| Abstract: | This article takes up the question of whether the approaches to study adopted by Australian students and overseas Chinese students differ. Participants in the study consisted of 202 first‐year Australian students and 248 first‐year overseas Chinese students drawn from two Australian universities. The students were tested using the Approaches to Studying Inventory (ASI). The data obtained from the two groups were subjected to factor analysis (with orthogonal rotation). For Australian students, a four‐factor structure in studying approaches, which accounted for 55.6% of the total variance, was obtained. The factors were: Meaning Orientation; Non‐Academic Orientation; Anxious‐Rigid Orientation; and Goal Orientation. For the overseas Chinese students, a four‐factor structure in studying approaches which accounted for 52.8% of the total variance was obtained. The factors were: Anxious‐Surface Orientation; Self‐Motivated Reflective Orientation; Efficiency Orientation; and Comprehension Orientation. Although Cattell's (British Journal of Psychology, II, 1949, pp. 134–138) salient similarity sindex indicated some resemblance between the factors obtained for Australian and overseas Chinese students, confirmatory factor analyses failed to confirm a common factor structure in approaches to studying for both groups. It is concluded that the studying approaches of first‐year Australian and overseas Chinese university students are summarized by somewhat different factor structures. Several implications of the research findings are discussed. |
