Sari Lindblom-Ylänne Professor , University of Helsinki, Finland President of EARLI

1. The interaction between students' approaches to learning and perceptions of the teaching-learning environment Sari Lindblom-YlänneProfessor, University of Helsinki, Finland President of EARLI

2. Outline of my presentation • Evidence of the relationship between approaches to learning and experiences of the teaching-learning environment at the group level • Quantitative studies • Preliminary results of the interaction at the individual level • Three cases Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

3. My collaborators • Anna Parpala • Henna Rytkönen • ErkkiKomulainen • Liisa Postareff • Saara Repo • Mia Ruohoniemi • Anne Haarala-Muhonen • Viivi Virtanen • Nina Katajavuori • Laura Hirsto • TopiLitmanen Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

4. Approaches to learning(e.g., Entwistle; Ramsden; Marton; Biggs) • Describestudents’ aims and processestheyapplywhentrying to reachtheiraims • Contextual and dynamic in nature • Deep approach • Intention to maximiseunderstanding • Based on interest in the subjectmatter • Surfaceapproach • Intention to coupewith the courserequirements • Routine factmemorisation • Related to an experience of highworkload • Organisedstudying • Strategicapproach; organisedstudying and effort management • Intention to succeedwell Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

5. Variation in approaches to learning • There is empirical evidence that approaches are related to • characteristics of the teaching-learning environment • discipline of study • motivation to studying • regulation of studying • personal epistemology Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

6. Correlations between approaches to learning and experiences of the teaching-learning environment scales (N=2509, p<0.000) Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

7. Scalemeansbyfaculty (N=2509) Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

8. The contextual variation of approaches to learning is complex in nature - and still largely unknown • Quantitative data show that the approaches do not change much (at least not easily) during Bachelor studies • Evidence of individual variation • Some students are “immune” to the demands and characteristics of the teaching-learning environment • Some students are easily affected by the environment Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

9. Three cases: same course, same teacher, same study phase, same discipline, same level of motivation – different experiences and reactions Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

10. EXAMPLE 1: Teachingimpedeslearning • I have a slow study pace and I need a long time to learn something. It’s a disappointment that courses are so short. I seem to be stuck in repetition and I never have enough time move to a critical and analytical level. The teacher was very sympathetic, but the course wasn’t a positive learning experience for me. There was such hurry all the time, the teacher hardly had time to breath. I attendedalllectures, butcouldnotfollow. I totally lost it. I tried to read the course book alongside with the lectures, but I got mixed up. The teaching lacked a rhythm and a structure. It was very difficult for me to form a general picture. Had this course been longer, I would have learned better. Without reading the book I wouldn’t have learned anything. Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

11. Example 1: more information • Compared to her average scores on the approaches to learning scales, Student 1 scored in this specific course • much lower on deep approach (3.75 → 2.50) • intention to understand almost the same (4.25→4.0) • organised studying almost the same (3.25 →3.0) • much higher on surface approach (2.75 →4.25) • The teacher’s fast pace seemed to hinder learning • Destructive friction? Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

12. EXAMPLE 2: Teaching activates the student’slearningprocesses • I learn best when I’m able to listen and make notes at the same time. The best for me is if a teacher gives us the notes before the lecture so that I don’t have to write so much. Then I complete the teacher’s notes while listening. I usually go through my notes after the lecture; at least I glance through them. I have to say that this teacher’s notes were not very clear. They lacked structure, and it was unclear where one topic ended and the other begun. However, I like the way the teacher taught, his way of speaking. His talking was more understandable than his notes. I tried to complete his unclear notes by writing as much as possible during the lectures. I think it was even good for me that I had to be active and write myself, but the teacher could have taught in a slower pace. My general picture of the contents is not very coherent, at least it could be better. Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

13. Example 2: more information • Compared to her average scores on the approaches to learning scales, Student 2 scored in this specific course • higher on deep approach (3.25 → 4.0) • higher on intention to understand (3.75 →5.0) • higher on organised studying (3.0→3.75) • much lower on surface approach (2.75 →1.5) • Teacher’s fast pace seemed to increase the student’s own activities and push her to high-quality learning • Constructive friction? Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

14. EXAMPLE 3: Teachingdoesnothave a strongeffect on the learningprocesses •   A reason for me not to participate in lectures is too slow pace and too simple contents. I have a certain system, which I always follow: rule of three. First I listen in lectures, then I go through the notes at home and I don’t go to the next topic before I have understood it. Then I read the materials again before the exam. When I understand, I remember better. It is not memorising. This course was a pleasant experience. I participated in almost all lectures and really went through the contents at home. In addition to the teacher’s material, I made own notes, not everything, but the interesting ones. In this way I remember them better. Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

15. Example 3: more information • Compared to his average scores on the approaches to learning scales, Student 3 scored in this specific course • much higher on deep approach (2.75 → 4.0) • intention to understand almost the same (4.5 →4.75) • higher on organised studying (4.0→4.75) • surface approach almost the same (2.5 →2.25) Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

16. Conclusions • Interaction between the learner and his or her teaching-learning environment is complex • At the group level approaches to learning seem more stable • At the individual level more contextual variation • More research is needed on the specific factors affecting the interaction between approaches to learning and the teaching-learning environment Sari Lindblom-Ylänne

17. References • Haarala-Muhonen, A., Ruohoniemi, M., Katajavuori, N. & Lindblom-Ylänne S. (in press). Comparison of students’ perceptions of their teaching-learning environments in three professional academic disciplines – a valuable tool for quality enhancement. Accepted for publication. Learning Environments Research. • Parpala, A, Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E. & Entwistle, N. (2010). Students’ experiences of the teaching-learning environment, approaches to learning and their relation in two different contexts. Manuscript under review.  • Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E., Litmanen, T. & Hirsto, L. (in press). Students’ approaches to learning and their experiences of the teaching-learning environment in different disciplines. British Journal of Educational Psychology. • Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S. & Rytkönen, H. (in press). Students' conceptions of good teaching in three different disciplines. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. • Ruohoniemi, M. & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2009). Student perspectives on factors enhancing and preventing their learning. International Journal of Academic Development, 14 (1), 69–81. • Ruohoniemi, M., Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S. & Katajavuori, N. (in press). Relationships between students’ approaches to learning, perceptions of the teaching-learning environment, and study success – a case study of third-year veterinary students. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education. Sari Lindblom-Ylänne