Assessing learning-style inventories and how well they predict academic performance

Leiden, Lisa I.; Crosby, Ryan; Follmer, H

doi:10.1097/00001888-199006000-00009

Cited by 26 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That other studies have failed to find this probably indicates that they had too small a sample size 33. That study habits at the time of selection for admission to medical school did not predict results in final examinations reflects the fact that study habits are states as much as traits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Clinical experience, performance in final examinations, and learning style in medical students: prospective study

McManus

Richards

Winder³

et al. 1998

BMJ

188

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Clinical experience, performance in final examinations, and learning style in medical students: prospective study

McManus

Richards

Winder³

et al. 1998

BMJ

188

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Leiden et al . 's (1990) study compared the preferences of the medical students on the two learning style inventories: the Lancaster Approaches to Studying Inventory (LASI) and the Inventory Learning Processes (ILP).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning preferences of medical students

1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning styles and preferred learning approaches are believed to have an influence on student learning. This study investigated the learning preferences of first-, second- and fourth-year medical students as well as explored differences in learning preferences from first- to fourth-year students. In June 1992, 95 students were administered the learning preferences inventory (LPI) designed by Rezler at the United Arab Emirates University. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the significance of the differences of the six LPI mean scores on Abstract/Concrete, Teacher-structured/Student-structured, and Individual/Interpersonal categories across the academic year and sex. The two predominant preferences were concrete and teacher-centred. Results of this study showed students preferred teacher-structured learning experiences dealing with concrete and applied tasks, rather than abstract tasks.

show abstract

“…The approaches to learning could be surface, deep, or strategic. In an individual with surface approach to learning, the primary concern is to pass the examinations, and hence, predominantly depends on rote learning; those with an interest in the subject and a desire to understand the subject matter adopt the deep learning approach; strategic approach involves using a combination of surface and deep approach based on the intrinsic motivation and the nature of work to be accomplished [5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaches to learning and academic performance in pharmacology among second-year undergraduate medical students

Kamath¹,

Rao

Shenoy³

et al. 2018

Sci Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIMS: To determine the learning approach of second-year undergraduate medical students and whether a surface or deep approach to learning had any correlation with the pharmacology sessional and university examination marks obtained.METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among second-year medical students in their fifth semester. To determine the students’ learning approach, whether superficial or deep, we used the Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F), which contains 20 items in the form of a five-point Likert scale and is suitable for use in higher education settings. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated using the scores obtained from a sample of 20 students to determine the internal consistency. To determine the relationship between the learning approach and examination scores, the average of the individual sessional examination marks and the university examination scores obtained by the students were calculated.RESULTS: Of the 170 students who participated in the study, 87 (51.2%) were females. The Cronbach’s alpha value was considered acceptable for both surface and deep approach. While the academic performance was significantly better in females (U = 2571.5; p = 0.001), no difference was seen in the learning approach based on gender. Fifty (29.4%) students had a higher score for the surface approach. This group had lower examination scores compared with those with equal scores for surface and deep approach or higher scores for the deep approach. A weak negative correlation was seen between the examination marks and surface approach (τb = −0.167; p = 0.002). When analyzed based on gender, the correlation was statistically significant only in females (τb = −0.173; p = 0.02).CONCLUSIONS: A weak negative correlation was seen between the examination marks and surface approach to learning. Although statistically significant, the actual difference between the groups was of a small magnitude. Hence, whether promoting deep learning approach improves academic performance in terms of marks obtained in the examination needs to be confirmed by further studies.

show abstract

Assessing learning-style inventories and how well they predict academic performance

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

Clinical experience, performance in final examinations, and learning style in medical students: prospective study

Clinical experience, performance in final examinations, and learning style in medical students: prospective study

Learning preferences of medical students

Approaches to learning and academic performance in pharmacology among second-year undergraduate medical students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About