Following the perspective of Student’s Approaches to Learning (SAL), this study aimed to understand the relation of approaches to learning of a sample of Portuguese elementary school students, with the learning context (i.e. teaching practices) they are immersed in.

 Students’ Approaches to Learning (Marton & Säljö, 1976) refers to students’ motivations and learning strategies on confronting a learning task. Research has identified different approaches to learning, that combine different types of motivations and strategies: Deep approach, Surfaceapproach and Achieving/Strategic (Entwistle & Ramsden, 1983, Platow, Mavor & Grace, 2013). Research has also gathered evidence that these approaches can influence the learning outcomes (Gomes & Mauro, 2011,  Trigwell, Ellis & Han, 2012).

 Research indicates that these Approaches to Learning are related to the perceptions student’s have of their learning environments. For example, Entwistle et al., (2000) found a link between a deep approach and the perception of an encouraging and supportive learning environment. Besides, the surface approach is negatively predicted by the perception of clear goals and standarts, appropriate workload and assessment (Diseth, 2013; Sabzevari, Abbaszade & Borhani, 2013).

 Certain contextual characteristics, like the teaching practices to which student’s are exposed to, are found to be an important factor that influences the adoption of different approaches to learning, besides the individual characteristics of the student. (Biggs, Kember, & Leung, 2001; Entwistle, 2009)

 In one hand it was found a connection between a surface approach  and a “transmissive” learning environment, where students are expected to receive information uni-directionaly transmitted to them (Burnett & Proctor, 2002).On the other hand a “constructivist” learning environment, where students are prompted to actively construct knowledge seems related to deep approaches to learning (Chen & Dhillon, 2012, Ali & El Sebai, 2010)

 Surface  approach is related with learning environments characterized by the use of “non-participatory teaching ”: A teacher’s centered and depersonalized form of teaching (Biggs & Moore, 1993), in which the teacher, as figure of authority, basically “transmits”  facts (Gibbs, 1992), which “receptive” students are oriented to memorize and then reproduce in single final tests (Biggs, 1990). Deep approach is encouraged by “participatory teaching”, which encourages learners to have some participation in the construction of knowledge and learning.

 This study has the main purpose to explore the relation between elementary school students’ approaches to learning and their teaching context, on the basis that it is important to understand the roots of those approaches in order to improve learning and teaching since early schooling.

Ali, W. G. & El Sebai, N. A. ( 2010). Effect of problem-based learning on nursing students’ approaches to learning and their self directed learning abilities.International Journal of Academic Research 4(2).188-195. Biggs, J.B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: ACER. Biggs, J.B. (1990). Teaching for desired learning outcomes. In N.Entwistle (Ed.). Handbook of educational ideas and practices. London and New York: Routledge. Biggs, J., Kember, D. & Leung D.Y.P. (2001). The revised two-factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149. DOI: 10.1348/000709901158433 Biggs, J. B. & Moore P. J. (1993). The process of learning (3rd. Ed.). N.Y.: Prentice Hall Burnett, P. C. & Proctor, R. M. (2002). Elementary School Students’ Learner Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concepts and Approaches to Learning. Educational Psychology in Practice, 18, 4, 325-333. DOI: 10.1080/0266736022000022020 Chen, L. & Dhillon, J. K. (2012). Deep Approaches to Learning in Improving Reading Skills: A Case Study from Yunnan Agricultural University. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(8), 1603-1613. Diseth, A. (2013). Personality as an indirect predictor of academic achievement via student course experience and approach to learning. Social Behavior and Personality, 41, 8, 1297-1308. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.8.1297 Entwistle, N. J. & Ramsden, N. (1983). Understanding student learning. London & Camberra: Croom Helm. Entwistle, N. J. (2009). Teaching for understanding at university: Deep approaches and distinctive ways of thinking. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Entwistle, N., Tait, H., & McCune, V. (2000). Patterns of response to approaches to studying inventory across contrasting groups and contexts. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15, 33-48. http://doi.org/cgvfh9 Gibbs, G. (1992). Improving the quality of student learning: theory and practice. Bristol: TES. Gomes, A. & Mauro, C. (2011). Abordagem Profunda e Abordagem superficial à aprendizagem: diferentes perspectivas do rendimento escolar. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 24(3), 438-447. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976). On qualitative diff erences in learning, outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11. Platow, M. J., Mavor, K.I. & Grace, D. M. (2013). On the role of discipline-related self-concept in deep and surface approaches to learning among university students. Instructional Science, 41, 271-285. Sabzevari, S., Abbaszade, A. & Borhani,F.(2013). The Assessment Methods and Learning Approaches in Nursing Students of Kerman University of Medical Sciences in Iran. Creative Education, 4(2), 160-164. Trigwell, K., Ellis, R. A. & Han, F. (2012).Relations between students’approaches to learning experienced emotions and outcomes of learning. Studies in Higher Education, 37(7), 811-824.