: Using data from course and teacher evaluations , 1996 .

[40]  Alex Radloff,et al.  Quality and Generic (Professional) Skills , 2000 .

[41]  F. Marton,et al.  The Experience of Learning , 1984 .