Freyberg, PeterKatterns, RobertHaigh, NeilCalder, Ian2026-05-042026-05-041989https://hdl.handle.net/10289/18254This research examined the study and learning strategies of students in the natural setting of a New Zealand teachers college. It was prompted by the researchers’ professional interest as a teachers college lecturer, the need expressed in the research literature for in-depth longitudinal research into learning at the tertiary level, and the contradictory findings in that literature about students’ attitudes towards learning and their ability to acquire a reflective, analytical and critical approach to study. The researcher was interested in the strategies adopted by students when faced with their normal learning tasks in a teachers college setting. What determined the strategies that students used? How effective were these strategies? Did these strategies change with time and experience? Could these strategies be improved? These questions were researched by means of a two-phase research design. Phase 1 was a longitudinal study of a single cohort (n=86) of Hamilton Teachers College students over the three year period of their preservice programme. The methodology here was a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches. Psychometric instruments used were the Approaches to Studying Inventory - ASI (Entwistle and Ramsden, 1983), The State Trait Anxiety Inventory - STAI (Spielberger et al. 1968), The Expressed Vocational Commitment Scale - EVCS (Ramsay, 1978). Factor analysis of the ASI generated some alternative sub-scales which were also applied. Qualitative data to do with learning strategies and motivation stemmed from a series of five interviews over the three year period with two groups of students: 12 students selected for their high degree of a surface-confused approach to study and learning as revealed by their performance on the ASI, and 20 students who were randomly selected. Phase 2 of the research involved a cross-sectional study of Year 1, 2, and 3 students (n = 136, 130, and 102 respectively), and a comparison of the perceptions of students and teachers college staff regarding students’ development as learners. The cross-sectional application of the ASI was an attempt to offset special problems with factor analysis activity as a result of a smaller than desirable sample size in the Phase 1 longitudinal design. A sample of staff (n=13) was interviewed about their views on students as learners and also responded to a Staff Perceptions of Student Development Questionnaire (SPSDQ) which derived from factor analysis of the ASI. The items of the SPSDQ were embedded in the ASI as administered to the cross-sectional sample making it possible to directly compare student and staff perceptions of students as learners. Students in the original (longitudinal) sample appeared not to develop as better learners, and their pattern of development strongly resembled that of students in an Australian study (Watkins and Hattie, 1983). Students in the cross-sectional sample did appear to develop in positive directions with an increase in deep learning and the development of positive attitudes towards learning. Whether the difference in the two populations was due to the relative maturity of the cross-sectional population or to a change in the college programme which was instituted between the two phases could not be determined. It is probable that both these actors were involved. Interviews with students revealed insights into the motivational factors underlying student approaches to studying. In particular it was found that stress was an important factor related to students being surface-confused. Some surface-confused students also appeared to be basically deep learners who could not apply that mode of learning appropriately. The majority of students who were interviewed came to college with a surface approach to learning well in place. The advice with respect to studying that these students received at secondary school reinforced that approach. Students appeared also to have ambiguous attitudes towards academic achievement. In general they did not wish to appear achievement orientated when responding to the ASI or to direct questions about achievement in the interviews. For some students it was apparent that this image they wanted to project did not match their learning behaviours. Staff and student perceptions of student development appeared to be in accord with respect to motivational and attitudinal factors but were opposed with respect to approaches to studying and general development. There was some support for the hypothesis that students with a versatile learning style at entry to college would have an academic advantage. The findings have implications for teaching at the tertiary level, and have particular relevance therefore for staff development programmes in tertiary institutions. They also have relevance for the development of study skills programmes for students. Due to the increasing numbers of students staying at school longer, the study also has relevance for teaching at the secondary school level.enAll items in Research Commons are provided for private study and research purposes and are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.Thesis