LEARNING STYLES

1
LEARNING STYLES A REVIEW
SE Technology Enhanced Learning Franziska Matzer,
01/06/2005

• Collfield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E.
  Ecclestone, E. (2004). Learning styles and
  pedagogy in post-16 learning. A systematic and
  critical review. Learning and Skills Research
  Centre, London.
• http//ferl.becta.org.uk/display.cfm?resID7619

2
Contents

• Introduction
• Models instruments of learning styles1.
  Genetic other constitutionally based factors2.
  The cognitive structure family3. Stable
  personality type4. Flexibly stable learning
  preferences5. Learning approaches strategies
• Advice Implications for pedagogy

3
Introduction

• Research field is divided into 3 areas
• Theoretical- since 1900 theoretical
  empirical research in UK,
  US Western Europe- 71 models of LS, 13 major
  models- very few robust studies for reliable
  valid evidence
• Pedagogical- vast body of research about
  teaching learning from different fields
  psychology, sociology, business, management,
  education- result fragmentation, little
  cumulative knowledge and cooperative research

4
Introduction

• Commercial- large industry promoting
  inventories and instruments for LS- commercial
  gains hardly permit critical view of the
  theoretical empirical bases
• Mainstream use is often separated from the
  research field
• Models instruments for different purposes
  theory vs. use in practice
• Complex controversial research field
• AIMS of the REVIEW- review of research on
  post-16 learning styles- evaluate main models-
  discuss implications of LS for teaching and
  learning

5
Models Instruments of LS

• How can different models be organized?
• Currys onion model of LS

Instructional preferences Information processing
style Cognitive personality style
6
Models Instruments of LS

• Continuum of LSIdea behind is to what extent LS
  are constitutionally based and fixed, or more
  flexible and open to change
• 5 families of LS
• Constitutionally-based LS preferences (incl.
  VAKT)
• Cognitive structure
• Stable personality type
• flexibly stable learning preferences
• Learning approaches and strategies

7
1. Genetic other constitutionally based factors

• Main assumption LS are fixed, or at least very
  difficult to change
• e.g., Rita Dunn argues that
• learning style is a biologically and
  developmentally imposed set of characteristics
  that make the same teaching method wonderful for
  some and terrible for others (Dunn and Griggs
  1998, 3)

8

• Argumentative basis
• Genetically influenced personality traits
• Dominance of particular sensory or perceptual
  channels (modality-specific processing)
• Dominance of functions linked with cerebral
  hemispheres
• Genetics- arguments based on analogy no twin
  studies, no DNA-studies- strong environmental
  influences on pers. traits cogn. abilities- no
  cognitive characteristics or personal qualities
  which are so strongly determined by the genes
  that they could explain the fixed nature of
  cognitive styles

9

1. Modality-specific processing- existence of
   modality-specific strengths weaknesses (visual,
   auditory, kinaesthetic) in people with learning
   difficulties- matching instructional to
   individual sensory/perception styles is not
   necessarily more effective - use of
   content-appropriate multi-sensory forms of
   presentation
2. Cerebral hemispheres- left hem. specialised for
   speech language, analytic- right hem.
   visuospatial, holistic, emotive- LS-research no
   appropriate studies supporting this argument

10
1. Genetic other constitutionally based factors
The Dunn Dunn model and instruments of LS

• Main ideaidentify and then match individual
  learning style preferences with appropriate
  instructions, resources homework ? transform
  education (e.g. US learning styles school
  districts)
• LS is divided into 5 major strands, called
  stimuli
• 1. Environmental 2. Emotional
• 3. Sociological 4. Psychological
• 5. Physiological
• elements influence how individuals learn

11

• From these strands, 4 variables each including
  different factors affect students preferences

Variable Factors Factors Factors Factors
Environmental Sound Temperature Light Seating, layout of room, etc.
Emotional Motivation Degree of responsibility Persistence Need for structure
Physical Modality preferences (VAKT) Intake (food and drink) Time of day Mobility
Sociological Learning groups Help/support from authority figures Working alone or with peers Motivation from parent/ teacher
12

• Assessment identifies- strong
  preferences -opposite preferences-
  preferences - strong opposite pref.? unique
  combination of preferences comprises the
  individual learning style
• Implications from assessment- work with
  preferences- avoid very low preferences
• Discussion- measures preferences, not
  strengths- anyone can improve achievement by
  matching
• Measures- Dunn Dunn Learning Styles
  Questionnaire (LSQ, 1979)- Dunn, Dunn Price
  Learning Styles Inventory (LSI, 1992, 1996)-
  Building Excellence Survey (BES, 2002)- Our
  Wonderful Learning Styles (OWLS, 2002)

13

• Main principle of the Dunn Dunn model
  students potential and achievement are heavily
  influenced by relatively fixed traits and
  characteristics
• Changes in LS over time

Variable Changes
Environmental Preferences for sound, light and informal design become stronger with age
Emotional Emotional factors are relatively unstable most responsive to experience matching can be effective
Physical Modality preference and LS controversial findings modality effects associated with reading performance?Time-of-day preference stronger afternoon/evening preference with age
Sociological Desire to please parents persists well into adulthood continuously influenced by authority figures gender difference ? motivation, responsibility, working with others ? kinaesthetic learning
14
Implications for pedagogy

• Most people have LS preferences
• Individuals LS preferences differ significantly
  from each other
• Individual instruction preferences exist and can
  be measured
• The stronger the preference, the more important
  it is to provide compatible instructional
  strategies
• Matching results in increased academic
  achievement and attitude towards learning
• Teachers can learn to use a diagnosis of LS
  preferences as the cornerstone of instruction
• There are characteristic patterns of preference
  in special groups, particularly the gifted and
  low achievers

15
2. The cognitive structure family

• Main assumption LS are structural properties of
  the cognitive system itself
• Theorists concentrate on the interactions of
  cognitive controls and cognitive processes
• styles are more like generalised habits of
  thought, not simply the tendency towards specific
  acts but rather the enduring structural basis
  for such behaviour. (Messick, 1984)
• Styles are linked to particular personality
  features, deeply embedded in personality structure

16
Theoretical background

• LS in this family tend to be expressed as bipolar
  constructs
• Strong intellectual influence from psychotherapy
  (e.g. cognitive control of drives defence
  mechanisms,)
• Most important member Witkin bipolar
  dimensions of field dependency/ field
  independency (FDI) influences motor skill
  performance musical discrimination(Tests Rod
  and Frame Test Body Adjustment Test Group
  Embedded Figures Test)Claims FI better than FD
  in tasks requiring the breaking of an organised
  stimulus context into indiv. elements and/or
  rearranging of the indiv. elements to form a
  different organisation

17
Measurement of the instruments

• Two key issues
• Style ? Ability- are the empirical consistencies
  attributed to cognitive styles instead a function
  of intellectual abilities? - cognitive styles
  are assessed with a ability-like measures (esp.
  FD/FI)- e.g. students with learning
  disabilities - more FD
• Validity of the bipolar structure- importance of
  bipolarity for differentiating style and ability
  abilities unipolar traits styles bipolar

18
Implications for pedagogy

• Assumption that cognitive styles are not
  particularly amenable to change relatively
  fixed traits
• Diagnosis, matching, compensation of
  disadvantages (typically field dependence)
• Danger students could be denied the opportunity
  to learn the broad range of intellectual skills
  they need to function in society
• FI as a predictor of performance
• FD might be advantageous for second-language-acqui
  sition
• FD students need support in tasks requiring
  imaginative flexibility

19
2. The cognitive structure family Ridings
model of cognitive style the Cognitive Style
Analysis (CSA)

• Cognitive stylethe way the individual person
  thinksan individuals preferred and habitual
  approach to organising and representing
  information
• ? learning strategy (vary, may be learned and
  developed)
• Emphasis on how cognitive skills develop
• Model2 independent dimensions
• Cognitive organisation (holist analytic)
• Mental representation (verbal imagery)

20

• The 2 dimensions of the CSA

Holist
Imager
Verbaliser
Analytic
Mental representation (verbaliser imager)
natural tendency to process information quickly
in verbal or in visual form not a strength of
verbal/visual abilities Both dimensions are about
speed of reaction and processing, not accuracy
21
Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA)

• Computerised assessment no self-report measure,
  but cognitive tasks without evidence WHAT is
  being measured
• Holistic-Analytic dim. visual items speed of
  response on a matching task (holist preference)
  and embedded figures task (analytic preference)
• Verbaliser-Imager dim. verbal items speed of
  response to categorising items as being similar
  by virtue of their conceptual similarity (verbal
  preference) or colour (visual preference)
• Critics reliability, validity exclusively
  verbal/non-verbal form of presentation for each
  dimension

22
Empirical evidence implications for pedagogy

• Evidence of links between cognitive styles and
  instructional preferences holists prefer
  collaborative learning and use of non-print
  materials (overheads, slides, videos)
• In computerised instruction holist learners do
  better with breadth first and analytic
  learners with depth first
• Language students holists tend to make greater
  use of analogy when unable to find the correct
  word analysts use analytic strategies (naming
  parts, functions of the object,)
• Teachers should take account of individual
  differences in working memory as well as style

23
3. Stable personality type

• Main assumption LS as one part of the observable
  expression of a relatively stable personality
  type
• Instruments which embed learning styles within an
  understanding of the personality traits that
  shape all aspects of a individuals interaction
  with the world
• Instruments - Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
  (MBTI)- Motivational Style Profile (MSP)-
  Jacksons Learning Styles Profiler (LSP)

24
3. Stable Personality Type Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator (MBTI)

• Developed in early 1940s, aim making Jungs
  theory of human personality understandable in
  everyday life
• Focuses on the description of normally observed
  types, rather than idealised theoretical types
• Strongly linked to the big five personality
  factors (extraversion, openness, agreeableness,
  conscientiousness, neuroticism)
• 4 bipolar, discontinuous scales

Extraversion (E)
Introversion (I)
Sensing (S)
Intuition (N)
Thinking (T)
Feeling (F)
Judging (J)
Perceiving (P)
25

• ? 16 MBTI personality typesISTJ ESFJ ISTP INT
  PINTJ INFJ ISFP INFPESTJ ESFJ ESTP ENTPEN
  TJ ENFJ ESFP ENFP
• 10 most common MBTI types

Type Positive traits Negative traits
INFP Artistic, reflective, sensitive Careless, lazy
INFJ Sincere, sympathetic, unassuming Submissive, weak
INTP Candid, ingenious, shrewd Complicated, rebellious
INTJ Discreet, industrious, logical Deliberate, methodical
ISTJ Calm, stable, steady Cautious, conventional
ENFP Enthusiastic, outgoing, spontaneous Changeable, impulsive
ENFJ Active, pleasant, sociable Demanding, impatient
ENTP Enterprising, friendly, resourceful Headstrong, self-centred
ENTJ Ambitious, forceful, optimistic Aggressive, egoistical
ESTJ Contented, energetic, practical Prejudiced, self-satisfied
26

• Description - 4 bipolar, discontinuous scales-
  16 personality types are distinctive in terms of
  cognitive, behavioural, affective and perceptual
  style
• Considerable academic impact- 2000 articles
  between 1985 and 1995- most popularly used
  measure in consultancy training- widely used
  in medicine, business, management, religious
  communities- used both as a career development
  managerial tool
• Criticism concerning the relevance for LS!- MBTI
  includes learning- intention tool to aid
  learners

27
Implications for pedagogy

• Correlationshigh academic achievement
  intuitive-judging (NJ)lower performance
  sensing types (S)
• No sign. relationship between MBTI type and
  method of information processing
• No evidence for any impact on student
  satisfaction and achievement when matching
  instructor and learner style
• Often used for best fit career advice
• Role in locating and understanding interpersonal
  and community dynamics
• Few studies show correlations between MBTI types
  and improved attainment

28
Conclusions MBTI

• Enormous commercial success
• Designed for better understanding for individuals
  used to assess suitability, strengths,
  weaknesses
• No clear evidence of how stable personality types
  are over an individuals lifetime
• Not clear which elements of the 16 personality
  types are most relevant for education
• Practical application of MBTI types in pedagogy
  Not clear if matching or repertoire
  enhancement

29
4. Flexibly stable learning preferences

• Pioneer David Kolb, 1970s
• Starting point dissatisfaction with traditional
  methods of teaching ? experimenting with new
  teaching methods
• Aim identifying preferences for certain
  activities
• Kolbs model (cycle of learning) influenced
  many theorists
• LSnot a fixed trait, but a differential
  preference for learning, which changes slightly
  from situation to situation. At the same time,
  there is some long-term stability in LS (Kolb,
  2000)

30
4. Flexibly stable learning preferences Kolbs
Theory Learning Style Inventory (LSI)

• DefinitionsLearning is the process whereby
  knowledge is created through the transformation
  of experience. Knowledge results from the
  combination of grasping experience and
  transforming it.
• Experiential learning 6 characteristic features
• Learning is best conceived as a process, not in
  terms of outcomes
• L. is a continuous process grounded in experience

31

1. L. requires the resolution of conflicts between
   dialectically opposed modes of adaptation to the
   world 4 kinds of ability needed for learning-
   concrete experience (CE)- reflective observation
   (RO)- abstract conceptualisations (AC)- active
   experimentations (AE)
2. L. is a holistic process of adaptation to the
   world
3. L. involves transactions between the person and
   the environment
4. L. is the process of creating knowledge, which is
   the result of the transaction between social
   knowledge and personal knowledge

32
Cycle of learning 4 basic LS
Concrete experience (CE)
Accomodating
Diverging
Active experimentation (AE)
Reflective observation (RO)
Converging
Assimilating
Abstact conceptualisation (AC)
33
4 styles main characteristics

1. Converging Style (abstract, active)- good at
   problem solving, decision making, practical
   application of ideas, conventional intelligence
   tests- controlled expression of emotions-
   prefers technical to interpersonal issues
2. Diverging Style (concrete, reflective)-
   imaginative, aware of meanings and values-
   views situations from many perspectives- adapts
   by observation rather than by action-
   interested in people feeling-oriented

34
4 styles main characteristics

1. Assimilating Style (abstract, reflective)-
   prefers abstract conceptualisation and reflective
   observation- likes to reason inductively and
   create theoretical models- more concerned with
   ideas abstract concepts than people
2. Accommodating Style (concrete, active)- likes
   doing things, carrying out plans and getting
   involved in new experiences- good at adapting
   changing circumstances- solves probl. in an
   intuitive, trial-and-error manner- at ease with
   people but sometimes seen as impatient and pushy

35

• These LS play a significant role in 5 main
  fields
• Behaviour/pesonality
• Educational specialisation (most important)
• Professional career
• Current job
• Adaptive competencies
• Educat. experiences shape our LS
• Relations between specialisation LS- students
  of business, management, educational
  administration ? accommodative LS- engineering
  economics ? converging LS- History, English,
  psychology ? diverging LS- Mathematicians,
  sociologists, theologians, chemists ?
  assimilating LS

36
Learning Style Inventory (LSI)

• complete 12 sentences that describe learning
• 4 possible endings
• ExampleI learn best from 1. rational
  theories (AC)2. personal relationships (CE)
  3. a chance to try out and practice (AE) 4.
  observation (RO)
• ? preference for the 4 modes
• ? relative preference for one pole or the other
  of the 2 dialectics conceptualising/experiencing
  (AC-CE) and acting/reflecting (AE-RO)

37
Implications for pedagogy

• People choose fields that are consistent with
  their LS and are further shaped to fit the
  learning norms of their field once they are in it
• Table lists characteristics of learning
  environments that help or hinder learners with 4
  different LS(e.g. high active experimentation
  small group-discussions, projects, peer feedback,
  homework not lectures)
• Teachers learners should explicitly share their
  respective theories of learning ? benefits
• Need to individualise instruction! (information
  technology could provide breakthrough)
• Integrative development, competence in all 4
  learning modes (no matching)

38
Empirical findings

• Study by Similarly, Buch Bartley, 2002
• Kolbs LSI, Preferred Delivery Mode
  Self-Assessment
• N165 employees had to choose between 5
  different teaching methods computer, TV, print,
  audio, classroom
• Hypotheses accommodators convergers prefer
  computer, divergers prefer classrooms,
  assimilators prefer print
• Findings all learners regardless of style-
  preferred classroom delivery!
• Known from childhood? Social reasons? No
  challence of new methods?

39
5. Learning approaches and strategies

• 1970s research explored a holistic, active view
  of approaches and strategies, opposed to styles
• take into account the effects of previous
  experiences and contextual influences ?
  multifaceted view of teaching
• pedagogy subject discipline, institutional
  culture, students previous experiences, way the
  curriculum is organised and assessed
• no specific interventions like matching or
  encouraging a repertoire of styles

40

• EntwistleStrategy...the way in which students
  choose to deal with a specific learning task
  ...less fixed than a style
• Paskdifferences between students strategies-
  holist strategy (build up a broad view of the
  task more complex hypotheses)- serialist
  strategy (build understanding from details
  step-by-step)
• Marton Säljötwo different levels of
  processing1. Surface-level-processing
  attention towards learning the test itself2.
  Deep-level-processing attention towards the
  intentional content of the learning material

41
5. Learning approaches and strategies
Vermunts framework for classifying LS and his
Inventory of LS (ILS)

• DefinitionLS ... a coherent whole of learning
  activities that students usually employ, their
  learning orientation and their mental model of
  learning
• LS is not conceived of as an unchangeable
  personality attribute, but as the result of the
  temporal interplay between personal and
  contextual influences (Vermunt, 1996)

42
Framework

• Four learning styles
• 1. Meaning-directed
• 2. Application-directed
• 3. Reproduction-directed
• 4. Undirected
• Each has distinguishing features in 5 areas
• 1. What students do (cognitive processing of l.
  content)
• 2. Why they do it (learning orientations)
• 3. How they feel about it (affective processes
  during study)
• 4. How they see learning (mental learning models)
• 5. How they plan and monitor learning (regulation
  of l.)

43
(No Transcript)
44
Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS)

• 120-item self-rating instrument
• Cognitive processing- deep, stepwise, concrete
  processing
• Learning orientation- personally interested,
  certificate-oriented, self-test-oriented,
  vocation-oriented, ambivalent
• Mental model of learning- construction, intake,
  use of knowledge stimulating education,
  cooperative learning
• Regulation of learning- self-regulation,
  external reg., lack of regulation

45
Implications for pedagogy

• Move away from traditional teaching programmes
  towards process-oriented study programmes - a
  transfer of control over learning processes from
  instruction to learners
• ILS used to reveal dissonant approaches to
  learning e.g. students combining external
  regulation with deep processing or
  self-regulation with stepwise processing
• provides a common language for teachers
  learners to discuss and promote changes in
  learning teaching
• impact in northern Europe, encouraging learners
  to undertake demanding activities (...)

46
ADVICE for PRACTIONERS

• No consensus about recommendations for practice
• Understanding of LS as institutional necessity?
• Big commercial industry - claims conclusions
  often go beyond knowledge
• Advice often too vague unspecific

47
Strategies for pedagogy

• Increase self-awareness and metacognition
• knowing about ones strengths weaknesses as
  learners enables individuals to see question
  long-held habitual behaviours
• gives individuals more control of their
  motivation and of their learning
• no need to attribute learning difficulties to own
  inadequacies
• chose strategy which is most appropriate for task

48
Strategies for pedagogy

• A lexicon of learning for dialogue
• language to discuss own preferences, how people
  learn fail to learn, why, how they see
  learning, how they plan monitor it, how
  teachers hinder these processes
• use topic of LS as a motivational ice-breaker,
  warming up the class,...
• Problem not ONE language, variety of competing
  vocabularies ? which theory?

49
Strategies for pedagogy

• Career counselling
• theorists are divided over this issue Kolb
  Honey Mumford -
• Kolb certain LS characterize certain occupations
  groups (people choose right careers are
  further shaped) ? mismatch individual will
  either change or leave the field

50
Strategies for pedagogy

• Matching
• matching hypothesis match LS of students with
  teaching style and style of the tutor
• Same number of studies in favour against
• effects of matching may entail complex
  interactions with factors like gender different
  forms of learning
• even if it is improving performance - will do
  nothing to help prepare the learner for
  subsequent learning tasks

51
Strategies for pedagogy

• Matching
• unrealistic in practice - demands for flexibility
• Variety of methods (e.g. repetition of the
  learning cycle) can also be tiresome
• matching hypothesis has not been clearly
  supported!

52
Strategies for pedagogy

• Deliberate mismatching
• Grasha How long can people tolerate
  environments that match their preferred learning
  style before they become bored?
• Gregorc (1984) even those individuals with
  strong preferences for particular LS preferred a
  variety of teaching approaches to avoid boredom
• Can mismatched LS harm the student? Felder
  (1993) unfamiliar language lower grades less
  interest in course

53
Why are LS so appealing?

• Promises professionals a solution for improving
  attainment, motivation,...
• LS literature provides a plausible explanation
  for failure
• Correction of how particular subjects are most
  appropriately taught
• Re-categorisation of students with learning
  difficulties Teaching style inappropriate!
• Policy shifts responsibility of enhancing
  learning quality from management to the
  individual LS of teachers learners

54
Thanks for your attention!