High Educ (2007) 54:781–794

DOI 10.1007/s10734-006-9023-7

ORIGINAL PAPER

Conceptions of learning and approaches to learning

in Portuguese students

António M. Duarte

Received: 27 July 2005 / Accepted: 6 June 2006 / Published online: 9 July 2006

Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Abstract The article describes a study that attempted to characterise Portuguese

students’ conceptions of learning and approaches to learning. A sample of university
students answered open questions on the meaning, process and context of learning.
Results, derived from content analysis, replicate most conceptions of learning de-
scribed by phenomenographical research (i.e. distinction between learning as
memorisation and learning as comprehension). Moreover, new variants of known
conceptions of learning emerged (e.g. learning occurs through: exploratory practice;
learning to learn; motivation) and an apparently new conception (i.e. learning as
understanding and application). The same sample answered a questionnaire which
attempted to measure motivation and learning strategies. Through factorial analysis
of results it was possible to confirm the presence of three well-known approaches to
learning: surface, deep and achieving.

Keywords Academic learning Æ Approaches to learning Æ Conceptions of Learning Æ

Learning strategies Æ Motivation

Introduction

Students’ conceptions of learning and the ways they approach learning are significant
factors of the quality of their learning products.
Conceptions of learning have been studied through Phenomenography and refer
to students’ natural understanding, or interpretation, of the learning phenomena
(Marton, 1981). Basically, research identified two opposing conceptions of learning:
reproductive, or quantitative, and comprehensive or qualitative (Marton & Säljö,
1976).
A quantitative conception of learning views learning as a process of accumulating
information in order to reproduce or apply it. In contrast, a qualitative conception of

A. M. Duarte (&)
Faculty of Psychology and of Educational Sciences, University of Lisbon,
Portugal Alameda da Universidade, 1649-013 Lisboa, Portugal
e-mail: antonio.duarte@fpce.ul.pt
123
782 High Educ (2007) 54:781–794

learning implies that learning has to do with comprehension and interpretation of

meaning. These two basic conceptions of learning have been observed in several
contexts and labelled in different ways. For instance, recently Trigwell and Ashwin
(2006) wrote about ‘aligned and non-aligned conceptions’. Marton, Dall’Alba, and
Beaty (1993) identified specific variants of each of the main conceptions of learning.
They propose a system of six conceptions that define learning. The first, second and
third of these conceptions are variants of a quantitative conception that represents
learning as (1) increasing knowledge; (2) memorising and reproducing; (3) applying.
The fourth, fifth and sixth conceptions are variants of a qualitative conception which
states that learning is (4) understanding; (5) seeing things in a different way; (6)
changing as a person. Entwistle and Peterson (2004) consider the last two concep-
tions as the integration of earlier conceptions, resulting in a more complete one that
reflects the expansion of the awareness of learning.
More recent research on conceptions of learning has observed additional con-
ceptions, perhaps partly due to cultural variations. Several studies point out that
students, especially in Asian cultures, might represent learning as a combination of
memorizing and understanding (e.g. Marton, Watkins, & Tang, 1997). Meyer (2000a
cit. Entwistle & McCune, 2004) detected the notion of ‘‘learning as a duty’’.
Vermunt and Vermetten (2004) testify to the idea of ‘‘stimulating education’’
(i.e. the notion that the educational environment should stimulate learning) and of
‘‘cooperative learning’’ (i.e. valuing learning in collaboration with peers).
The notion of approaches to learning also derived from phenomenographic re-
search and conceptualises students’ learning process in terms of a conjugation be-
tween motivational orientation and type of learning strategy (Biggs, 1987; Entwistle &
Ramsden, 1983). Approaches to learning differ from conceptions of learning, in-
asmuch as the former refer to how students learn and the latter stands for how they
represent learning. With regard to approaches to learning, the main distinction is
between surface, deep and achieving approaches to learning (Biggs, Kember, &
Leung, 2001; Entwistle & McCune, 2004).
The surface approach to learning involves dealing with learning situations with
minimum effort, responding only to compulsory demands in terms of rote memo-
risation of details (Biggs, 1999). In contrast, the deep approach to learning implies
dealing with academic tasks because of the intrinsic enjoyment of learning and
through an investment in comprehension (Biggs, 1999). Nevertheless, the use of a
deep approach does not imply the avoidance of memorisation. As stated by
Entwistle and Peterson (2004), when students choose such an approach to learning
they can realize that comprehension may demand memorisation at some stage or for
certain purposes. Finally, the achieving approach to learning refers to the search for
excellent grades through work organisation (Biggs, 1990). Although the deep ap-
proach seems the best way to learn, there is evidence that its extreme or exclusive
use might not contribute to students’ adaptation, maybe demanding a combination
with the achiever approach to learning. For instance, Lonka et al. (2000, cit. Lonka,
Olkinuora, & Mäkinen, 2004) observed that students who study in order to search
for meaning for life might lose motivation to graduate.
Recent perspectives on approaches to learning also stress the need to incorporate
new key variables in the description of students’ learning. For instance, in an analysis
of the inventories developed to measure approaches to learning, Entwistle and
McCune (2004) point to a lack of emphasis on emotion in learning. They also
hypothesise a new dimension of studying, related to vocational orientation and
123