In this chapter, the data from the survey are integrated with the interview data and discussed using the five categories developed in the grounded theory analysis. Since this is an explanatory mixed methods study with the qualitative data given more emphasis, relevant aspects of the quantitative data are discussed within the categories that arose from the qualitative analysis. These are: Calculating, Developing
discipline-specific discourse competence in English, Engaging in study strategies, Being motivated to achieve success, and Memorising, practising and understanding.
For the final category, I undertake a more detailed analysis using subcategories with additional data to support these. The more fine-grained analysis of this category was prompted by its position in relation to the other categories. It is centrally placed in this study as it brings to the foreground an explanation of the processes that underlie how Chinese students‟ perceptions of examination formats impact on their motivation and study strategies. The relationships among the categories is represented in Figure 4, and an explanation of this relationship concludes the chapter.
Calculating
For Chinese students studying in a western university, Calculating involves trying to predict what will be in examination papers so that they can work strategically to manage time and study strategies. The process of Calculating represents a nexus of power between the student domain and the teaching domain as students seek to align their perceptions of what is required of them in an examination to the reality of the examination (Volet, 1999). It forms an important system of communication as students seek to determine the values and expectations of courses through the assessment process (Knight, 2002). Varying combinations of deep and surface motives act as drivers of Calculating. The result of the process affects the choices of the study strategies.
In the quantitative data, Calculating is implicit in the following item from the adapted R-SPQ-2f (Biggs et al., 2001):
I do not learn things that are unlikely to be in the examination when I am studying for (essay or multiple-choice) examinations (adapted from Biggs et al., 2001).
This item fits on the surface motives subscale because students use Calculating as a way of focusing on examinations, implying a surface motivation in only wishing to study in order to pass the examination. In this case, the onus is on the student to undertake Calculating for herself or himself. The use of the word “unlikely” suggests that it is the students‟ responsibility to determine the probability of any topic occurring in an examination.
At the same time, the qualitative data reveal that Calculating is also linked with motivation for Chinese students as it enables them to align the demands of question types with study strategies. This includes the content of the questions, such as which topics will be most important, and the skills needed to answer the questions. Students develop perceptions of the complexity of questions that will affect their approaches to learning (Baumgart & Halse, 1999). Though practising potential examination questions, students can self-monitor their own learning. The following item on the deep strategy subscale in the R-SPQ-2f (Biggs et al., 2001) represents this:
I test myself on important topics until I understand them completely when I am studying for (multiple-choice or essay) examinations. (adapted from Biggs et al., 2001).
Hence a strategy such as cue-seeking, which appears to be a surface strategy, may allow students to identify what is important in the course and undertake a deeper strategy of self-monitoring by seeking feedback on their learning. Although most students reported using old examination papers as their primary sources of cues,
the qualitative data show that Calculating occurs as part of interactions between students and lecturers:
I come to most classes with questions that I want answered when I am preparing for essay examinations.
This item is on the deep motives subscale of the R-SPQ-2f (Biggs et al., 2001) and suggests a reflective approach with built-in self-assessment when studying. It may result in interactions with staff or the impetus to explore knowledge, actively using extra resources.
In the codes that arose from the short answer questions on the survey, cue-seeking by looking at previous examination papers was mentioned 20 times for essay questions and 17 times for multiple-choice questions. This suggests that Calculating is an important process for both types of examinations. It can be related to deep or surface strategies. When students feel that the process of cue-seeking is effective, it increases their motivation to study because they have more confidence that their own efforts will bring about results. It could represent attempts by the students to negotiate the tacit requirements of assessments (Rust, O‟Donovan & Price, 2005). This enables students to have a sense of agency in their learning which is essential to motivation since Chinese students believe that success is a result of effort (Dahlin & Watkins, 2000; Watkins, 2000).
When students engage in the process of Calculating in order to be able to practise examination questions, they are seeking feedback. Hattie and Timperley (2007) point out that feedback occurs after instruction and is most useful when students understand at least something about the task. When Chinese students prepare for examinations by meeting with groups of their peers, they report that each member of the group is required to prepare information beforehand. Using the model developed by Hattie and Timperley (2007), the students seek information on a task level, trying to answer the questions “Where am I going?” “How am I going?” and “Where to next?” (p. 87). In order to be able to answer the first question, clear goals are needed. The Chinese students in this study have goals of understanding the content of courses and also passing courses to gain a qualification. When practising multiple-choice questions, students gain feedback on the correctness of the answers from consulting with peers, textbooks or staff:
I think about 20% of them have answers but, for the rest, you can only talk with the others, Maybe ask. Like three people sit together, and two people think A is right. And you think B is right, but you get A. Just follow the other people‟s idea.
This enables a second feedback question “How am I going?” to be answered for students. Although the student above gets feedback about correctness of the task of answering the multiple-choice question, she does not get feedback about the processing of the task. She resorts to memorisation and does not use the feedback on the correctness of the answer to enhance her future learning or her ability to do similar multiple-choice questions.
In contrast with multiple-choice questions, task feedback on essay questions is more difficult to obtain, especially as students do not usually find a way to get feedback on the language of the task. This impacts on study skills and some students report purposefully seeking out ways of getting feedback on their knowledge and discipline-specific language for essay questions:
She study a PhD in psychology at university so I keep contact with her and I will ask her for her suggestions and advice because she is much more professional than the teacher in learning support and she will give me some extra advice and I know a professor in church. He is my physiology professor so when I go to church I will talk with him about this kind of area and maybe ask him about some case and his opinion about this kind of case and this kind of question. Usually he will give me some kind of information that I cannot find otherwise.
As the quote above indicates, students are likely to report seeking help from peers and experts when preparing to answer essay questions. Higher achieving students have a clearer idea about the processes needed to do essay tasks and seek feedback about those processes. This argument is developed further later in this chapter when I provide evidence of how memorisation and language proficiency may interact for Chinese students.
Successful cue-seeking as part of Calculating can represent a tacit agreement among the staff, the students and the institution to enable international students to be successful by passing the examination and the institution to continue to gain the revenue from international students in the future. Items which cue students to assessment are made accessible to students by the institution. An example is the availability of examination papers from previous years. This is a form of “soft leaking” (Saravanamuthu, 2008, p. 173). It can vary from identifying the topics that will be in the examination to reproducing tutorial questions in examinations. If academic staff are evaluated by student achievement, then soft leaking could be one way of responding to the commercial pressures to ensure that international full fee paying students are successful. On the other hand, soft leaking can contribute by giving students the opportunity to self-assess their learning and can contribute to matching strategies with the demands of the questions.