Student-centred learning environments show mixed effects on students' approaches to learning, with several studies reporting increased surface or decreased deep approaches¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Pre/post studies of student-centred teaching methods confirmed deepening of approaches in some studies, while others showed significant increases in surface approaches or decreases in deep approaches. → Baeten 2010 q2 i? Studies comparing learning environments differing in student-centredness found surplus value for deep approaches in some studies and more surface approaches in student-centred environments in others. → Baeten 2010

Evidence¶

Baeten 2010¶

Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5, 243–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.06.001

q2 · i? · review · r3

Narrative review of 25 articles on student-centred learning environments and approaches to learning. The review reports that pre/post studies "confirmed the hypothesis that these teaching methods deepened students' learning approaches" in some cases, while other studies showed significant increases in surface approaches or decreases in deep approaches.

"Several studies using pre- and post-test measures of approaches to learning, before and after experiencing student-centred teaching methods, confirmed the hypothesis that these teaching methods deepened students' learning approaches"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Portfolio-based learning environments did not change assessment preferences or deepen learning, and increased surface approaches in first-year students — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• In a constructivist portfolio-assessment course, deep approaches decreased, surface approaches increased, and preferences for student participation and permanent evaluation decreased significantly — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• A constructivist course increased perceived deep-level assessment demands but students still reported more frequent use of surface approaches to learning — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• In a constructivist learning environment, students' perceptions of assessment shifted toward deeper demands but their actual learning approaches did not, and surface approaches increased — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Students who perceive assessment demands as assessing deep, higher-level cognitive processing employ deep approaches, while those perceiving rote-recall demands employ surface approaches — related