Abstract:

Depending on perceived, personal, and contextual factors, students approach their learning process in different ways. Whereas students who adopt a deep approach basically engage in meaningful learning, surface approach students relay mainly on memorizing data and text excerpts. Students may have a preference towards a particular learning approach, but it is the learning environment itself and their perception of this environment which determines how they will perform. In this work, the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) was used to explore the approaches to learning of first year undergraduate students enrolled in the bachelor’s degree of Biotechnology (Universitat Politècnica de València) at the end of 2020-2021 academic year. Two different subjects were featured, namely Biotechnology Business Economics and Thermodynamics and Chemical Kinetics, both programmed in the spring term (February-May). The sample is made up of students with different languages used as medium of instruction (Spanish and English) that voluntarily responded to the questionnaire at the end of term in connection with both courses, rather than to studying in general. The total return rate was 46% for both subjects. The validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by measuring Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and by principal components analysis. Strong positive correlations were found between each scale and their two related subscales, as well as a negative correlation between the two different approaches. The results of Deep Approach (DA) and Surface Approach (SA) scores were similar to those found in previous research in the same degree. Mean DA scores were higher than SA in both subjects, which was also observed for both languages and genders. Coherently, Deep Motivation (DM) and Deep Strategy (DS) scores were higher than those of Surface Motivation (SM) and Surface Strategy (SS). Neither DA, nor its components (DM and DS) scores were significantly affected by the subject, the language of instruction and the gender (p > 0.05). Only the gender affected SS and consequently SA significantly, and the scores of both was higher for males.

Keywords:

R-SPQ-2F, Motivation, Strategy, Learning approach.