Mathematical tasks, study approaches, and course grades in undergraduate mathematics: a year-by-year analysis

Students approach learning in different ways, depending on the experienced learning situation. A deep approach is geared toward long-term retention and conceptual change while a surface approach focuses on quickly acquiring knowledge for immediate use. These approaches ultimately affect the students’ academic outcomes. This study takes a cross-sectional look at the approaches to learning used by students from courses across all four years of undergraduate mathematics and analyses how these relate to the students’ grades. We find that deep learning correlates with grade in the first year and not in the upper years. Surficial learning has no correlation with grades in the first year and a strong negative correlation with grades in the upper years. Using Bloom's taxonomy, we argue that the nature of the tasks given to students is fundamentally different in lower and upper year courses. We find that first-year courses emphasize tasks that require only low-level cognitive processes. Upper year courses require higher level processes but, surprisingly, have a simultaneous greater emphasis on recall and understanding. These observations explain the differences in correlations between approaches to learning and course grades. We conclude with some concerns about the disconnect between first year and upper year mathematics courses and the effect this may have on students.

[1]  D. Krathwohl.  A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview , 2002 .

[2]  A. Mji,et al.  Combining Reliability Coefficients: Toward Reliability Generalization of the Conceptions of Mathematics Questionnaire , 2005, Psychological reports.

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

[4]  Jerome I. Rotgans,et al.  Is the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) a good predictor of academic achievement? Examining the mediating role of achievement-related classroom behaviours , 2012 .

[5]  Michael Prosser,et al.  Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes , 1991 .

[6]  Ragbir Bhathal,et al.  Learning approaches as predictors of academic performance in first year health and science students. , 2013, Nurse education today.

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

[8]  Michele Groves,et al.  Problem-Based Learning and Learning Approach: Is There a Relationship? , 2005, Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice.

[9]  D. Watkins.  Correlates of approaches to learning: A cross-cultural meta-analysis. , 2001 .

[10]  F. Coffield.  Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review , 2004 .

[11]  P. Booth,et al.  The quality of learning in accounting education: the impact of approaches to learning on academic performance , 1999 .

[12]  Marilyn P. Carlson,et al.  A Characterization of Calculus I Final Exams in U.S. Colleges and Universities , 2016 .

[13]  A. Mji,et al.  A three-year perspective on conceptions of and orientations to learning mathematics of prospective teachers and first year university students , 2003 .

[14]  S. Snelgrove,et al.  Approaches to learning: psychometric testing of a study process questionnaire. , 2003, Journal of advanced nursing.

[15]  J. Star.  Reconceptualizing procedural knowledge. , 2005 .

[16]  Psychometric Characteristics of the Conceptions of Mathematics Questionnaire , 2001, Psychological reports.

[17]  J. Biggs,et al.  From Theory to Practice: A Cognitive Systems Approach , 1993 .

[18]  Ray Sleet,et al.  IMPROVING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ASSESSMENT RESULTS AND STUDENT UNDERSTANDING , 1990 .

[19]  J. MacBean.  Students' conceptions of, and approaches to, studying mathematics as a service subject at undergraduate level , 2004 .

[20]  Michelle K. Smith,et al.  Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  P. Zeegers,et al.  Approaches to learning in science: a longitudinal study. , 2001, The British journal of educational psychology.

[22]  Wes Maciejewski.  Instructors' Perceptions of Their Students' Conceptions: The Case in Undergraduate Mathematics. , 2016 .

[23]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Learning Styles , 2008, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[24]  Alberto F. Cabrera,et al.  Making the Mark: Are Grades and Deep Learning Related? , 2014, Research in Higher Education.

[25]  Michael N. Milone,et al.  Teaching Through Modality Strengths: Concepts and Practices , 1979 .

[26]  J. Biggs.  Student Approaches to Learning and Studying , 1987 .

[27]  Prem Ramburuth,et al.  Exploring the relationship between students' orientations to learning, the structure of students' learning outcomes and subsequent academic performance , 2004 .

[28]  K. Trigwell,et al.  RELATING APPROACHES TO STUDY AND QUALITY OF LEARNING OUTCOMES AT THE COURSE LEVEL , 1991 .

[29]  Gizem Karaali.  An Evaluative Calculus Project: Applying Bloom's Taxonomy to the Calculus Classroom , 2011 .

[30]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. , 1957 .

[31]  H M Alkhateeb.  University Students' Conceptions of First-Year Mathematics , 2001, Psychological reports.

[32]  George D. Kuh,et al.  The Effects of Discipline on Deep Approaches to Student Learning and College Outcomes , 2008 .

[33]  J. Biggs.  Individual differences in study processes and the Quality of Learning Outcomes , 1979 .

[34]  Tammy M. Long,et al.  Just the Facts? Introductory Undergraduate Biology Courses Focus on Low-Level Cognitive Skills , 2010, CBE life sciences education.

[35]  Jackie Nicholas,et al.  Qualitatively different experiences of learning mathematics at university , 1998 .

[36]  J. Biggs,et al.  The revised two-factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. , 2001, The British journal of educational psychology.

[37]  G. Boulton‐Lewis.  Teaching for quality learning at university , 2008 .

[38]  J. Stanley,et al.  Book Review: Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , 1957 .

[39]  L. Cronbach.  Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[40]  N. Entwistle,et al.  Understanding Student Learning , 1983 .

[41]  F. Marton,et al.  ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING: I—OUTCOME AND PROCESS* , 1976 .

[42]  J. O’Donoghue,et al.  Factors influencing the transition to university service mathematics: part 2 a qualitative study , 2009 .

[43]  Jackie Nicholas,et al.  University mathematics students' conceptions of mathematics , 1998 .

[44]  J. Biggs.  What do inventories of students' learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. , 1993, The British journal of educational psychology.

[45]  Jackie Nicholas,et al.  Conceptions of mathematics and how it is learned: The perspectives of students entering university , 1994 .

[46]  F. Marton,et al.  ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING—II OUTCOME AS A FUNCTION OF THE LEARNER'S CONCEPTION OF THE TASK , 1976 .