Mikkel M Thørrisen1,2, Gry Mørk3, Lene A Åsli4, Astrid Gramstad4,5, Linda Stigen6, Trine A Magne7, Tove Carstensen7, Susanne G Johnson8, Ted Brown9, Hua B Lim10, Kenneth N K Fong11, Tore Bonsaksen1,3,12. 1. Department of Occupational Therapy, Prosthetics and Orthotics, Faculty of Health Sciences, OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway. 2. Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway. 3. Faculty of Health Studies, VID Specialized University, Sandnes, Norway. 4. Department of Health and Care Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT - The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway. 5. Centre for Care Research, North, Tromsø, Norway. 6. Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Gjøvik, Norway. 7. Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway. 8. Department of Health and Function, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway. 9. Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University Peninsula Campus, Frankston, VIC, Australia. 10. Health and Social Sciences Cluster, Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore, Singapore. 11. Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, Hong Kong. 12. Department of Health and Nursing Sciences, Faculty of Social and Health Sciences, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Elverum, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Productive approaches to studying (deep and strategic learning) are associated with a variety of favourable academic outcomes, and may be of particular importance for students in multifaceted and complex disciplines such as occupational therapy. AIM: To explore associations between student characteristics and their dominant approaches to studying in two samples of occupational therapy students: a national sample of Norwegian first-year students, and an international sample of students in different year cohorts (Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore and Norway). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 180 (national sample) and 665 (international sample) students were included in the study. Approaches to studying were measured with the Approaches to Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST). Data were analyzed with adjusted multinomial regression analyses. RESULTS: Age, gender and prior higher education were not associated with the dominant study approach. More time spent on independent study (international sample: OR = 1.07/1.08, p < 0.01/<0.001) and having current study program as the top priority line of education at enrolment (national sample: OR = 2.89, p < 0.05) predicted productive study approaches. CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: Factors such as age, gender and prior higher education seem to be of limited importance for understanding students' dominant approaches to studying.
BACKGROUND: Productive approaches to studying (deep and strategic learning) are associated with a variety of favourable academic outcomes, and may be of particular importance for students in multifaceted and complex disciplines such as occupational therapy. AIM: To explore associations between student characteristics and their dominant approaches to studying in two samples of occupational therapy students: a national sample of Norwegian first-year students, and an international sample of students in different year cohorts (Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore and Norway). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 180 (national sample) and 665 (international sample) students were included in the study. Approaches to studying were measured with the Approaches to Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST). Data were analyzed with adjusted multinomial regression analyses. RESULTS: Age, gender and prior higher education were not associated with the dominant study approach. More time spent on independent study (international sample: OR = 1.07/1.08, p < 0.01/<0.001) and having current study program as the top priority line of education at enrolment (national sample: OR = 2.89, p < 0.05) predicted productive study approaches. CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: Factors such as age, gender and prior higher education seem to be of limited importance for understanding students' dominant approaches to studying.
Authors: Elaina DaLomba; Astrid Gramstad; Susanne G Johnson; Tove Carstensen; Linda Stigen; Gry Mørk; Trine A Magne; Tore Bonsaksen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-06-25 Impact factor: 3.240