Relationship of study approach and exam performance

By Ronald A. Davidson. 2002

160 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Education, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e2a9bd6af28eee3fc5a31a92a63712474d69b6fd

How researchers see this paper

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

In Accounting

1. Yilmaz Guney
2. Sophie Maussen
3. Patricia Everaert
4. E. Opdecam
5. Marann Byrne
6. Barbara J. Flood
7. B. Jackling
8. Richard B. Dull

In Education

1. Yilmaz Guney
2. Sophie Maussen
3. Patricia Everaert
4. E. Opdecam
5. Marann Byrne
6. Barbara J. Flood
7. Richard B. Dull
8. Lydia L. F. Schleifer

In Management of Technology and Innovation

1. Yilmaz Guney
2. Sophie Maussen
3. Patricia Everaert
4. E. Opdecam
5. Richard B. Dull
6. Lydia L. F. Schleifer
7. Jeffrey J. McMillan
8. A. Ramsay

Citations in the corpus

• Changing the learning environment to promote deep learning approaches in first-year accounting students (2004, methodology): “To achieve this, accounting education should move away from procedural tasks and the memorising of professional standards to a more conceptual and analytical form of learning (Beattie et al., 1997; Davidson, 2002).”
• Achievement Goal Theory: The Relationship of Accounting Students’ Goal Orientations with Self-efficacy, Anxiety, and Achievement (2015, background): “SAL can have implications for their academic success, although research results in accounting education have been mixed concerning whether achievement is more associated with a surface approach (negatively) (Booth, Luckett, & Mladenovic, 1999) or a deep approach (positively) (Davidson, 2002).”
• Exogenous and Endogenous Factors Influencing Students' Performance in Undergraduate Accounting Modules (2009, methodology): “…be relevant especially for accounting modules in our study, as the evaluation method and nature of topics in accounting could arguably promote a surface approach (English et al., 2004), which can limit academic achievement (e.g. Byrne et al., 2002; Davidson, 2002; Ramburuth and Mladenovic, 2004).”
• Perceptions of the learning context and learning approaches: Implications for quality learning outcomes in accounting (2005, background): “In contrast, Davidson (2002) found a significant positive relationship between performance on complex examination questions and the use of a deep learning approach.”
• The relationship between motivation, learning approaches, academic performance and time spent (2017, methodology): “Researchers found a significant (but rather weak) relation between the weekly amount of reported study time and GPA for higher education students (e.g. Michaels & Miethe, 1989; Rau & Durand, 2000).”
• Validation of the approaches and study skills inventory for students (assist) using accounting students in the USA and Ireland: a research note (2004, result): “In some cases, students were found to favour a surface approach (Bowen et al., 1987; Chan et al., 1989; Booth et al., 1999; Davidson, 2002), while in others, students showed no preference for any one approach (Sharma, 1997; Byrne et al.”
• Performance of College Students: Impact of Study Time and Study Habits (2010, background): “Davidson (2002) also reported a deep study approach that demonstrated a positive relationship with course performance on complex examination questions but not on simple (less complex) ones.”
• Encouraging a deep approach to learning through curriculum design (2004, background): “In a recent study, Davidson (2002) examined the relationship between approach to learning (measured using the SPQ) and examination performance.”
• The Effect of Synchronous and Asynchronous Participation on Students' Performance in Online Accounting Courses (2012, background): “The quantity of participation in an online environment is related to improved examination performance (Davidson, 2002; Davies and Graff, 2005).”