Surface vs Deep learning 2

And how did it end up being so surface?

"...While the approach used determines the level of enjoyment and commitment, interest in the task for its own sake encouraged a student to use a deep approach."

Could this be the link? Why students who choose subject that they like do well? Could it be because they will use the deep approach when they study what they like? Is this why I always perform better for the modules that I enjoy? And is it circular? I will study more and deeper I study, the more I enjoy, the more I enjoy, the deeper I study.

"Real education makes howlers impossible, but this is the least of its advantages. Much more important is the saving of unnecessary strain, the achievement of security and confidence in mind. It is far easier to learn the real subject properly, than to learn the imitation badly. And the real subject is interesting. So long as a subject seems dull, you can be sure you are approaching it from the wrong angle. All discoveries, all great achievements, have been made by men who delighted in their work." (Sawyer 1943:9)

But a caveat is that the approach of learning doesn't correlate with the grades achieved. There is a more direct link between the approach and the quality of learning.

"Many assessment methods do not test understanding..." Students who use the surface approach, can succeed (look it took me all the way to University) and those who use the deep approach might not have the chance to display the full range of their understanding because of the assessment methods used.

Prof. Hugh Tan always talks about how the open book exam test higher order thinking, while closed book tests for recall. And I have always hated recall assessments. I find it a total waste of time. I would rather not use my brain as a memory storage tank since textbooks are so readily available.

"Surface approaches have nothing to do with wisdom and everything to do with aimless accumulation."