S. SABZEVARI ET AL.
students are older than other students, they have stronger inter-
nal motive and intention for deep approach; while married stu-
dents have surface learning approach due to their endeavors and
lack of free time. Explanations for these interesting results
could lie in other contextual elements, alongside the cultural
factors and educational disciplines which affect learning ap-
proaches and styles. (Seif & Khaier, 2007)
Limitation of the Study
This research was conducted only on a small size of popula-
tion. Therefore, research studies with much larger sample size
would be required to ensure appropriate generalization of the
findings of the study.
Conclusion
Assessment is a basic component of curriculum planning but
despite its importance, many teachers believe that it is often a
time-consuming and confusing process. Learning approaches
influence students’ academic achievements thus deserve special
considerations and more investigations. We recommend teach-
ers to use the assessment methods which can encourage stu-
dents towards deep understanding and critical thinking.
Applying mixed assessment methods in written tests lead to
deep learning approach but taking technical examinations
without focusing on reflective thinking, problem solving and
critical thinking lead to surface learning approach; therefore the
aim of students in those circumstances would be only on pass-
ing the exams. We recommend teachers to use mixed assess-
ment methods for clinical assessments. Holding special work-
shops on new assessment methods would be beneficial for
clinical teachers.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge all the students for collaboration in
conducting this research. We also acknowledge the Research
Council Center of Kerman Medical University for their Support
and dedicated work. This paper is part of a Ph.D. dissertation.
REFERENCES
Akinsanya, C., & Williams, M. (2004). Concept mapping for meaning-
ful learning. Nurse Educations Today, 2 4, 41-46.
doi:10.1016/S0260-6917(03)00120-5
Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. (2001). The revised two factor
study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educa-
tional Psychology, 7 1 , 133-149. doi:10.1348/000709901158433
Bourbonnais, F. F., Langford, S., & Giannantonio, L. (2008). Devel-
opment of a clinical assessment tool for baccalaureate nursing stu-
dents. Nurse Educa t i o n in Practice, 8, 68-71.
doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2007.06.005
Diseth, A. (2007). Approaches to learning, course experience and ex-
amination grade among undergraduate psychology students; tests of
mediator effects and construct validity. Studies in Higher Education,
32, 373-388. doi:10.1080/03075070701346949
Duff, A., Boley, E., Dunleavy, K., & Fergusen, J. (2004). The relation-
ship between personality approach to learning and academic per-
formance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1907-1920.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.08.020
Haggis, T. (2003). Constructing images of ourselves? A critical inves-
tigation into approaches to learning research in higher education.
British Educational Research Journal, 29, 89-104.
doi:10.1080/0141192032000057401
Harlenw (2007). Criteria for evaluating systems for student assessment.
Student in Educatio n a l Assessment, 33, 15-28.
Hessler, K., & Humphreys, J. (2008). Student evaluations: Advice for
novice faculty. Faculty Forum, 47, 187-190.
Houston, T. K., Clark, J. M., Levine, R. B., Ferenchick, G. S., Bowen , J .
L., Branch, W. T. et al. (2004). Outcomes of a national faculty de-
velopment program in teaching skills: prospective follow-up of 110
internal medicine faculty development teams. Journal of General In-
ternal Medicine, 19, 1220-1227.
doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.40130.x
Khomeiran, R. T., Yekta, Z. P., Kiger, A. M., & Ahmadi, F. (2006).
Professional competence: Factors described by nurses as influencing
their development. International Nursing Review, 53, 66-72.
doi:10.1111/j.1466-7657.2006.00432.x
Leung, S. F., Mok, E., & Wong, D. (2008). The impact of assessment
methods on the learning of nursing students. Nurse Education Today,
28, 711-719. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2007.11.004
Magnussen, L. (2001). The use of the cognitive behavior survey to
assess nursing student learning. Journal of Nursing Education, 40,
43-46.
Morrison, J. (2003). ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: As-
sessment. British Medical Journal, 15, 385-387.
doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7385.385
Narenji, F., Roozbahani, N., & Amiri Farahani, L. (2010). The effective
education and assessment program on clinical learning of nursing
and midwifery instructors and students opinion in Arak University.
Arak Medical University Journal, 12, 103-110.
Nejat, N., Koohestani, H., & Rezaie, K. (2011). The effect of concept
mapping on learning approaches in nursing students. Teharn Medical
University Journal of Nursing and Midwifery, 17, 22-31.
Park, S. (1995). Implications of learning strategy research for designing
computer assisted instruction. Journal of Research in Computing in
Education, 27, 435-456.
Parsa, A., & Saketi, P. (2006). Learning approaches, outcomes and
students perception of implemented curriculum. Shiraz Humanities
and Social Sciences Journal, 26, 1-23.
Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method on students,
learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus
assignment essay. Higher Education, 35, 435-472.
doi:10.1023/A:1003196224280
Seif, A. A. (2008). Psychology of modern farm (6th ed.). Teharan:
Doran.
Seif, D., & Khayer, M. (2007). The relationship between motivation
believes and learning approaches in some engineering and medical
students in Shiraz Universities. Journal of Educational Sciences and
Psychology, 3, 57-82.
Shipman, D., Roa, M., Hooten, J., & Wang, Z. J. (2012). Using the
analytic rubric as an assessment tool in nursing education: The posi-
tive and the Negative. Nurse Education Today, 32, 246-249.
doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2011.04.007
Shokri, A., Kadivar, P., Farzad, V., & Daneshvarpoor, Z. (2006). The
thinking styles relationship and achievement. New Cognitive Sci-
ences, 8, 44-52.
Watkins, Ch., Carnell, E., & Lodge, C. (2007). Effective learning in
Classrooms. London: SAGE Pub Co.
Copyright © 2013 SciRe s .
164