This project examined the relationships between students’ approaches to study, conceptions of learning and judgements about the value of networked technologies. For the project 144 first-year students completed the 52-item Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST), and a series of focus group interviews was used to assess attitudes towards the use of networked technologies within a blended curriculum. Significant positive associations were found between both deep and strategic approaches to study and students’ perceptions of networked learning, and negative associations with a surface approach. Students were positive about the incorporation of technology but had some concerns about the time needed to become sufficiently competent. They demonstrated a reflective approach and exhibited a broad view of the ways in which knowledge might be interpreted. The online forum was viewed as a site where they could benefit from sharing of personal experiences. Recommendations are offered for designing a blended curriculum.
Biggs, J.B. ( 1979) ‘Individual Differences in Study Processes and the Quality of Learning Outcomes’, Higher Education8: 381-94.
2.
Bradley, C. & Boyle, T. ( 2004) ‘The Design, Development and Use of Multimedia Learning Objects’, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Special Edition on Learning Objects13 (4): 371-89.
3.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. ( 2006) ‘Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology’, Qualitative Research in Psychology3: 77-101.
4.
Burr, V. ( 1995) An Introduction to Social Constructionism. London: Routledge.
5.
Byrne, M., Flood, B. &Willis, P. ( 2002) ‘Approaches to Learning of European Business Students’ , Journal of Further and Higher Education26 (1): 19-28.
6.
Dickinson, J. ( 2005) Enabling E-Learning in Higher Education. Newcastle: Newcastle Business School.
7.
Donnelly, R. ( 2006) ‘Blended Problem-Based Learning For Teacher Education: Lessons Learnt’, Learning, Media and Technology31(2): 93-116.
8.
Ellis, R.A. & Calvo, R.A. ( 2004) ‘Learning Through Discussions in Blended Contexts’ , Educational Media International40(1): 263-74.
9.
Entwistle, N. & Ramsden, P. ( 1983) Understanding Student Learning. London : Croom Helm.
10.
Entwistle, N., Tait, H. & McCune, V. ( 2000) ‘Patterns of Response to an Approaches to Study Inventory Across Contrasting Groups and Contexts’, European Journal of the Psychology of Education15: 33-48.
11.
Ford, N. ( 1995) ‘Levels and Types of Mediation in Instructional Systems: An Individual Differences Approach’, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies43: 241-59.
12.
Fuller, R. & Chambers, D. ( 1999) ‘Approaches to Learning of TAFE and University Students’ , Australian and New Zealand Journal of Vocational Educational Research10: 127-44.
13.
Gerbic, P. & Stacey, E. ( 2005) ‘A Purposive Approach to Content Analysis: Designing Analytical Frameworks’, Internet and Higher Education8: 45-59.
14.
Goodyear, P., Asensio, M., Jones, C., Hodgson, V. & Steeples, C. ( 2003) ‘Relationships Between Conceptions of Learning, Approaches to Study and Students’ Judgements About the Value of their Experiences of Networked Learning’, Association for Learning Technology Journal11(1): 17-27.
15.
Goodyear, P., Jones, C., Asenso, M., Hodgson, V. & Steeples, C. ( 2005) ‘Networked Learning in Higher Education: Students’ Expectations and Experiences’, Higher Education50: 473-508.
16.
Haggis, T. ( 2003) ‘Constructing Images of Ourselves? A Critical Investigation into Approaches to Learning Research in Higher Education’, British Educational Research Journal29(1): 89-104.
17.
Heinze, A. & Proctor, C. ( 2004) ‘Communication - A Challenge and an Enabler for Facilitating Blended Learning Community’, Internal ReportUniversity of Salford.
18.
Holmes, B. & Gardner, J. ( 2006) E Learning. Concepts and Practice. London: SAGE.
19.
Honey, P. & Mumford, A. ( 1986) The Manual of Learning Styles. Maidenhead : Peter Honey Associates.
20.
Jelfs, A. & Colbourn, C. ( 2002) ‘Do Students’ Approaches to Learning Affect their Perceptions of Using Computing and Information Technology?’, Learning, Media and Technology27(1): 41-53.
21.
Johnson, G. ( 2006). ‘A Theoretical Framework for Organizing the Effect of the Internet on Cognitive Development’, in E. Pearson and P. Bohman (eds) Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2006, pp. 3041-8. Norfolk, VA: AACE.
22.
Johnson, G.M. ( 2007) ‘Learning Style Under Two Web-Based Study Conditions’ , Educational Psychology27(5): 617-34.
23.
Jones, C., Asensio, M., Goodyear, G., Hodgson, V. & Steeples, C. ( 2001) ‘Final Report on the Field Studies’, Networked Learning in Higher Education Project (JISC/CALT). Lancaster : CSALT (the Centre For Studies in Advanced Learning Technologies Lancaster University).
24.
Kember, D., Leung, D.Y.P. & McNaught, C. ( 2008) ‘A Workshop Activity to Demonstrate that Approaches to Learning Are Influenced by the Teaching and Learning Environment’ , Active Learning in Higher Education (1): 43-56.
25.
Kirkwood, A. ( 2006) ‘Getting Networked Learning in Context: Are On-Line Students’ Technical and Information Literacy Skills Adequate and Appropriate?’ , Learning, Media and Technology31(2): 117-31.
26.
Kolb, D.A. ( 1985). Kolb Learning Style Inventory Version 3.1. Boston, MA: Hay Resources Direct.
27.
Lizzio, A., Wilson, K. & Simmons, R. ( 2002) ‘University Students’ Perception of the Learning Environment and Academic Outcomes: Implications for Theory and Practice’ , Studies in Higher Education27(1): 27-52.
28.
Loomis, K. ( 2000). ‘Learning Style and Asynchronous Learning: Comparing the LASSI Model to Classroom Performance’, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4: http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v4n1/v4n1_loomis.asp [accessed 5 December 2007].
29.
Marshall, D. & Case, J. ( 2005) ‘Approaches to Learning Research in Higher Education: A Response to Haggis’, British Educational Research Journal31(2): 257-67.
30.
Marton, F. & Saljo, R. ( 1976) ‘On Qualitative Differences in Learning: I - Outcome and Process’, British Journal of Educational Psychology46: 4-11.
31.
Molesworth, M. ( 2004) ‘Collaboration, Reflection and Selective Neglect: Campus-Based Marketing Students’ Experiences of Using A Virtual Learning Environment’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International41(1): 79-92.
32.
Oliver, M. & Trigwell, K. ( 2005) ‘Can "Blended Learning" Be Redeemed?’, E-Learning2(1): 17-26.
33.
Prosser, M. & Trigwell, K. ( 1999) Understanding Learning and Teaching. Buckingham: Open University Press.
34.
Rae, S. ( 2004) ‘Comparison of CAU Access Rates to Various ICT Facilities-Courses Survey 2003 Data’, Internal Report. Milton Keynes : Institute of Educational Technology, the Open University .
35.
Ramsden, P. ( 1979) ‘Student Learning and Perceptions of the Academic Environment’, Higher Education8: 411-27.
36.
Ramsden, P. ( 1992) Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: Routledge.
37.
Rothery, A. ( 2004). ‘EUNIS European E-Learning Workshop Report’ : http://www.2.worc.ac.uk/euniselearning/index.php?option=displaypage&itemid=63&op=page&submenu= [accessed 12 October 2005].
38.
Schmeck, R. ( 1988) Learning Strategies and Learning Styles. London: Plenum Press.
39.
Selwyn, N. ( 2006) ‘The Use of Computer Technology in University Teaching and Learning: A Critical Perspective’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning23(2): 83-94.
40.
Selwyn, N. ( 2008) ‘An Investigation of Differences in Undergraduates’ Academic Use of the Internet’, Active Learning in Higher Education9(1): 11-22.
41.
Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G. & Francis, R. ( 2006) The Undergraduate Experience of Blended E-Learning: A Review of UK Literature and Practice. York: Higher Education Academy.
42.
Subrahmanyam, K., Kraut, R., Greenfield, P. & Gross, E. ( 2001) ‘New Forms of Electronic Media: The Impact of Interactive Games and the Internet on Cognition, Socialization, and Behaviour’, in D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (eds) Handbook of Children and the Media, pp. 73-99. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
43.
Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C., eds (1998) Pragmatism and the Choice of Research Strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
44.
Teaching With Independent Learning Technology Programme ( 2001) ‘Overview of the TILT Project’: http://www.elec.gla.ac.uk/TILT/TILT.html [accessed 29 May 2001].
45.
Thorne, K. ( 2003) Blended Learning: How to Integrate Online and Traditional Learning. London: Kogan Page.
46.
White, S. ( 2007) ‘Critical Success Factors for E-learning and Institutional Change - Some Organisational Perspectives on Campus-Wide Learning’, British Journal of Educational Technology38(5): 840-50.
