Learning in Science: A Comparison of Deep and Surface Approaches.

By Christine Chin, David E. Brown. 2000

563 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Students' questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science (2008, background): “The type of question and the content embedded therein can also indicate the questioner’s depth of thinking (Chin & Brown, 2000b).”
Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science (2008, background): “This type of explanation [mechanistic] was like a model or a minitheory which served as a link between the macro and micro levels. ( Chin & Brown, 2000, p. 121 )”
Metacognitive Development as a Shift in Approach to Learning: An in-depth study (2002, methodology): “Other researchers who have drawn links between approaches to learning and metacognition include Vermunt (1996) and Chin & Brown (2000).”
Conceptions of learning science among high school students in Taiwan: a phenomenographic analysis (2004, background): “Research also suggested that deep approaches to learning were associated with better learning outcomes (Chin and Brown 2000, Trigwell and Prosser 1991).”
Connecting High School Physics Experiences, Outcome Expectations, Physics Identity, and Physics Career Choice: A Gender Study. (2010, unknown): “…a link between physics conceptual understanding and performance (e.g., Eryilmaz, 2002; Hazari et al., 2007; Willson, Ackerman, & Malave, 2000), reasoning ability (e.g., Cavallo et al., 2004; Chin & Brown, 2000), self-ef ﬁ cacy (e.g., Cavallo et al., 2004), and interest (e.g., Otero & Gray, 2008).”
Cram School Students’ Conceptions of Learning and Learning Science in Taiwan (2008, background): “They distinguished students’ learning approaches between deep and surface, similar to the dichotomy used by Marton (1983) and Chin and Brown (2000).”
Knowledge and question asking. (2011, methodology): “With regard to the fi rst criterion, we distinguished between superfi cial and deep questions, in the same vein as Chin and Brown (2000) and Pedrosa de Jesus et al. (2006).”
Between deep and surface: procedural approaches to learning in engineering education contexts (2004, background): “(Entwistle, 1997, p. 216) Some researchers have taken this injunction to involve rede®ning the characteristics of deep and surface approaches within particular disciplinary contexts (for example, Chin & Brown, 2000).”
Posing Problems for Open Investigations: What questions do pupils ask? (2002, methodology): “Coding categories were developed; the categories of questions were partly inductive and partly derived from theoretical commitments based on the existing literature of questions that pupils asked (e.g. Chin & Brown, 2000; Elstgeest, 1985; Harlen, 1996; Goldsworthy, Watson, & Wood-Robinson, 1998).”
Promoting science and technology in primary education: a review of integrated curricula (2014, unknown): “The complexity staircase provides a powerful, descriptive classification scheme that can help to solve Czerniak’s (2007) definition problem, and it can be used to compare one programme to another (Rennie et al.”