In a constructivist learning environment, students' perceptions of assessment shifted toward deeper demands but their actual learning approaches did not, and surface approaches increased¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoreticalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Gijbels and colleagues showed students changed their perception of assessment toward more deep-level demands but did not shift their actual learning approach toward a deeper one, and developed more surface approaches during the course. → Remy M. J. P. Rikers 2008
Evidence¶
Remy M. J. P. Rikers 2008¶
Remy M. J. P. Rikers, Tamara van Gog, Fred Paas. (2008). The effects of constructivist learning environments: a commentary. Instr Sci (2008) 36:463–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9067-4
q2 · i? · theoretical · r2
A study by University of Antwerp researchers on change in students' learning approaches and assessment perceptions in a constructivist learning environment, as reported by the commentary. Perception shifted but approaches did not; no effect sizes are printed.
"they showed that although students change their perception of assessment towards more deep level demands, they did not change their actual approach to learning towards a deeper approach. Even worse, students seem to have developed more surface approaches towards learning during the course."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Portfolio-based learning environments did not change assessment preferences or deepen learning, and increased surface approaches in first-year students — related
- In a constructivist portfolio-assessment course, deep approaches decreased, surface approaches increased, and preferences for student participation and permanent evaluation decreased significantly — related
- A constructivist course increased perceived deep-level assessment demands but students still reported more frequent use of surface approaches to learning — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- The authors argue that constructivists talking about constructivist learning environments is not necessarily a paradox — related
- Students who perceive assessment demands as assessing deep, higher-level cognitive processing employ deep approaches, while those perceiving rote-recall demands employ surface approaches — reports the opposite
- Students who perceive teaching as good, and perceive clear goals, supportiveness and relevant courses, are more inclined towards a deep approach — reports the opposite
- Student-centred learning environments show mixed effects on students' approaches to learning, with several studies reporting increased surface or decreased deep approaches — a broader claim this one bears on
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
perception-shift-without-approach-change |
title |
In a constructivist learning environment, students' perceptions of assessment shifted toward deeper demands but their actual learning approaches did not, and surface approaches increased |
description |
In a constructivist learning environment, students' perceptions of assessment shifted toward deeper demands but their actual learning approaches did not, and surface approaches increased |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2008 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — remy-m-j-p-rikers-2008 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.