Suppr超能文献

两种学习方法评估工具的比较及其在预测考试成绩和学习习惯方面的效用。

A comparison of two learning approach inventories and their utility in predicting examination performance and study habits.

机构信息

Department of Medical Education, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, United States.

出版信息

Adv Physiol Educ. 2024 Jun 1;48(2):164-170. doi: 10.1152/advan.00227.2023. Epub 2024 Jan 25.

Abstract

The revised two-factor Study Process Questionnaire and the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students are two instruments commonly used to measure student learning approach. Although they are designed to measure similar constructs, it is unclear whether the metrics they provide differ in terms of their real-world classification of learning approach. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes of these two inventories in a study population from an undergraduate (baccalaureate) human anatomy course. The three central goals of this study are to compare the inventories in terms of ) how students are classified, ) the relationship between examination performance, time spent studying, and learning approach, and ) instrument reliability. Results demonstrate that student classifications of corresponding scales of each inventory are significantly correlated, suggesting they measure similar constructs. Although the inventories had similar reliability, neither was consistently strong in predicting examination performance or study habits. Overall, these results suggest that the two inventories are comparable in terms of how they measure learning approach, but the lack of correspondence between learning approach scores and measurement outcomes questions their validity as tools that can be used universally in classrooms. Although learning approach inventories have been used extensively in education research, there has been no direct comparison of how student classification differs between instruments or how classification influences the interpretation of how learning approach impacts student performance. This is especially relevant in light of recent research questioning the validity of the Study Process Questionnaire (LoGiudice AB, Norman GR, Manzoor S, Monteiro S. 28: 47-63, 2023; Johnson SN, Gallagher ED, Vagnozzi AM. 16: e0250600, 2021).

摘要

修订后的双因素学习过程问卷和学生学习方法与技能量表是两种常用于测量学生学习方法的工具。虽然它们旨在测量相似的结构,但不清楚它们提供的指标在学习方法的实际分类方面是否存在差异。本研究的目的是比较本科(学士学位)人体解剖学课程研究人群中这两种量表的结果。本研究的三个主要目标是比较这些量表在以下方面的差异:(1)学生的分类方式;(2)考试成绩、学习时间和学习方法之间的关系;(3)工具的可靠性。结果表明,每个量表对应量表的学生分类显著相关,表明它们测量相似的结构。尽管这两个量表的可靠性相似,但它们都不能始终如一地预测考试成绩或学习习惯。总的来说,这些结果表明,这两个量表在测量学习方法方面是可比的,但学习方法评分与测量结果之间缺乏一致性,质疑它们作为可在课堂上普遍使用的工具的有效性。虽然学习方法量表在教育研究中得到了广泛应用,但在学生分类如何在工具之间存在差异以及分类如何影响学习方法对学生表现影响的解释方面,还没有直接的比较。考虑到最近的研究对学习过程问卷的有效性提出了质疑,这一点尤其重要(LoGiudice AB、Norman GR、Manzoor S、Monteiro S. 28: 47-63, 2023; Johnson SN、Gallagher ED、Vagnozzi AM. 16: e0250600, 2021)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验