The ‘deep/surface approach to learning’ framework is widely used in higher education. Its perceived strength is that it is regarded as having two functions: both being (1) a useful metaphor for development of teaching and learning in higher education and (2) a valid concept for researchers. In this paper, I present a critical review of the model. I argue that an oversimplified conceptual framework, empirical weaknesses, and a relative lack of conceptual development can all be seen as a function of the attempt to meet both these divergent goals. The dominance of the model in the teaching and learning in higher education literature may also have prevented the development of alternative, more useful frameworks for understanding learning in higher education, such as that of ‘expert competence’.
Rakesh Chawla, Andrea Rizzi, Matthias Finger, Federica Legger, Matteo Galli, Sun Hee Kim, Jian Zhao, João Miguel das Neves Duarte, Tagir Aushev, Hua Zhang, Alexis Kalogeropoulos, Yixing Chen, Tian Cheng, Ioannis Papadopoulos, Gabriele Grosso, Valérie Scheurer, Meng Xiao, Qian Wang, Michele Bianco, Varun Sharma, Joao Varela, Sourav Sen, Ashish Sharma, Seungkyu Ha, David Vannerom, Csaba Hajdu, Sanjeev Kumar, Sebastiana Gianì, Kun Shi, Abhisek Datta, Siyuan Wang, Anton Petrov, Jian Wang, Yi Zhang, Muhammad Ansar Iqbal, Yong Yang, Xin Sun, Muhammad Ahmad, Donghyun Kim, Matthias Wolf, Anna Mascellani, Paolo Ronchese, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Siara Ruth Isaac, Joelyn de Lima