Theory of learning styles and practical applications

Contents

Abstract

Learning Styles – Practical Applications
Introduction
Learning Styles
1. People tend to develop learning styles at all.
2. Developed learning styles are pretty constant over time.
3. Optimising own learning style is possible.
4. Several learning style theories and affiliated instruments are compatible i.e. the results for a certain student are corresponding.
Learning Styles – selection of theories
1. Felder & Silverman (1988, 1993)
2. Kolb (1984)
3. The Jungian psychological/learning dimensions
4. Gardner’s seven (or even more) intelligences (1983)
Determining student’s personal learning style preference
1. The VAK (Visual Auditory Kinesthetic) chart
2. The MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator)
3. The Index of Learning Styles Questionnaire (ILS)
4. More Interactive tests (self-assessment) on the internet
From theory to practice
1. Finding your peace as an instructor/educator
2. Differentiating instruction
3. More appropriate student counselling
4. More meaningful support of student’s learning process and personal development
Discussion
1. Role of environment
2. Types of Learning Styles
3. Validity, reliability and sound theoretical basis

Conclusion
1. To make use of personal learning style some background knowledge is essential
2. There is no good or bad learning style
3. Learning styles are (just) points on a scale

References

Abstract

This essay is dealing with practical implications the knowledge of students’ learning styles has got for the educator. To do so, some information about learning styles in general is provided, a selection of theories is introduced as are tests to determine a particular student’s learning style. On the basis of this implications are finally discussed.

Learning Styles – Practical Applications

Introduction

“A large amount of responsibility for analyzing content and selecting learning strategies falls upon the students and their skills in this area are in short supply.” (Moore 2004). Though the student him- or herself being responsible for his or her own learning and personal development there are possibilities for the educator to support the process of finding out which way/which ways are working best, introducing unknown and uncommon ways of gaining knowledge which may suit especially for this very student and helping the student to become more effective in learning. To do so a framework about student’s possible learning styles, how to assess them and how to use gained information from this best is possibly a very helpful tool. Such framework shall be proposed via a selection of different learning style theories which are the ones introduced by Felder & Silverman, Jung, Kolb and Gardner. A lot more (besides also very good ones are existing though some of the more popular ones were selected to be introduced into them for this essay.

Learning Styles

“Think about what you do when you have to learn something new. You probably approach the task in a similar fashion each time. That is, over time you have developed a pattern of behaviour that you use for new learning. This pattern is called a learning style.”^[1] Or by using some more academic terms: “characteristic cognitive, affective, and psychological behaviours that serve as relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment.” (Keefe 1979).

There is no single theory of learning styles but various ones (some of which are listed in the following chapter) almost all of them are compatible and having several criteria in common. Those criteria are at least four:

1. People tend to develop learning styles at all.

According to Kolb (1981) as “a result of our hereditary equipment, our particular past life experience, and the demands of our present environment, most of us develop learning styles that emphasize some learning capabilities over others.” (237) Why this is so, O’Connor (1997) explains: “people rely on personally constructed filters to orient their relationships toward the world. These filters are responsive to a variety of factors: age, experience, internal psychodynamics, maturity, cognition, physiology, biochemistry, and so on. Since no one is capable of switching endlessly between all of these filters, it seems obvious that each individual has a unique approach he or she uses to perceive, understand, and plan his or her interactions.” As having developed a certain style was a process having taken part over a long time and is occurring all the time, learning styles are pretty constant over time:

2. Developed learning styles are pretty constant over time.

As the learning style of a particular student is likely to stay relatively constant over time^[2], the question is arising if the teaching process shall be optimised in a way that all groups of students may benefit from or if students not being this compatible to the teaching style as others shall be trained in strategies not coming naturally to them. The point of view is taken by the author as well as the vast majority of university staff working with learning style theories and instruments do not only try to help students to capitalize on the way they are learning naturally best but also giving advice to them how to use their weaker parts when doing so is the more appropriate way to learn for a certain task/problem. Thus optimising own learning style is possible.

3. Optimising own learning style is possible.

Felder (1996) is providing the example of Charles Yakomoto, an electric engineering professor who is using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as a diagnostic tool for students having academic difficulties: “Working with an ISTJ (introvert, sensor, thinker, judger) student who was failing the introductory course in electrical circuits, Yokomoto speculated and confirmed that the student relied too heavily on memorization and drill (traits of ISTJs) as approaches to problem solving. The professor persuaded his student to add strategies based more on a fundamental understanding of the concepts. The student's performance began to improve: by his senior year he was earning A's, and he subsequently received a master's degree in electrical engineering.“ Though there are beside the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator different instruments available to access the learning style of a particular person – with different theories behind – those are neither unconnected nor incompatible.

4. Several learning style theories and affiliated instruments are compatible i.e. the results for a certain student are corresponding.

But if there are different theories and different instruments, which one is then the best one? According to Berens (2005), “[t]he answer lies not in any one instrument such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® or the Keirsey Temperament Sorter, but in the appropriate use of these instruments.” To get an impression of what is meant by the instruments being corresponding, several free instruments are listed within section Determining student’s personal learning style preference, and the results of the author of this essay for each test are displayed below. But before doing so, some background information about four theories/models are provided as follows:

Learning Styles – selection of theories

The four models/theories having been selected to serve as examples for learning style theories or the ones of Felder & Silverman, Kolb, Jung, and Gardner

1. Felder & Silverman (1988, 1993)

Richard M. Felder and Linda K. Silverman are describing preferences on four dimension which are: active vs. reflective, sensing vs. intuitive, visual vs. verbal, and sequential vs. global.^[3] Active learners tend to try things out whereas reflective ones are more likely to think things through, sensing ones are oriented toward facts as well as procedures whereas intuitive ones towards meanings and theory, visual learners love flow charts, pictures, diagrams etc., whereas verbal ones prefer words (either written and/or spoken), and finally inductive learners prefer proceeding from specific to general whereas the deductive ones prefer going from the general to the specific.

2. Kolb (1984)

Kolb published his learning theory as late as 1984, though a lot of research was done on it by him years ago. His thinking is based on the work of John Dewey, Kurt Lewin, Jean Piaget, and J. P. Guilford.

It is basically best described via three perspectives:

a) the two continuums of dialectic related modes
b) the four-type definition of learning styles (and respective groups of people having their preferences within them), and
c) a four-stage learning cycle.

The two continuums are:

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Modified from: Chapman (2005).

The types of learning styles are Diverging (feeling and watching - CE/RO), Assimilating (watching and thinking - AC/RO), Converging (doing and thinking - AC/AE), and Accommodating (doing and feeling - CE/AE), brief descriptions for all four of them can be found within Chapman (2005).

The four learning styles together make up the Kolb’s learning cycle:

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Copied from: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/history/kolb.html; date of access 26 July 2005.

Again: though all four stages are necessary for learning, people tend according to Kolb to have preferences in certain stages of the circle.

[...]

^[1] Retrieved from: http://www.algonquincollege.com/edtech/gened/styles.html; date of access: 6 May 2005.

^[2] The author of this paper took the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator recently as well as three years ago and (not?) surprisingly the category falling in is still the same though a lot meanwhile had happened academically.

^[3] Find index of learning styles on http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSpage.html; date of access: 9 May 2005.