An investigation of the study processes of British higher education students using Biggs' Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) is reported. There is partial confirmation of Biggs' findings that the study process complex, as operationalised by the SPQ, comprises the three orthogonal factor dimensions of utilising, internalising and achieving, where each dime?,sion is ma+ up of a motivational and a strategy subscale. The least satisfactory dimension is utilising which appears to be the most unstable scale with few consistent items from study to study. Our research yields evidence to support Biggs' congruence hypothesis that students with particular motivational predispositions tend to adopt a corresponding, linked strategy.

No abstract

Summary. The Junior Maudsley Personality Inventory was given to samples of children from an urban comprehensive school (138) and a boys' public school (40). In addition, the General Anxiety Scale for children and a reminiscence test were administered in the comprehensive school. Both I.Q. measures and terminal examination results were taken from the school record cards. A teacher‐rating of Extraversion‐Introversion was obtained from the public school. The results indicated that Extraversion, neuroticism and I.Q. were statistically unrelated and that there was a positive correlation between stable Introversion and attainment in school examinations. High or even moderate neuroticism or general anxiety were not advantageously related to attainment and the Yerkes‐Dodson law was not detected. Reminiscence scores were negatively related to attainment which is in the predicted direction. An analysis of the mean I.Q. and Extraversion scores for promoted and demoted children showed that the former were significantly introvert whilst demoted children tended to be extravert. The public school sample showed some unusual personality trends and some teacher‐ratings at this school seemed reasonably sound.

Summary. A 20‐item questionnaire designed by Joyce and Hudson to measure convergence and divergence was given to a sample of 306 first‐year university students from various science and non‐science disciplines. From the data the scale was refined using factor analysis. To validate the scale, scores on intelligence and open‐ended tests were obtained from the sample and used to define three groups consisting of convergers, divergers and all‐rounders. The scale proved to be more closely related to science/non‐science bias than to convergence/divergence.

No abstract