Study Process of Private and Public Universities Students Using the Revised Two Factors Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F)
How to Cite
This research examined the impact of students’ demographic background on the study process of public and private university students. The Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) consisting of 20 items was used to collect data from 217 conveniently selected participants from public and private universities. To answer the research questions, descriptive statistics, an independent sample t-test, and a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were employed. The research findings indicate that regardless of university types, students tend to use the deep approach (M = 2.685) of learning more compared to the surface approach (M = 1.928). The researchers have found statistically significant differences between study approach and gender, types of universities, fields of study, academic level, year(s) of study and ethnicity. The research results reveal that demographic background has a significant influence on students’ approaches to learning. In terms of university type, the results indicated that students at public universities preferred the deep method of learning more (M = 2.809, SD = 0.515) than students at private universities (M = 2.537, SD = 0.581).
Allen, M. (2017). The sage encyclopedia of communication research methods (Vols. 1-4). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411
Bacon, D. R., & Stewart, K. A. (2006). How fast do students forget what they learn in consumer behaviour? A longitudinal study. Journal of Marketing Education, 28(3), 181-192.
Baumann, C., & Winzar, H. (2017). Confucianism and Work Ethic-Introducing the ReVaMB Model. In The Political Economy of Business Ethics in East Asia (pp. 33-60). Chandos Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-100690-0.00003-8
Behzadnia, A., Smith, D. R., & Goodson, M. L. (2018). A cross-sectional examination of the relationship between approaches to learning and perceived stress among medical students in Malaysia. Education for Health, 31(2), 80-86.
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Camberwell, Vic.: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Biggs, J. B. (1987b). Study Process Questionnaire Manual. Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd.
Biggs, J. B. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 57-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105
Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001) The Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 133-149.
Booth, P., Luckett, P., & Mladenovic, R. (1999). The quality of learning in accounting education: the impact of approaches to learning on academic performance. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 8(4), 277-300.
Cano, F. (2005). Consonance and dissonance in students’ learning experience. Learning and Instruction, 15(3), 201-223.
Chan, K. Y., & Mousley, J. (2005). Using word problems in Malaysian mathematics education: Looking beneath the surface. In Chick, H. L. & Vincent, J. L. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2: 217-224. Melbourne: PME.
Choo, P. G. S. (2006). Assessing the approaches to learning of twinning programme students in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 3, 93-116.
Cortina, J.M. (1993) What Is Coefficient Alpha: An Examination of Theory and Applications?. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98
Craik, F. I., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684.
Diseth, A. (2003). Personality and approaches to learning as predictors of academic achievement. European Journal of Personality, 17(2), 143- 155. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.469
Dunkin, M. J., & Biddle, B. J. (1974). The study of teaching. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., New York.
Entwistle, N. J. (1991). Approaches to learning and perceptions of the learning environment: Introduction to the special issue. Higher Education, 22(3), 201-204.
Entwistle. N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding Student Learning. London: Croom Helm.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding student differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 57-72.
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of The Oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). Continuum. (Original work published 1968).
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Education research: Competencies for analysis and applications (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Gow, L., Kember, D., & Cooper, B. (1994). The teaching context and approaches to study of accountancy students. Issues in Accounting Education, 9(1), 118.
Graham, J. M. (2006). Congeneric and (Essentially) Tau-Equivalent Estimates of Score Reliability: What They Are and How to Use Them. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(6), 930-944. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406288165
Gray, A. (2016). The 10 skills you need to thrive in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-10-skills-you-need-to-thrive-in-the-fourth-industrial-revolution
Habel, C. (2012). “I Can Do It, and How!” Student Experience in Access and Equity Pathways to Higher Education. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(6), 811-825.
Hall, M., Ramsay, A., & Raven, J. (2004). Changing the learning environment to promote deep learning approaches in first-year accounting students. Accounting Education, 13(4), 489-505.
Hee, O. C. (2014). A Study on the Learning Approach of the Malaysian Adult Students. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 6(2), 14-27.
Hunkins, F. P., & Ornstein, A. C. (2016). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues. Pearson Education.
Ismail, H., Hassan, A., Muhamad, M. M., Ali, W. Z. W., & Konting, M. M. (2013). Epistemological belief and learning approaches of students in higher institutions of learning in Malaysia. International Journal of Instruction, 6(1), 139-150.
Jager, J., Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2017). More Than Just Convenient: The Scientific Merits of Homogeneous Convenience Samples. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 82(2), 13-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/mono.12296
Johnson, S. N., Gallagher, E. D., & Vagnozzi, A. M. (2021). Validity concerns with the Revised Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) in undergraduate anatomy & physiology students. PLoS ONE, 16(4), e0250600. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250600
Jones, C. T. (2003). Biggs’s 3P Model of Learning: The Role of Personal Characteristics and Environmental Influences on Approaches to Learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Griffith University. https://doi.org/10.25904/1912/2382
Justicia, F., Pichardo, M. C., Cano, F., Berbén, A. B. G., & De la Fuente, J. (2008). The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F): Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses at item level. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 23(3), 355-372. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03173004
Kember, D., Wong, A., & Leung, D. Y. (1999). Reconsidering the dimensions of approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69(3), 323-343.
Kirby, J. R., Knapper, C. K., Evans, C. J., Carty, A. E. & Gadula, C. (2003). Approaches to learning at work and workplace climate. International Journal of Training and Development, 7(1), 31-52.
Konting, M. M. (1990). Kaedah penyelidikan pendidikan. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Laird, T. F. N., Shoup, R., Kuh, G. D., & Schwarz, M. J. (2008). The effects of discipline on deep approaches to student learning and college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 49(6), 469-494.
Lake, W., & Boyd, W. (2015). Age, maturity and gender, and the propensity towards surface and deep learning approaches amongst university students. Creative Education, 6(22), 2361.
Lee, J., & Choi, H. (2017). What affects learners’ higher-order thinking in technology-enhanced learning environments? The effects of learner factors. Computers & Education, 115, 143-152.
Leung, S. F., Mok, E., & Wong, D. (2008). The impact of assessment methods on the learning of nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 28(6), 711-719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2007.11.004
Lietz, P., & Matthews, B. (2010). The effects of college students’ personal values on changes in learning approaches. Research in Higher Education, 51(1), 65-87.
Lim, K. Y. (2020). A mixed methods approach to understanding the relationship between computing students’ approaches to learning and academic performance for different entry pathways. Doctoral dissertation, University of Bristol. https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/studentTheses/a-mixed-methods-approach-to-understanding-the-relationship-betwee
Lonka, K., Ketonen, E., & Vermunt, J. D. (2020). University students’ epistemic profiles, conceptions of learning, and academic performance. Higher Education, 81(4), 775-793.
Magno, C. (2011). The Use of Study Strategies on Mathematical Problem Solving. The International Journal of Research and Review, 6(2), 57-82. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277405378_The_Use_of_Study_Strategies_on_Mathematical_Problem_Solving
Malakolunthu, S., & Joshua, A. (2012). Learning approaches of undergraduate computer technology students: strategies for improvement. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 9, 1-14.
Martinelli, V., & Raykov, M. (2017). Evaluation of the revised two-factor study process questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) for student teacher approaches to learning. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 7(2), 9-9.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning. I-outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x
Marton, F., Alba, G. D., & Kun, T. L. (1996). Memorising and understanding: The keys to the paradox?. In D.A. Watkins & J. B. Biggs (ed.), The Chinese Learner: Cultural, Psychological and Contextual Influences (pp. 69-83) CERC and ACER, Hong Kong: The Central Printing Press.
Mathias, J., Bruce, M., & Newton, D. P. (2013). Challenging the Western stereotype: Do Chinese international foundation students learn by rote?. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 18(3), 221-238.
Matthews, B. (2004). Life values and approaches to learning: A study of university students from Confucian heritage cultures. Flinders University Institute of International Education. Research Collection, Number 12. Adelaide: Shannon Research Press.
McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Murawski, L. M. (2014). Critical Thinking in the Classroom… and Beyond. Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 10(1), 25-30.
Neumann, R., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: a conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 405-417.
Nijhuis, J. F., Segers, M. S., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2005). Influence of redesigning a learning environment on student perceptions and learning strategies. Learning Environments Research, 8(1), 67-93.
Norshidah Nordin, Rohaya Abdul Wahab, & Nadia Ainuddin Dahlan. (2013). Approaches to Learning among Trainee Teachers: Malaysian Experiences. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 105, 284-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.030
Nurshafikah Shaffie. Rosliza Mat Zin, & Shahnaz Ismail (2020). Accounting Students’preferences Towards Learning Strategies in Universiti Malaysia Terengganu. Universiti Malaysia Terengganu Journal of Undergraduate Research, 2(4), 75-88.
Okabayashi, H., & Torrance, E. P. (1984). Role of Style of Learning and Thinking and Self Directed Learning Readiness in the Achievement of Gifted Students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17(2), 104-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948401700210
Oliveira, D., Esgalhado, G., Oliveira, D., & Garcia, N. M. (2015). Psychometric Study of a Questionnaire for Academic Study Processes of Portuguese College Students. In CSEDU (2) (pp. 85-92).
Penprase B.E. (2018). The Fourth Industrial Revolution and Higher Education. In: Gleason N. (eds) Higher Education in the Era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0194-0_9
Ramsden, P. (1979). Student learning and perceptions of the academic environment. Higher Education, 8(4), 411-427.
Ramsden, P. (1997). The context of learning in academic departments. The experience of learning, 2, 198-216.
Richardson, J.T.E. (2000). Researching student learning Approaches to studying in campus-based and distance education. Buckingham: SRHE & Open University Press.
Rodríguez, L., & Cano, F. (2006). The epistemological beliefs, learning approaches and study orchestrations of university students. Studies in Higher Education, 31(5), 617-636.
Rojewski, J., Lee, I. H., & Gemici, S. (2012). Use of t-test and ANOVA in career-technical education research. Career and Technical Education Research, 37(3), 263-275.
Ryan, J., & Louie, K. (2007). False Dichotomy? ‘Western’ and ‘Confucian’ concepts of scholarship and learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(4), 404-417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2007.00347.x
Sabzevari, S., Abbaszade, A., & Borhani, F. (2013). The assessment methods and learning approaches in nursing students of Kerman University of Medical Sciences in Iran. Creative Education, 4(02), 160.
Sach, J., & Gao, L. (2000). Item-level and subscale-level factoring of Biggs’ Learning Process Questionnaire (LPQ) in a mainland Chinese sample. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 405-418.
Seif, E. (2018). What is deep learning? who are the Deep Learning Teachers? ASCD. https://www.ascd.org/blogs/what-is-deep-learning-who-are-the-deep-learning-teachers
Sekaran, U. (1992). Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Shah, D. K., Yadav, R. L., Sharma, D., Yadav, P. K., Sapkota, N. K., Jha, R. K., & Islam, M. N. (2016). Learning approach among health sciences students in a medical college in Nepal: a cross-sectional study. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 7, 137.
Shaik, S. A., Almarzuqi, A., Almogheer, R., Alharbi, O., Jalal, A., & Alorainy, M. (2017). Assessing Saudi medical students’ learning approach using the revised two-factor study process questionnaire. International Journal of Medical Education, 8, 292-296. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5974.7a06
Shaturaev, J. (2022). Economies and Management as A Result of The Fourth Industrial Revolution: An Education Perspective. Indonesian Journal of Educational Research and Technology, 3(1), 51-58.
Shields, P., & Rangarajan, N. (2013). A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management.
Smith, S., & Miller, R. (2005). Learning Approaches: Examination type, the discipline of study, and gender. Educational Psychology, 25(1), 43-53.
Stes, A., De Maeyer, S., & Van Petegem, P. (2013). Examining the Cross-Cultural Sensitivity of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) and Validation of a Dutch Version. PLoS ONE, 8(1), e54099.
Struyven, K., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 325-341.
Swee-Choo, P. G., Teck, W. K., & Osman, R. (2012). Student teachers’ approaches to learning, academic performance and teaching efficacy. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 9, 31-46.
Taher, H., & Jin, C. (2011). Assessing learning approaches of Chinese local MBA students: an investigation using the Revised Two-factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F). Educational Research and Reviews, 6(19), 974-978.
Tarabashkina, L., & Lietz, P. (2011). The impact of values and learning approaches on student achievement: Gender and academic discipline influences. Issues in Educational Research, 21(2), 210-231.
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55.
Teoh, H. C., Abdullah, M. C., Roslan, S., & Daud, S. M. (2014). Assessing students’ approaches to learning using a matrix framework in a Malaysian public university. SpringerPlus, 3(1), 1-11.
Thang, S. M., & Alias, A. (2007). Investigating readiness for autonomy: A comparison of Malaysian ESL undergraduates of three public universities. Journal of Reflections on English Language Teaching, 6(1), 1-18.
Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1991). Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes. Higher Education, 22(3), 251-266.
Trigwell, K., Ashwin, P., & Millan, E. S. (2013). Evoked prior learning experience and approach to learning as predictors of academic achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 363-378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02066.x
Wan Shahrazad Wan Sulaiman, Wan Rafaei Abdul Rahman, Mariam Adawiah Dzulkifli & Wan Samhanin Wan Sulaiman (2013). Reliability of second-order factor of a revised two-factor study process questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) among university students in Malaysia. AJTLHE: ASEAN Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 5(2), 1-13.
Wang, J. (2013). The Effects of Deep Approaches to Learning on Students’ Need for Cognition Over Four Years of College (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd/4924
Watkins, D. (1983). Assessing tertiary study processes. Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research & Applications, 2(1), 29-37.
Watkins, D. (2001). Correlates to approaches: A cross-cultural meta-analysis. In Perspectives on thinking, learning and cognitive styles, ed. Sternberg, R. J., & Zhang, L. F., pp. 165-195. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Watkins, D. A., & Hattie, J. (1981). The learning process of Australian university students: Investigations of contextual and personological factors. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(3), 384-393.
Watkins, D. A. & Biggs, J. B. (2001). The Paradox of The Chinese Learner and Beyond. In D. A. Watkins and J. B. Biggs (eds). Teaching the Chinese learner: Psychological and pedagogical perspective. HK: CERC:3-26.
Xie, Q., & Zhang, L. F. (2015). Demographic factors, personality, and ability as predictors of learning approaches. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(4), 569-577.
Zain, Z. M., Malan, I. N. B., Noordin, F., & Abdullah, Z. (2013). Assessing student approaches to learning: A case of business students at the Faculty of Business Management, UiTM. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 904-913.
Zakariya, Y. F. (2019). Study Approaches in Higher Education Mathematics: Investigating the Statistical Behaviour of an Instrument Translated into Norwegian. Education Sciences, 9(3), 191. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9030191
Zakariya, Y. F., Bjørkestøl, K., Nilsen, H. K., Goodchild, S., & Lorås, M. (2020). University students’ learning approaches An adaptation of the revised two-factor study process questionnaire to Norwegian. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 64, 100816.
Zeegers, P. (2001). Approaches to learning in science: a longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 115-132.
Zhang, L. F., & Watkins, D. (2001). Cognitive development and student approaches to learning: An investigation of Perry’s theory with Chinese and US university students. Higher Education, 41(3), 239-261.
Zhao, C., Hou, H., & Gu, Q. (2022). The Types of Learning Approaches Used by Engineering Students in Three Scenarios: An Adaptation of the R-SPQ-2F to China. Frontiers in Psychology, 4056.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 Vietnam Journal of Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.