A plethora of work has been done to examine the dynamics of learning in higher education contexts to foster positive learning outcomes. The 3P model (Biggs in Teaching for quality learning at university, Open University Press, Birkshire, 2003) is one theoretical model that has been well researched. However, much of the work to date has focused on examining relationships of two factors (either presage and process; or process and product) of the model, with relatively less effort made to test the interactivity among the three factors in entirety. The present study examined the variables from all three factors of the 3P model longitudinally. Specifically, epistemic beliefs were tracked as the presage variable, alongside students’ perceptions of the learning environment and use of study approaches as process variables, finally with academic performance and epistemic belief at later time points as product variables. Two hundred and eighty-four Chinese college students participated in the study. Self reported instruments were used to measure epistemic belief at two time points (Lee and Chan in Asia Pac Educ Res 24(4):603–612, 2015), approaches to learning (Biggs et al. in Br J Educ Psychol 71(1):133–149, 2001) and perception of learning environment (Taylor et al. in Int J Educ Res 27(4):293–302, 1997). A structural equation model showed that epistemic beliefs at Time 1 yielded a direct effect on academic performance without being mediated by any process variables; there seemed to be a disjuncture from presage to product variable as conjectured in the 3P model, and this warrants future investigation.
Keywords: 3P model Epistemic beliefs Perception of learning environment Approaches to study Academic performanceIdentifying and Examining Epistemic Beliefs among College Students in Hong Kong
Asikainen, H., & Gijbels, D. (2017). Do students develop towards more deep approaches to learning during studies? A systematic review on the development of students’ deep and surface approaches to learning in Higher Education. Educational Psychology Review, 29(2), 205–234.
Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centered learning environments to stimulate deep approach to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 243–260.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.
Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS: Structural questions program. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E. J. C. (2002). EQS 6 for Windows user’s guide. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn, VIC: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Biggs, J. B. (1993a). From theory to practice: A cognitive systems approach. Higher Education Research & Development, 12(1), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436930120107.
Biggs, J. B. (1993b). What do inventories of students’ learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1993.tb01038.x.
Biggs, J. B. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university. Birkshire: Open University Press.
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. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158433.
Bookallil, C., & Rolfe, J. (2016). University-based enabling program outcomes: Comparing distance education and internal study. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 56(1), 89–110.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 445–455). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005.
Buehl, M. M. (2008). Assessing the multidimensionality of students’ epistemic beliefs across diverse cultures. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 65–112). New York, US: Springer.
Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: Their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 203–221.
Clinton, V. (2014). The relationship between students’ preferred approaches to learning and behaviors during learning: An examination of the process stage of the 3P model. Instructional Science, 42, 817–837.
Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, I., & Harrison, D. (2004). Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(2), 186–204.
Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2010). Epistemological resources and framing: A cognitive framework for helping teachers interpret and respond to their students’ epistemologies. Personal Epistemology in the Classroom: Theory, Research, and Implications for Practice. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511691904.013.
Entwistle, N., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.
Gijbels, D., & Dochy, F. (2009). Students’ assessment preferences and approaches to learning: Can formative assessment make a difference? Educational Studies, 32, 401–411.
Gijbels, D., Segers, M., & Struyf, E. (2008). Constructivist learning environments and the (im)possibility to change students’ perceptions of assessment demands and approaches to learning. Instructional Science, 36(5–6), 431–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9060-y.
Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Bråten, I. (2016). An introduction to epistemic cognition. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Bråten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 1–15). New York: Routledge.
Greene, J. A., Torney-Purta, J., & Azevedo, R. (2010). Empirical evidence regarding relations among a model of epistemic and ontological cognition, academic performance, and educational level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 234–255.
Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 378–405. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1026.
Hofer, B. K. (2016). Epistemic cognition as a psychological construct: Advancements and challenges. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Bråten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 19–38). New York, NY: Routledge.
Ilgüy, M., Ilgüy, D., Fisekçioʇlu, E., & Oktay, I. (2014). Comparison of case-based and lecture-based learning in dental education using the SOLO taxonomy. Journal of Dental Education, 11(1), 1521–1527.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511571350.
Marsh, H. W. (1997). The measurement of physical self-concept: A construct validation approach. In K. Fox (Ed.), The physical self: From motivation to well-being (pp. 27–58). Campaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: 1. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x.
Muis, K. R., & Duffy, M. C. (2013). Epistemic climate and epistemic change: Instruction designed to change students’ beliefs and learning strategies and improve achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 213–225. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029690.
Noar, S. M. (2003). The role of structural equation modeling in scale development. Structural Equation Modeling, 10(4), 622–647.
Ozkal, K., Tekkaya, C., Cakiroglu, J., & Sungur, S. (2009). A conceptual model of relationship among constructivist learning environment beliefs and learning approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.05.005.
Phan, H. (2009). Amalgamation of future time orientation, epistemological beliefs, achievement goals and study strategies: Empirical evidence established. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 155–173.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan.
Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education: Open University Press.
Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498–504.
Schommer, M. (1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 406–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.3.406.
Sinatra, G., Kienhues, D., & Hofer, B. (2014). Addressing challenges to public understanding of science: Epistemic cognition, motivated reasoning, and conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 1–16.
Stromso, H. I., Braten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: The relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20(3), 192–204.
Taylor, P., Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1997). Monitoring constructivist learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 27(4), 293–302.
Tiwari, A., Lai, P., So, M., & Yuen, K. (2006). A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Medical Education, 40(6), 547–554.
Tsai, C. (2000). Relationship between student scientific epistemological beliefs and perception of learning environment. Educational Research, 42(2), 193–205.
Vermunt, J. D. (1994). Inventory of learning styles in higher education: Scoring key. Department of Educational Psychology: Tilburg University.
Wong, A., Young, D., & Fraser, B. (1997). A multilevel analysis of learning environments and student attitudes. Educational Psychology, 17(4), 449–468.
Zhang, L. F. (2000). University students’ learning approaches in three cultures: An investigation of Biggs’ 3P model. The Journal of Psychology, 134(1), 37–55.