Introduction
Learning can be defined as the long life process of converting information and experience into behaviors, attitudes and skills. Though, in most cases people go through classes to learn, the process of learning does not necessarily depend on classes. One acquires knowledge as he or she continues with the normal life. Learning occurs consciously and unconsciously. A person may learn something by getting involved in certain activity for along time without him or her knowing that he or she is gaining some experience from that activity. This paper is aimed at discussing the learning stages and surface and deep approaches to learning as some of the learning concepts and how they are applied (Atherton 2009, para. 3).
Deep and surface learning approaches
Deep and surface approach of learning is a common term used by academicians. Most education research institutes have conducted research to determine whether students use deep or surface approach in conducting their studies (Barrow & Woods 1988, p. 25).These are powerful learning approaches that need to be applied in daily teaching. Deep learning entails; critically analyzing new ideas and looking for their relationships with the already known principles. This results in learners being able to understand and retain the learnt concept. It helps the learners to use these concepts in solving unfamiliar problems (Belenky et al. 1986, p. 75).
The approach helps in developing skills among the learners which can be applied in solving life problems. On the other hand, surface learning refers to the general acceptance of information and retaining it in its natural form without having to look into the deep meaning of it or other related information (Biggs 1999, p. 10). This method helps in retention of information required for examination and is mostly used by students. There is no long-term retention of information and learners poorly understand the information (Blythe & associates 1998, p. 23).
It is believed that assessment methods play a vital role in determining the learning approach to be adopted by a learner (Bowden 1990, p. 14). The tendency of using unstructured questions when assessing students leads to most of them adapting surface learning (Bradford 2009, para. 4).
This is because learners are generally interested in giving what examiner has asked in fear of failing (Case 2008, para. 3). Study has suggested that, by teachers trying to insist that what they ask for requires deep learning, learners result to trying to use surface learning to come up with features portrayed in deep learning (Dahlgren 1975, p. 89). While deep learning is experienced as fascinating and satisfying learning challenges, surface learning is experienced as a struggle and leads to boredom and stress (Entwistle 1988, p. 66).
Stages of learning
As learning is a continuous process, learners go through numerous stages in their learning process. The three main stages of learning are preparation or cognitive stage, practice or associative stage and automatic or autonomous stage (Entwistle & Ramsden 1983, p. 75). In preparation stage, the learner gathers information and look for ways on how to use the gathered information (Entwistle 1998, para. 2).
Information can be gathered through verbal instructions or visual demonstrations (Entwistle 2000, par. 4). In this stage, the learner makes many mistakes and his or her actions appear crude (Laurillard 1993, p. 123). During this stage, it is important for learners to get a clear picture of the skill through visual demonstrations in order to retain the idea (Marton & Booth 1997, pp. 12-15). It is important for the learner to break down the skill into series of subroutines for easy learning (Marton & Entwistle 2000, p. 17). This can be achieved by using step by step build up of practice (Marton & Säljö 1976, P. 19). This is where the learner understands one practice before going to another. Making each practice a bit difficult helps in increasing learner’s experience (Marton & Säljö 1984, p. 97).
In practice stage, the learner starts combining the various practices that had been broken down in stage one (McCune 1998, p. 57). This helps the learner in becoming familiar with the sequence and timing of the various subroutines (Process Coaching Center 2009, para. 5). Minor faults are corrected and movement repeated over and over (Morgan 1993, p. 44). Despite one having to think about execution of the skill, it is possible for learner to remember some parts of the skill (Perry 1970, P. 136).
The learner repeats the practice using gradual build-up and whole part as well as integrating other practical methods into it to help in improving understanding (Prosser & Trigwell 1999, p. 19). Feedback is important at this stage as it helps in improving various subroutines as the learner tries to perfect the movement (Ramsden 1988, p. 253). The duration taken in this stage depends on the complexity of the skill being learnt, learner’s past experience and the level of desire by the leaner to perfect his or her skill (Ramsden 1992, p. 184).
Conclusion
The third stage of learning is automatic stage. At this stage, the leaner has already mastered most of the subroutines (Säljö 1978, p. 67). The learner pays little attention to the subroutines and is capable of selecting any skill and performing it without difficulty (Säljö 1979, p. 74). Due to high level of skills gained by learner at this stage, errors are less likely, leaner portrays consistent performance of the skill and devotes more time in looking for more detailed aspects of the skill such as tactical considerations (Svensson 1977, pp. 225-242). Learner goes through pressure training to improve his or her performance speed (Wirth 2009, para 1).
Normal rules can also be changed to ensure that a skill that needs to be practiced is done more often. Even when the learner is at the automatic stage, some times one may be required to revisit the practice or cognitive stage to help correct some minor faults or develop more advanced technique (Wiske 1998, p. 38)
Reference list
Atherton, J. S., 2009. Learning and Teaching; Deep and Surface learning. Web.
Barrow, R. & Woods, R., 1988. An Introduction to Philosophy of Education, third edition. London and New York: Routledge.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R. & Tarule, J. M., 1986. Women’s Ways of Knowing. New York: Basic Books.
Biggs, J., 1999. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Shre: Open University Press.
Blythe, T. & associates, 1998. The Teaching for Understanding Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bowden, J. A., 1990. Deep and surface approaches to learning in M Akbar Hessami and J. Sillitoe (eds. Deep vs. Surface Teaching and Learning in Engineering and Applied Sciences. Footscray: Victoria University of Technology.
Bradford, K., 2009. Deep and Surface Approaches to Learning and the Strategic Approach to Study in Higher Education; Based on Phenomenographic Research. Web.
Case, J., 2008. Deep and Surface Approaches to Learning. Web.
Dahlgren, L. O., 1975. Qualitative differences in learning as a function of content-orientated guidance’ in Göteborg Studies in Educational Sciences. Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Entwistle, N., 1988. Styles of Learning and Teaching. Oxford: David Fulton.
Entwistle, N. & Ramsden, P., 1983. Understanding Student Learning. London: Croom Helm.
Entwistle, N., 1998. Conceptions of Learning, Understanding and Teaching in Higher Education. SCRE Fellowship. Web.
Entwistle, N., 2000. Promoting deep learning through teaching and assessment: conceptual frameworks and educational contexts. Web.
Laurillard, D., 1993. Rethinking University Teaching, a framework for the effective use of educational technology. New York: Routledge.
Marton, F. & Booth, S., 1997. Learning and Awareness. Lawrence Erblaum Associates, chapter 2.
Marton, F. & Entwistle, N., 2000. Phenomenography. Web.
Marton, F. & Säljö, R., 1976. On qualitative differences in learning I – outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, pp. 4-11.
Marton, F. & Säljö, R., 1984. Approaches to learning’ in Marton, F., Hounsell, D. and Entwistle, N. (eds.) The Experience of Learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
McCune, V., 1998. ‘Academic development during the first year at university’ in Rust, C. (ed.) Improving Student Learning – Improving Students as Learners. Oxford: The Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
Morgan, A., 1993. Improving Your Students’ Learning. London and Philadelphia: Kogan.
Perry, W.G., 1970. Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: a Scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Process Coaching Center, 2009. The four stages of Learning. Web.
Prosser, M. & Trigwell, K., 1999. Understanding Learning and Teaching, on Deep and Surface Learning. London: Open University Press.
Ramsden, P., 1988. Improving Learning: New Perspectives. London: Kogan.
Ramsden, P., 1992. Learning to Teach in Higher Education. New York: Routledge.
Säljö, R., 1978. Learning about learning, Lancaster 4th International Conference on Higher Education cited by Gibbs, G. (1981) in Teaching Students to Learn. Milton Keynes and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Säljö, R., 1979. ‘Learning in the learner’s perspective I – some common-sense conceptions’, Reports from the Institute of Education, No. 76. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg, Department of Education.
Svensson, L., 1977. On qualitative differences in learning III – study skill and learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47, PP. 223-243.
Wirth, R., 2009. Five stages of learning. Web.
Wiske, M. S., 1998. The Teaching for Understanding Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.