COMPARING HIGH ACHIEVER STUDENTS AND

LOW ACHIEVER STUDENTS IN THEIR LEARNING

Maulidatuz Zuhria
English Education Study Program
STKIP PGRI Pasuruan
maulidatuz.zuhria@gmail.com

Abstract
The aim of this study is to find out the way of learning between the low achiever and the high
achiever students in English Department also what factor that could impact their understanding in
learning. The study uses a case study design and the instrument was interview. The data were
collected on December 25th up to 30th 2019. This study was conducted for students in STKIP PGRI
Pasuruan from the English Department batch 2017A in academic year 2019/2020. The participants
of this study were 10 students (3 males and 7 females). The results showed that their learning
strategies and academic performances are related to each other. In high achiever students deep
learning is significant as compared to low achiever students. Furthermore, comparative analysis of
learning styles on males and females are preferred learning strategy equally.

Keywords: high achiever, learning, low achiever, student

INTRODUCTION
The approaches to learning play a
significant role in determining the
outcomes of educational endeavors
(Hasnoor, Ahmad, & Nordin, 2013). There
are three essential elements that influence
learning of students: (a) students, (b)
course, and (c) teaching strategies (Mayya,
Rao, & Ramnarayana, 2004). Each of the
elements has an impact on students’
adopted approach to learning (Hasnoor,
Ahmad, & Nordin, 2013). Teaching and
course produce a variety of environments
for students and to cope with pressure they
adopt learning strategy according to the
situation (Hasnoor, Ahmad, & Nordin,
2013). It has some factors that impact the
learning strategy among students, either
the high achiever or the low one. Such as
the assessment, process of rewarding,
teaching, work overload, reproduction of
content knowledge as well as student
perceptions about the relevance of the
content (Hasnoor, Ahmad and Nordin,
2013).
The researcher showed the interest
in students’ learning approaches, how do
they learn and why they chose a particular
approach for their learning. Based on the
study of Marton and Saljo (1976), there
are commonly two strategies of learning;
surface learning approach and deep
learning approach. Surface approach is
memorizing information without
understanding the deeper knowledge, also
known as rote learning. The features of
this learning are; 1) unreflective approach,
2) no interaction with content or ideas, 3)
concentrates only on memorization, 4)
underlying the argument not the
comprehend, 5) treats the task as like a
monotonous chore, 6) external incentive–
based on demand or test, 7) aims to recite
and regurgitate material inactively.
Meanwhile in deep approach, the students
involve themselves in the study process to
grasp the deeper understanding of the
content (Duff, Boyle, Dunleavy, &
Ferguson, 2003). The features are; 1)
relates topic and ideas to past knowledge
and experiences, 2) thinks critically about
newly learned material, 3) ties in
information from other sources, 4) creates
new arguments and understands logic
based on new information, 5) recognizes a
structure in the content, 6) motivation from
within–wants to learn, 7) aims to
understand the meaning behind the
material.
Marton and Saljo (1970) proposed
the idea of student approach to learning,
which then becomes part of student
approaches to learning concepts (Hasnoor,
Ahmad, & Nordin, 2013) this learning
approach is a vital and essential element as
it helps students to get good scores in their
examinations. Students’ learning
approaches have a significant impact on
the quality of learning and academic
achievements. To make students better
graduates they should be encouraged to
develop deeper research strategies
(Hasnoor, Ahmad, & Nordin, 2013).
There were 10 students that
participate in this study. They were from A
class batch 2017. Five students among
them were known as the low achiever
students because most of their scores were
under B grade, and five students left were
high achiever students that usually got A-
and A scores in all subjects in fifth
semester, those subjects are English for
Young Learners, TEFL, Academic
Writing, Extensive Reading, Classroom
Management, Syntax, Semantics,
Introduction to Research Method in ELT,
Sociolinguistic, and Introduction to
Translation. Besides that, the researcher
also knew the participants in the whole
class activities. The high achiever students
were active, energetic, and always give
attention and response to the lecturer,
either when the lecturer explained the
material or gave the questions and task.
Meanwhile, the low achiever students
were the opposite. They were inactive and
just listen to the lecturer’s explanation
without understanding it.
The high achiever students and the
low achiever students were definitely have
their own way in learning, that cause
themselves had difference score
achievements. Hence, this study was
aimed to explore these questions;
1. What is the way or strategy of
these high achiever students and
low achiever students in their
learning?
2. What factor that might impact their
understanding in learning?
METHOD
This research used documentation
research. This research applied a thesis
statement, the researcher made a thesis
statement to prepare questions to be given
to the students in order to get answer about
their way or strategy of learning and its
factors that impact in it. Besides the thesis
statement, there was also an interview and
make a report. The interview was done to
know answer from students’ experiences,
opinions, and personal perception in their
learning.
This interview was conducted to
get information which includes the ideas
about how do they learn. The data was
collected on 25th up to 30th December.
There were 10 participants that were
interviewed. The participants consist of 3
males and 7 females. In this research the
researcher gave some questions and asked
them to explain their way in learning. The
researcher didn’t give limited time to the
participants to answer the questions. After
interviewing, the researcher made a report
of the results of the interview, using the
results of the data that has been analyzed.
The data was analyzed descriptive
quantitative with diagram.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The way or strategy of learning that used
by high achiever students and low
achiever students.
Based on the observation by
interviewing the participants, the
researcher got the information and facts
that both of these qualifications had the
contrast way of learning. The high
achiever group used the deep learning
approach, which means they focus on
understanding the material totally. The low
achiever group used the surface learning
approach they memorized the material at
that time/ class only, without
understanding it. The results of this study
showed that the high achiever students
were totally pay attention to the lecturers.
They noted the crucial points of the
explanation, and understood what the
lecturer told then they wrote the
commentary about the material by their
own words. They said it could increase
their comprehension in every subject.
Factor that might give impact to their
learning is the way of lecturer teaching.
Because slow or fast the comprehension of
the high achiever students depended on the
way of lecturer teaching. Compared to
those students who had low achiever, they
listened to the lecturer but didn’t note any
points or they noted the material but didn’t
listen to the lecturer’s explanation. Mostly
they memorized the material only.
The purpose of this study was to
find out the way or strategy of learning
between the high achiever students and
low achiever students. This study
conducted to look for the following
objectives to determine the learning of the
high and low achiever students that impact
their achievement in the college. The result
showed that gender wasn’t the factor that
determined the student was included the
high or low achiever students. It depended
on their focus and activeness while
learning activity in the class. The high
achiever students put their whole attention
to the lecturer and noted crucial point by
themselves. The result of the interviewed
below;
“Mostly I learn the material in the
class, because I can understand
the material directly. Then I write
in my note what points that must be
noted, so I can re-read in the
home” (FR/M)
“Usually I listen to the lecturers’
explanation very carefully, then I
re-write the material by my own
words” (LS/F)
“While lecturer explains the
material, I surely pay attention to
him/ her, but sometimes I don’t get
the point. So I am kind of person
that likes to ask. Because by
asking, I can get the point well”
(LFW/F)
“To comprehend and understand
the material better, I usually sit on
the first line/ bench. So I am able
to listen to the material clearly”
(WF/F)
“If I still feel confused with the
material, I usually look for the
same topic on internet with many
sources, so I can really understand
the material” (ZDP/F)
(/M= male and /F= female)
From the interviewed results of high within–wants to learn (29%), aims to
achiever students, the researcher classified understand the meaning behind the
their answers into what kind of features of material (0%). Evidently, the researcher
deep learning approach they were. The also found that some students had 2
following is a percentage diagram that features of this learning; the first
shows the result of kinds of features of participant was the kind of 4th and 5th
deep learning approach by high achiever feature; the second participant was the 4th
students. feature; the third participant was the 2nd
feature; the fourth participant was the 6th
feature; and the fifth participant was the 3rd
relates topic
and ideas to
and 6th feature. It could be seen that the 4th
past knowledge and the 6th features were the common ways
and
experiences for these 5 high achiever students. It was
in line with the state from Noordin (2013)
thinks critically
about newly mostly students that used deep learning
learned
material
approach have strong motivation from
within and wants to learn by themselves
ties in
information
also like to create new arguments that
from other logic based on new information or
14% sources
29% knowledge they got. In addition, Hasnoor
14% creates new (2013) stated in his study that all of feature
arguments and
understands in deep learning approach emphasizes in
logic based on
14%
new information
understanding. Several students sometimes
29% have compound feature in their learning. It
recognizes a
structure in the
means they have variety ways to
content comprehend and understanding.
motivation from
Meanwhile the low achiever
within–wants to students they focused on the note or the
learn
material only. They didn’t focus on the
aims to explanation of the lecturer. The results of
understand the
meaning behind the interviewed below;
the material “Usually when the lecturer
explains the material, I write what
(Picture 1.1 Percentage of High Achiever Students’
Feature)
the Power Point is shown first. So I
From the diagram above, the researcher busy with my note” (AM/F)
found that; relates topic and ideas to past “I can’t focus on learning in the
knowledge and experiences (0%), thinks class, because some lecturers don’t
critically about newly learned material give any material. He or she just
(14%), ties in information from other delivers it directly. I have no note
sources (14%), creates new arguments and at all. So I borrow my friend’s note
understands logic based on new to copy” (MTR/F)
information (29%), recognizes a structure “I prefer to write down all the
in the content (14%), motivation from materials, then I study and
 memorize it to prepare on any Based on the diagram, the percentage of
test” (LH/M) low achiever students’ features in surface
“I actually pay attention to the learning approach were; unreflective
lecturer, but sometimes I forget to approach (12%), no interaction with
write down what I have content or ideas (12%), concentrates only
understood, it makes me to re- on memorization (25%), underlying the
study what I have learned” (AL/M) argument not the comprehend (13%),
“I just note what should be noted. treats the task as like a monotonous chore
Then, if there is test or something, (0%), external incentive–based on demand
I memorize what I noted about the or test (25%), aims to recite and
material” (AD/F) regurgitate material inactively (13%). The
(/M= male and /F= female) researcher found the similarity as the
From the answers of the low achiever previous result. There were 2 students who
students, it was proven that they used had compound features of this learning.
surface learning approach. The following The first participant was kind of the 2 nd
is the percentage diagram of low achiever feature; the second participant was the 4th
students features that already classified by feature; the third participant was the 3rd
the researcher; and 6th feature; the fourth participant was
the 1st feature; and the last participant was
the 3rd, 6th, and 7th feature. The most
feature that used by the low achiever
students was the 3rd and 6th feature, which
means concentrates only on memorization
and external incentive – based on or
unreflective no interaction
approach with content
demand or test. Nordin (2013) stated that
or ideas surface learning approach is kind of old
concentrates underlying the
only on argument not
learning which focusing on strong
13 13 memorization the memorization only. It doesn’t matter if the
% % 13 comprehend
25 % treats the task external
students understand or not about the
%
25 as like a incentive– material. Ahmad (2013) added, mostly
13 % monotonous based on
% chore demand or students who will have a test, they force
test their mind to memorize the material
aims to recite
and totally. They just move the material from
regurgitate the note into their brain. No
material
inactively comprehension at all. Sometimes it was
caused by the teacher who wants the
answer same as their explanation. It makes
the students can’t develop their
comprehension.
From these interviewed results of
high and low achiever students, it found
(Picture 1.2 Percentage of Low Achiever Students’
that the students that are high achiever
Feature)
focus on deep understanding the materials
then improve it by themselves. It was
proven that students who used deep
learning approach were better in
understanding the knowledge. According
to Hasnoor (2013) stated in his study that
students who have good achievement are
those who have great understanding.
Factor that impacts their understanding in
learning
Based on the observation, the
researcher found the astounding result. All
the participants in high achiever and low
achiever had the same factor that impacts
their understanding or comprehension in
their learning. The results of the
interviewed below;
High achiever students
“The only one factor is how the
lecturer delivers the material”
(FR/M)
“It depends on the lecturer. If she
or he explains the material
properly, it will give the good
impact for my understanding”
(LS/F)
“The way of the lecturer explains
and interacts to the students
frequently” (LFW/F)
“I am able to comprehend or
understand the material if the
lecturer teaches us well” (WF/F)
“When the lecturers spell out the
material in a good way, and
always give the examples in a real
life, it impacts my understanding”
(ZDP/F)
Low achiever students
“I can understand the material if
the lecturer explains respectively”
(AM/F)
“Sometimes, the lecturer gives us
short material and he or she
explains it briefly. It’s hardly to
understand” (MTR/F)
“My comprehend depends on how
the lecturer teaches us” (LH/M)
“If the lecturers deliver the
material properly, loudly and
clearly, I am able to get the
material well” (AL/M)
“There are some lecturers in the
class who teach the students
correctly. They just give us the
points of the material then they
widen the material well. I like the
way they teach” (AD/F)
From the interviewed results, the
researcher concluded in a diagram Venn
below;
High way of Low
Achieverlecturer Achiever
Students'teachin Students'
Understanding Understanding
(Picture 1.3 The Similarity of High and Low
Achiever Students’ Factor that impacts Their
Understanding)
Based on the diagram, those 10
participants in high and low achiever
completely had the same factor that
impacts their understanding. According to
Hasnain (2014) the teacher is the central
information and knowledge for the
students. If the teacher is not able to
deliver the information or knowledge
correctly and properly, the students won’t
get the point. Duff (2012) stated the
teacher is to know the difference between
do the students listen and do the students
understand. Because the success teacher is
when the students can comprehend,
understand and implement the information,
material and knowledge that have been
explained.
 The participants mentioned that
how the lecturer delivers the material
properly, clearly, loudly, respectively, and
how the interaction or communication with
the students. Better the teaching of the
lecturer, more better for the students to
understand the material.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
Conclusion
In order to find out what is the way
or strategy of high and low achiever
students, the researcher used a both, high achiever students and low
questionnaire that consists of 2 questions
about what is the strategy of their learning
and what is the factor that impacts their
understanding. All the participants which
are 10 students, 5 of high achiever
students, and 5 of low achiever students, 7
of them are female, and 3 left are male.
Based on the research finding on students’
response of questionnaire and interview,
the strategy that used by high achiever was
deep learning approach which focuses on
understanding. From 5 students who have
interviewed mostly they were kind of the
4th and the 6th feature, those were; creates
new arguments and understands logic
based on new information and motivation
from within–wants to learn, the percentage
was the same, both these feature were
29%, for the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th feature were
14% and 2 features left were 0%.
Meanwhile for low achiever students they
used surface learning approach. For the
common features, the 3rd (concentrates
only on memorization) and the 6th
(external incentive–based on demand or
test) were mostly used by them and the
percentage was 25%, for the 1st and 2nd
feature were 12%, for the 4th and 7th
feature were 13% and the 5th feature 0%.
In sum, students who high achiever were
proven more accentuate on understanding
the material by using those kinds of
features in deep learning approach.
Whereas, the low achiever students used
surface learning approach, which means
focuses on memorizing only. For factor
that impacts their understanding was same
between the low and high achiever
students, the factor was how the way of the
lecturer teaching the students.
Suggestion
The researcher has suggestion for
achiever students about their way of
learning. Achievement is a thing that is to
be gotten by students, because from
achievement, people could know the
quality of the student itself. For low
achiever students, they must change their
way of learning, memorizing is important
actually, but don’t use it in all the things.
Memorizing material is an old way of
learning. It doesn’t fit in this era. It’s better
if the students who have low achiever have
a study together with the students who
have better ability in study than them.
Then for high achiever students, keep
improve and develop the comprehension
and understanding of the material. Use
another feature to make it better and better.
REFERENCES
Duff, A. (2015). Access policy and
approaches to learning. Accounting
Education, 8(2), 99-110.
Duff, A., Boyle, E., Dunleavy, K., &
Ferguson, J. (2003). The
relationship between personality,
approach to learning and academic
performance. Personality and
Individual Differences, 36(8),
1907–1920.
Hasnain, A., & Bhamani, S. (2014).
Exploring perceptions of university
 students pertaining to grades over
knowledge and skills. Journal of
Education and Educational
Development, 1(2), 101-115.
Hasnoor, H. N., Ahmad, Z., & Nordin, N.
(2013). The Relationship between
learning approaches and academic
achievement among intec students.
Social and Behavioral Sciences,
90, 178-186.
Mayya, S. S., Rao, A. K., & Ramnarayana,
K. (2004). Learning approaches,
learning difficulties and academic
performance of undergraduate
students of physiotherapy. The
Internet Journal Allied Health
Sciences and Practice, 2(4), 6.