A degree of studying? Approaches to learning and academic performance among student ‘consumers’

Abstract

The marketization of higher education and focus on graduate employability and earnings data has raised questions about how students perceive their roles and responsibilities while studying for their degree. Of particular concern is the extent to which students identify themselves as consumers of their higher education, for example, whether they view their degree as a purchasable commodity to improve future earnings. This is because research has found that a stronger consumer identity is related to lower academic performance. This study examined whether this relation could be explained by the impact of a consumer identity on the extent to which students adopt deep, surface or strategic approaches to learning. The hypotheses were that the relation between consumer identity and academic performance would be mediated by approaches to learning, whereby a consumer identity would be related to adopting a more surface approach, a less deep approach and less strategic approach. Undergraduates completed an online questionnaire that assessed the extent to which they identified as a consumer, their approaches to learning and academic performance. The analysis partly supported the hypotheses: a stronger consumer identity was related to a more surface approach to learning. However, a surface approach to learning did not mediate the relation between consumer identity and academic performance. Conversely, a deep approach to learning mediated the relation between consumer identity and academic performance, whereby a stronger consumer identity was related to lower academic performance through its negative impact on a deep approach to learning. There was no relation between consumer identity and strategic approach to learning. Implications of students identifying themselves as consumers of their higher education are discussed.

Teaching sciences and mathematics – A challenge for higher education institutions: A systematic review

“…As a result of these interactions, the student may take a learner or a non‐learner identity, which may include the consumer identity proposed by Bunce et al . (2017) and Bunce and Bennett (2019). Cooperation (through scaffolding or cooperative learning) will further boost student interest in the course and may foster an identity shift in those students who previously adopted a non‐learner identity (Figure 7).…”

“…Students with a consumer identity tend to be less engaged in their studies and take surface approaches to learning. In addition, higher consumer identities have been negatively correlated with academic performance (Bunce et al ., 2017; Bunce & Bennett, 2019).…”

Studují spolu

“…Poměrně stabilní napříč sociokulturními prostředími jsou výsledky týkající se přístupu ke studiu, tedy způsobu, jakým se studenti vyrovnávají s učivem a řešením studijních úkolů (Säljö, 1979). Až na výjimky (Barac et al, 2016) s vyšším věkem narůstá hloubkový přístup (Bunce & Bennett, 2019;Richardson, 1995;Rubin et al, 2018) vyznačující se snahou porozumět problémům a hledat souvislosti, případně přístup strategický vyznačující se dobrým porozuměním zadání a plánování řešení tak, aby student co nejlépe uspěl (Entwistle et al, 2001). Naopak povrchový přístup, u nějž dominuje memorování, s vyšším věkem klesá (Aaron & Skakun,1999;Biggs, 1987).…”

The Relation Between Discipline Identity and Academic Achievement Within a Marketized Higher Education Context: A Serial Mediation Model of Approaches to Learning and Course Complaints

“…There is emerging evidence suggesting that students’ approaches to learning are also negatively affected by the marketization of higher education, with its emphasis on extrinsic motivation for attending, such as obtaining well-paid employment ( Naidoo and Williams, 2015 ). For example, Bunce and Bennett (2021) recently showed that approaches to learning mediate the negative relation between a consumer identity and academic achievement. Specifically, they found that students who identified more strongly as consumers had lower achievement because they were less likely to adopt deep approaches to learning and more likely to adopt surface approaches.…”