Learning conceptions and predicted academic performance

The quantitative analyses found that the learning conceptions ‘broadening horizons’ and ‘personal development’ predicted how the students who completed the COLI expected they would perform in their first trimester. Both these learning conceptions align with Purdie and Hattie’s (2002) ‘personal change’ learning conception, which is associated with a deep approach to learning. Students who scored higher in these conceptions predicted they would do better than those who did not score so highly on these conceptions. There is no published work in the field which explores the relationship between academic self-efficacy or performance self-efficacy and conceptions of learning, so these findings cannot be compared to students at any level of study.

However, there are several studies (e.g. Alamdarloo et al., 2013) that show that students who hold learning conceptions at the top end of the hierarchy perform better than students whose learning conceptions align to a surface approach to studying. The literature also suggests a relationship between self-efficacy and academic achievement, so it would be expected that students who hold learning conceptions affiliated with deep approaches to learning would predict they would perform better than those who place less importance in higher learning conceptions. Students who were high achievers in their previous learning environment, for example, university, college, and school, are likely to predict they would perform better than those who had not experienced high grades. These same high achievers may hold higher learning conceptions than those who did not perform so well in comparison to their peers. In this research, previous academic achievement was not considered.

As discussed in the previous paragraphs, students did not view the assessment process as evaluating their learning but merely as evaluating how they were able to meet the expectations of the academic teaching staff. This may explain why learning

conceptions associated with a deep approach to learning predicted students’ perceived academic performance but not their actual achievement.

5.4

Are there cultural differences in conceptions of learning?

The quantitative analyses found that there were little cultural differences in learning conceptions across the five cultural clusters. Due to the relatively small population in this research and the large number of countries represented within this population it is unfeasible to state that a particular culture emphatically holds any learning conception

higher or lower than another cultural cluster. The limitations of adopting the cultural cluster approach will be addressed in detail in Chapter 6 (section 6.4). This section will report the findings from the cultural clusters as identified in this study and will explore these in relation to the focus group discussions.

The most basic learning conception, as reported in the literature, which was termed ‘new information’ in this research, was scored lower by European students than by students from Central Africa, Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and Asia. The Central African cultural cluster, which was mainly populated by students from Nigeria, scored highest in the ‘new information’ learning conception. It could be argued that European students rated ‘new information’ lower as their experience of learning at undergraduate was more likely to involve critical thinking than students in the other cultural clusters. This was supported by students in the focus groups, evidenced by the following quote from a Nigerian student.

I now try to ask questions for learning. [2|1]

The ‘remembering’ learning conception was again reported as more important by the Central African students than the other cultural clusters. The emphasis on memorisation for learning in Nigeria has already been discussed with a Nigerian student (a man) stating:

It was very didactic teaching [in Nigeria], memorization and reproducing is encouraged. [3|4]

‘Using information’ and ‘making sense’ showed no cultural differences in the

quantitative analyses and were not raised as pertinent learning conceptions in the focus group discussions. As previously highlighted, students may not have viewed ‘gaining information’ or ‘increasing knowledge’ and ‘using information’ as mutually exclusive. There was some reference made in the discussions to ‘understanding’, which aligns with ‘making sense’ in this research, but this was in relation to memorising and repetition, which the Asian students viewed as related but which students from other cultural clusters saw as quite separate activities.

Central African students scored ‘broadening horizons’ highest, although the only significant difference was between them and the European students, who scored this

conception lower than the other cultural clusters. It could be argued that students from further afield than Europe have greater cultural adjustments to make, therefore learning in the UK is more likely to broaden their horizons than for European students, some of whom were from the UK. Rienties et al. (2012) found that non-Western students face more obstacles before they can actually integrate into academic life compared to the other student groups. This does not explain why Central African students would score this conception higher than students from MENA or Asia. The COLI analysis produced a similar effect for ‘personal development’, which was scored lowest by the European students and highest by Central African students. There is no doubt from the discussion in focus group 3 that the Nigerian student viewed learning as a lifelong process, which he believed leads to personal fulfilment, more so than the European students.

‘Learning is developing good relationships’ and ‘learning in order to become a member of society’ were the items that made up the learning conception ‘social outcome’ in this research, which was rated lower by the European students. In the focus groups the only students to discuss learning in relation to social outcome were from Asia. The final learning conception derived from this research, ‘social interaction’ which was made up from items such as ‘I learn a lot from talking to other people’, and ‘learning is knowing how to get on with other people’, which showed a similar effect with Central African students scoring significantly higher than the European students, while other cultural clusters sat in between. The analogy provided by the Nigerian student, as reported in section 5.2.1, is further evidence that a student from Central Africa saw skills

acquisition through social interaction as being fundamental to learning.

The differences in learning conceptions across cultural clusters in the COLI highlight that European students rated most learning conceptions lower than all other cultural clusters, with only North American students rating learning as ‘social outcome’ as lower and Asian students rating ‘remembering’ as lower. This is an interesting concept in relation to the general belief that Chinese students are far more likely to use

memorisation as a form of learning than other cultures (Watkins & Biggs, 1996). The Central African students’ tendency to rate most learning conceptions higher than other students and predict that they would perform better in their first trimester than the other students in this research may be related to a cultural difference in how they complete questionnaires.