STUDENTS’ CONCEPTIONS OF LEARNING ACROSS DIFFERENT CULTURES

STUDENTS’ CONCEPTIONS OF LEARNING ACROSS DIFFERENT CULTURES

Recent cross cultural studies of Asian students’ approaches to learning have shown that, contrary to Western perceptions, the students did not overwhelmingly take surface approaches, hence the apparent paradox of their high achievement. For example, in studies conducted by Ho (1991), Kember (2000) and Watkins and Biggs (1996; 2001), memorising was a common strategy among Asian learners but this strategy could be part of a deep approach. These studies revealed an association Recent cross cultural studies of Asian students’ approaches to learning have shown that, contrary to Western perceptions, the students did not overwhelmingly take surface approaches, hence the apparent paradox of their high achievement. For example, in studies conducted by Ho (1991), Kember (2000) and Watkins and Biggs (1996; 2001), memorising was a common strategy among Asian learners but this strategy could be part of a deep approach. These studies revealed an association

Comparative studies between learners from differing cultural contexts suggest that there are differences in the ways in which students experience learning situations (Marton et al., 1996). Most of these studies have focused on Chinese students in particular. For example, Wong and Wen (2001) outlined a series of cross‐cultural studies (Cortazzi & Jin, 2001; Kember, 1996; Lee, 1996; Marton, Dall'Alba, & Tse, 1996; Marton, Watkins, & Tang, 1997; Marton et al., 1996; Otsuka, 1996; Torney‐ Purta, 1990) comparing the relationship between learning conceptions and academic achievements among students from Confucian‐Heritage Cultures (CHC) in China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, Korea and Japan. CHC students are generally taught in large classes using expository methods which, by Western standards, are not conducive to effective learning (Watkins & Biggs, 1996). However, CHC students often outperform students from Western countries in mathematics and science. Such contradiction has been called the ‘paradox of the Chinese learner’ (Wong & Wen, 2001, p. 138).

Paradox of the Chinese learner

Chinese learners are often involved in competitive examinations and textbook learning (Biggs, 1990; Curro, 2003; Kember & Gow, 1991). In addition, researchers such as Biggs (1996), Kember and Gow (1991) and Samuelowickz (1987) argue that, Chinese learners make extensive use of rote memorisation and are perceived as more passive and less interactive in class than most students. Chinese learners are therefore expected to perform poorly in academic content (Watkins, 2000) because they are too dependent on surface approaches to learning. However, their level of academic achievement has been found to be relatively high, with higher deep and strategic inventory scores than students in Western countries (Au & Entwistle, 1999; Biggs, 1989; 1990; 1991; Kember & Gow, 1990; 1991). The success of Chinese learners in mathematics and natural sciences (Torney‐Purta, 1990) has resulted in a paradox: ‘If memorisation as a form of learning is so closely associated with surface approaches to learning and if surface approaches led to poorer learning, why do Chinese students, who spend a good deal of time in activities that appear to be aimed at pure memorisation, do so well in competition with their Western contemporaries?’ (Marton & Booth, 1997, p.39).

The paradox of the Chinese learner gave impetus to several studies investigating how Chinese students conceptualised learning and went about the task of learning (Marton et al., 1992). Quantitative and qualitative studies on the ways in which Chinese students experience learning have found that the Chinese students combine memorisation with attempts to understand (Au & Entwistle, 1999). Such The paradox of the Chinese learner gave impetus to several studies investigating how Chinese students conceptualised learning and went about the task of learning (Marton et al., 1992). Quantitative and qualitative studies on the ways in which Chinese students experience learning have found that the Chinese students combine memorisation with attempts to understand (Au & Entwistle, 1999). Such

Different types of memorisation have been revealed by several studies (Biggs, 1993; Entwistle & Entwistle, 2003). These studies demonstrate that memorisation is linked to understanding and surface approaches in three ways, namely: ‘rote memorisation’, ‘memorisation with understanding’ and ‘understanding without memorisation’ (Au & Entwistle, 1999, p. 3). First, in rote memorisation, students memorise as much information as they can without ‘digesting’ what the information means to them (Au & Entwistle, 1999, p. 4). Rote memorisation is linked to quantitative conceptions of learning and surface approaches as it signifies the students’ intention to reproduce information without necessarily understanding what it means to them. Second, memorisation with understanding corresponds to the notion of deep memorising (Dart et al., 2000), in which both memorisation and understanding are seen as reinforcing one another. From this perspective, memorising can enhance their ability to understand a learning material and correspondingly, understanding can contribute to a better memorisation (Au &

Entwistle, 1999). In the third approach, students noted that they are able to understand learning materials without having to memorise them word by word, that is, the ability to understand without memorisation.

However, most of the findings in studies investigating the ways in which students experience learning have been carried out in Western countries based on Western cultures. While those in non‐Western countries can adapt Western methods for improving learning outcomes a more culturally relevant approach is needed (Watkins, 2000). A limited number of studies have been carried out to investigate students’ conceptions of learning across different cultures. Most of these studies have made comparisons between Chinese students and students from Western countries such as Australia, Belgium and Germany. Very few studies have investigated students’ conceptions of learning in Asian countries apart from China and Hong Kong. Table 4 summarises the findings of these comparative studies.

Table 4: A summary of cross‐cultural conceptions of learning and approaches to learning

Chinese and Chinese and

Chinese and

Nepalese Portuguese Uruguayan Flemish students’ German students’ students’

students’ views conceptions of students’ conceptions of conceptions of of learning

learning (Zhu,

approaches to

learning and

learning

approaches to (Duarte, 2006) Nagle, 1996)

(Marton, Wen & Valcke &

learning (Dahlin

2000) (Watkins & Regmi, 1990; Dahlin & Regmi,

1997)

Chinese and Chinese students

Nepalese students’ Portuguese Uruguayan students

German and Chinese

conceptions of students’ agree that learning

viewed learning as

students had

learning: conceptions of involves the process of

important for personal

different views in

learning described acquiring information.

change and social

terms of their

competence. conceptions of the

(1) Learning as an all of the six

conceptions of Chinese students

usefulness of

increase in

knowledge; learning found by focus on on‐going

Chinese students

memorising at

Säljö (1979) and actions of learning.

viewed learning as

primary school level

understanding. and the conceptions

(2) Learning as a Marton et al.

process of seeing (1993). Uruguayan students

of the role of

things differently; focus on the end

Flemish students had

repetition in

the tendency to adopt

understanding. and,

product of learning. surface approach to

(3) Learning as an Uruguayan students

learning. Repetition is seen by

aspect of personal perceive memorising

German students as a

development. as ‘a natural product

way to check their

understanding while

of learning’ (Marton et

Nepalese students’ al., 1996, p. 132).

Chinese students

perceive repetition as

approaches to

learning were found Chinese students

critical in the

be similar to those believed that

development of

to

understanding, adopted by students memorisation led to a

in Australia (Biggs, better understanding

particularly with

1987) and Philippines of information and

‘attentive effort’

(Watkins et al., repeated practices

(Dahlin & Watkins,

2000, p. 78).

1986).

were necessary to enhance Nepalese students memorisation. held the belief that in order to achieve high

Chinese students grades, one needs to described two types of

understand what the memorisation, learning task requires

namely: ‘mechanical of him or her. and meaningful’ (Marton et al., 1996,

As students in Nepal p. 132).

progress through the educational system from school to university, they tend to adopt more surface approach than deep and achieving.

The range of students’ conceptions of learning has been shown to be generally similar across different cultures. For example, as outlined in Table 4, ‘learning as memorising’ and ‘learning as understanding’ were found in almost all studies. In particular, they are similar to the conceptions of learning found by Säljö (1979) and Marton et al. (1993). There were, however, differences in the ways in which they approached learning. Chinese students valued memorisation as a way to understand what they have learnt better and they viewed repetition as significant in promoting memorisation (Marton, Wen & Nagle, 1996; Zhu, Valcke & Schellens, 2008). In contrast, Uruguayan students viewed memorisation as an end‐product of learning rather than a process that helps them to understand better (Marton et al., 1996). Another marked difference was the ways in which Chinese and German students used repetition in learning (Dahlin & Watkins, 2000). Chinese students regarded repetition as a way that can enhance their understandings of a topic that they have learnt. German students, on the other hand, used repetition to check their understandings.

All of the studies described in this section have been conducted with students in university and secondary school settings (Purdie 1994; Kelly 2000). Younger students or children may conceive of their learning experiences differently from adult learners or those in the university. There is a growing body of literature that provides evidence of children’s capabilities in describing their learning or school experiences. In his seminal research, Piaget (1975) asked children to describe their conceptions of thinking (Piaget, 1975). Other studies involving children as All of the studies described in this section have been conducted with students in university and secondary school settings (Purdie 1994; Kelly 2000). Younger students or children may conceive of their learning experiences differently from adult learners or those in the university. There is a growing body of literature that provides evidence of children’s capabilities in describing their learning or school experiences. In his seminal research, Piaget (1975) asked children to describe their conceptions of thinking (Piaget, 1975). Other studies involving children as

A child‐centred perspective posits that it is more conducive to view learning from the child’s perspective as it provides a better understanding of what learning means to children. Thus, the children’s experiences of learning provide important information about schools and classrooms (Schuh, 2004). Moreover, a study of children’s perspective from a small, non‐Western country contributes to the limited body of research that investigates students’ conceptions of learning across different cultures.