ABSTRACT
N. J. Entwistle and J. D. Wilson’s model is undoubtedly the most picturesque of those so far advanced, and it is also the simplest. It is presented as a game, like Monopoly, in which ‘players’ define themselves in terms of intellectual and personality attributes and then proceed around a faculty track littered with ‘hazard’, ‘bonus’ or ‘chance’ factors, which simulate aspects of the university environment which may retard or advance their progress. J. B. Biggs sees ‘study processes’, which constitute a complex of tactics, strategies and approaches, as mediating between ‘presage’ factors, such as personal characteristics and institutional variables, and ‘product’ factors or academic performance. Both Biggs and Entwistle approach student learning as educational psychologists: their background and training lead them to search for consistent traits within individuals which may explain their approach to study, and this explains their emphasis on assessing personality, motivation and attitudes and the interrelationship between these variables and academic performance.
