Category: Learning Styles

Introduction

This paper will be based on a reflection on my personal assessment of the learning styles and personality tests. Belbin (1981) defines learning as “a permanent change in behavior resulting from experience.” Educational psychologists point out that all people have different learning abilities. As a result, different learning styles have been devised to fit various learning abilities. It is therefore imperative for one to understand his or her learning style in order to be able to choose learning activities that fit their learning styles (Belbin 1981). Once an individual understands his or her learning style, they can focus on improving their learning experience by using their best learning styles. Students who understand their learning styles can make their learning process more enjoyable by focusing on what is in their interest. Belbin (1981) asserts that understanding one’s learning style provides students with a gateway to many learning opportunities to develop their skills and knowledge.

The Learning Style Questionnaire

In order to understand one’s learning style, a learning test has to be carried out for evaluation. The test is conducted through a learning style questionnaire. The questionnaire is based on four learning styles; the activist, reflector, theorist and pragmatist. For each of the learning style, there are up to five scoring sections with assigned points. The questionnaire format is in form of a normal distribution curve, beginning with a low of 10%, rising to 40% and falling again to 10%. After filling the questionnaire, my analyzed results were as follows; activist B, reflector B, theorist D and pragmatist D. According to the scores, I scored highly for the activist and reflector learning styles, and low scores in the theorist and pragmatist learning styles. Having understood the learning styles that best fit me, my task is to strengthen my learning skills based on my learning styles.

Brown and Pendlebury (1997) point out that activists have a tendency to fully submerge themselves in the learning activities they take part in. They also have an open mind and are more focused on the present enjoyment rather than the future. Brown and Pendlebury (1997) assert that activists are inwardly centred individuals who often act without bothering others for ideas. As a result, activists hardly consider the consequences of their actions either to themselves or the other people close to them. They simply act and hope that all will be well. Based on this evaluation, my objective is to seek the best way to benefit from the traits of my learning style. According to Brown and Pendlebury (1997) activists prefer a number of learning activities which will henceforth be my focus. These include; Brainstorming, this is a highly productive learning method in which a group of individuals contribute ideas through a discussion forum on a particular topic.

Problem-solving is another learning activity associated with the activists’ learning style. The process gives a learner an experience to tackle real-life problems. This in the long run equips the learner with a variety of skills to solve problems in life. It is important for a learner to gain the skills of problem solving as he or she prepares for the role of an independent citizen after school. Life out of school revolves around problem-solving, this can either be a group work approach or as an individual task. Either way, it is important that one understands how to source information for solving problems and can be able to perceive the implications the decisions they come up with. Buchanan and Huczynski (1997) contend that the more problems one solves the more perfect he or she becomes in making decisions on given problems. On his part, Button (1971) recounts that every problem solved creates two or more problems for the individual or community. A good example for this scenario is when one decides to clear a forest to create land for agricultural activities to alleviate hunger. Once the forest is cleared, thousands of problems relating to climate change will be at hand both for the community and those who cleared the forest. This is a clear prove that humanity will forever face problems and therefore the need to learn how to solve them.

Conyne (1999) also adds that the activists pride in role play and competition. Role play gives a participant an opportunity to have a firsthand experience on roles of various characters in life. This gives a learner a practical learning experience in which they are bound to gain more insight than learning theory. Besides, role play provides a learner with real-life learning experience, unlike the classroom case that is usually artificial. Greater attention in this learning process is given to the student by allowing them chance to act on particular roles. Competition is an integral part of life which every individual faces. Conyne (1999) indicates that activists like competing with others. Competition gives learners chance to rate themselves against others in the same class. As long as the teacher endeavours to foster a healthy competition in class, students can rightly use their results to gauge their performance. I will strive to compete among my peers with the objective of rating my performance in class against theirs.

My scores on the learning style questionnaire are also high on reflectors. According to Garvin (1997), reflectors are rather laid back and analytical in every decision they make. On his part Conyne (1999) finds reflectors to be individuals who are more keen and cautious, especially with information. Reflectors tend to form the bigger picture about life by consolidating information from past and present experiences. Besides, reflectors desire paired deliberations, together with observation activities. An integration of the two learning styles; reflectors and theorists can give rise to a more enhanced learning experience. Opponents to the learning style questionnaire argue that the method falls short in classifying individuals in one particular class. As seen from my scores, many learners find themselves belonging to more than one learning style on the learning style questionnaire. According to Garvin (1997), the learning style questionnaire is an important tool for creating learning groups. The learning groups provide the most effective learners with an opportunity to learn from other learning styles. Garvin (1997) asserts that in cases where a learner scores highly in more than one learning style, the learner should be classified in both styles.

The BelbinTest

A Belbin report is generated from the Belbin “self-perception inventory” (Garvin 1997). The report is important in helping people learn to work together in a team by identifying the roles they can effectively play in the team. Using the Belbin report a manager can be able to identify the best role for his team members basing on their personalities. Parker (1998) points out that the success of a team relies heavily on the behaviour composition of the team members. This explains why a team comprising of well-educated individuals can fail to function well while one with less educated individuals performs well. After carrying out a self-perception inventory test on the Belbin’s test, my primary preferred was a team shaper. According to Parker (1998), primary shapers are outgoing and dynamic individuals who strive to achieve in every assignment. They are individuals who are highly motivated and will not fear to take a lead and push others into action.

As a primary shaper, I believe I can make a good manager as I am able to swing into action and do well under pressure. I am well skilled in breathing new life in a group at a time the rest of the group members feel exhausted. I am always charged to ascend above problems despite the difficulty in the situation. Rollinson and Broadfield (2002) indicate that shapers do not fear making less popular decisions about life as long as the decision can help them achieve a good objective for the group. The characteristics of a shaper make them effective in leading a team to attain its desired objective.

My secondary preferred according to the Belbin score is a coordinator. Rollinson and Broadfield (2002) suggest that coordinators possess the ability to influence their colleagues to work and attain collective goals. They trust people more readily and as a result they can easily delegate duties without bothering to stay close to the one they delegate the duties to. In any given team, coordinators command greater respect due to their ability to identify talents and use them to pursue the interests of the team. I view myself as one who is well endowed with a variety of skills and a dynamic personality that can easily integrate with other people. I am comfortable to work with colleagues who are at the same level with me rather than my juniors. Another strong personality of a coordinator as Schon (1983) points out is their ability to carry out controlled consultation and deal with problems in a quiet way. Coordinators believe in the ability and ideas of others and are more open to other people’s ideas without bias. They always remain focused on the main goal regardless of the destruction in their way.

The Big Five Locator

The Big Five locator is a model used to represent people’s personality sets relating to satisfaction and success. The model comprises of five components; “extroversion, agreeableness, emotional stability, conscientiousness, and openness to experience” Schon (1983). In my own assessment based on the big five locator model, I found that my traits include; “preserver, flexible, introvert, adapter, and responsive.” As an introvert, I am rather shy and I do not socialize much with friends. Unlike an extrovert, am less outgoing and more reserved, but still functional in society.

However, extreme extroversions and introversions are dysfunctional in societies. The score of “flexible” rates me as one who would easily agree with people and therefore easy to work with. My rating on emotional stability scale is “adapter”, this means that my reaction to emotional situations is measured and objective. On the scale of conscientiousness, I rate as a responsive individual. This implies that I am a committed and reliable team player. I am not very open to new experiences. Rather, I like keeping to what I already know and understand. On this scale, I rate as one who is more comfortable with the status quo and less comfortable with what is not familiar.

Type A and B Personality

Using the type A personality, I scored on 96 for a type A. Type A person are usually like multitasking and are often more impatient. Button (1971) points out that type A individuals thrive well in the new technology world which presents them an opportunity to deal with more than one thing at a time. According to Button (1971) type A personalities are characterized by “aggressiveness, hostility, time urgency, and competitiveness.” People with type A personality are however, characterized by coronary diseases and therefore there is need to exercise regularly to reduce changes of falling victim to these diseases.

Type A personalities are also generally highly tempered and easily irritated. As one with this personality type, I will need to register for stress management classes in order to be able to deal with the pressure associated with my character traits. Brown and Pendlebury (1997) command that type A personalities tend to more proactive when it comes to getting power and authority. Time is a very vital resource to type A personalities which they jealously guard.

Procrastination Indicator

Belbin (1981) defines procrastination as a behaviour tendency to postpone issues. Various researchers argue that the term procrastination is complex and cannot be defined. Rollinson and Broadfield (2002) point out that some people may postpone issues in a planned manner so as to provide time for other activities before tackling the postponed one. The tendency to postpone issues is caused “by lack of impulse control” (Garvin 1997). A procrastination test can help one establish whether he or she has a procrastination tendency. This comprises of a set of questions for self-assessment based on ‘thinking, emotions and behaviour” (Garvin 1997). The test is meant to indicate the spots of procrastination on which an individual can work on to improve. On the procrastination indicator, I scored 2.3, which is a high score on procrastination. It therefore means that I need to work on this weakness to improve on my delays on the activities that I schedule to carry out.

Results of Questionnaire

For one to function appropriately in a team, the issue of personality and behaviour dynamics is very important. Teamwork calls for learning and cooperating with other team members. However, each individual has different learning styles as well as personality traits. For the purpose of grouping people, psychologists use clusters of learning styles and personality types. There are four broad learning styles advanced by psychologists, they include; theorists, pragmatists, activists and reflectors. One can use the learning style questionnaire to do a self evaluation and identify a learning style that best suits his or her learning. The questionnaire is usually based on a 20 point score. The table below shows an illustration of the learning style questionnaire.

Source: Garvin (1997).

After filling in the learning style questionnaire, one can then use the table to identify the learning style that corresponds to the scores from the questionnaire. The identified learning style should then be matched with the learning and teaching methods for effective learning. According to Garvin’s (1997) multiple intelligence theory, teachers must put in consideration the diversity of their learners when preparing learning materials. This can help them capture the learning needs of each of the students in their classrooms. besides that students posses different learning abilities; teachers too have different instruction approaches. Teachers should therefore integrate a variety of teaching approaches in order reach out to the diverse learning needs of the students.

Personality patterns play an important role in teamwork and learning. It is imperative for teachers and managers to understand the differences in personality patterns in order to know how their “team members tend to react to situations” (Garvin 1997). In order to understand much about personality, there are different tools that are used for measurement of personality. The tools include; the Belbin test, the “big five” model, and type A and B personality. Information from either of the tools can be used to find some insights about an individual’s personality traits. The Belbin test is an important tool for testing one’s team roles. Managers and teachers can use the Belbin test to assign roles to different individuals in a team, based on their abilities. The model uses a self-perception inventory to capture information from an individual, which is then analyzed and used to classify them in various team roles. The team roles include; “shapers, implementers, coordinators, resource investigators, team workers, completers and specialists” (Tuckman 1965). Managers can use this information to assign roles to team members based on their abilities in order to achieve functional teams.

The Big Five model is considered one of the best approaches in determining personality traits. In this model, all the human personality traits have been grouped into five broad categories. Using the five categories, one can be able to choose description that best fits his or her behavior in each section. After scoring in the five categories, one can identify the personality traits that best suit his or her behaviour changes. The Big Five model is usually based on aspects of job satisfaction, which also relates to life satisfaction. The five dimensions of the Big Five locator include; “emotionality, introversion, agreeableness, openness and conscientiousness” (Tuckman, 1965)

Source: (Tuckman, 1965).

The scores in the table above range from 35 for the lowest to 65 for the highest score.

The Type A and B personality is another approach used to measure personality traits. This personality theory was advanced by Friedmann Myer and Rosemann. The two cardiologists classified human personality into two broad categories; A and B. Type A personality according to them are individuals who are more “concerned about their status and achievement” (Tuckman, 1965). The two further pointed out that type A personalities regard themselves with high esteem and are very impatient. Type A personalities are, however, associated with heart diseases due to high stress levels emanating from their lifestyle. Type B personalities are on the other hand more satisfied and patient. Opponents of this theory argue that the theory does not consider women volunteers and also makes use of large sample sizes that are hard to analyze.

Critical Incidence

One major incident I encountered in the course is when my instructor divided us into random groups of three. This incident resulted in some members not participating. It created a significant conflict for the success of the whole group. Perhaps, lack of responsibility and the varying learning style of each group member was the cause. Groups undergo various stages during its formation, hence each stage is characterized by its own successes and failures. Accordingly, Belbin (1981) asserts that people have varying learning aptitudes and that they fit into different learning styles. He further illustrate that a group leader is able to identify the best role for his team members basing on their personalities (Belbin, 1981).

Garvin (1997) also supports Belbin’s assertions. He illustrates that knowing a learner’s style is critical for effective group participation. If the instructor would have taken time to analyze the group members learning style, I think he would have devised a better style fitting individual member in the group as indicated by Belbin (1981). To ensure participation from members in the group, I embraced the Belbin test to identify the capabilities of each member in the group based on his/her personality and designated him/her with a responsibility. Also, I played an active role coordinating the group through influence and decision-making. This was to avoid conflicts and provide a clear direction for the group’s success as Rollinson and Broadfield (2002) illustrate. In the future, I would suggest that a careful selection of group members based on their individual behaviour should be embraced. Also, learning style befitting each member is equally important, hence; I would suggest individuals to be grouped basing on the learning styles to guarantee the success of the group (Parker, 1998).

I learned that group work is a challenge because it encompasses people from different backgrounds and learning needs. Thus, understanding individual behaviour and learning needs is important in supporting group success. Learning skills in a group requires knowledge, experience and practice, thus, it is a challenging task.

Reference List

Belbin, R 1981, Management Teams, Butterworth Heinemann, New York.

Brown, G Bull, J and Pendlebury, M 1997, Assessing Student Learning In Higher Education, Rutledge, New York.

Buchanan, D. and Huczynski, A. 1997, Organizational BehaviourAn Introductory Text, 3^rd edition, Pearson – Prentice Hall, London.

Button, L 1971, Developmental Group Work with Adolescents, Hodder and Stoughton, New York.

Conyne, R 1999 Failures in Group Work: How We Can Learn From Our Mistakes, Sage Publications, London.

Garvin, C 1997, Contemporary Group Work, Prentice Hall, London.

Parker, B 1998, Globalization and Business Practice Managing Across Boundaries, SAGE Publications Ltd, London.

Rollinson, D. and Broadfield, A. 2002, Organizational Behaviour and Analysis An Integrated Approach, 2^nd edition Pearson – Prentice Hall, London.

Schon, D 1983, The Reflective Practitioner: how professionals think in action, Temple Smith London.

Tuckman, B. 1965, “Developmental Sequence in Small Groups”. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 63, pp 384-399.

The issue of learning style entails the assessment of personal differences: every person perceives, understands, generates notions, makes assumptions, and behaves differently. Studies on style as a person’s attribute have been of significance to psychologists for a long time. Some people might be easy to deal with, while others prefer some sections of the learning cycle when compared to others. When it comes to the learning cycle or progression, learners receive information by generating understanding in the new experience (Duff & Duffy 2002).

With time, Kolb’s conception of a 4-stage process has gone through further development to become two orthogonal elements of learning emanating from the Learning Style Inventory. The Learning Style Questionnaire has been recommended as a substitute for the Learning Style Inventory. The Learning Style Questionnaire was established to depict management trainee’s inclinations and has consequently been employed to a broad scope of subjects, encompassing learners in higher education. The Learning Style Questionnaire is intended to look into the relative strengths of four diverse learning styles that include Reflector, Pragmatist, Activist, and Theorist.

Under the method, scores on the Learning Style Questionnaire were authenticated using 388 participants of learners enlisted in two different modules in an institution of higher education in Scotland. The instrument was applied to all the participating students at the beginning of the academic year. 224 of the participants were undergraduate students pursuing business courses, while 164 were taking medical studies.

The selected sample was demographically varied to be generalized to other Western higher educational situations (Duff & Duffy 2002). The suitability of the four styles was assessed by means of confirmatory factor analysis and the use of SPSS. To assess the association involving performance and learning style, a structural equation model was constructed for the two groups of students using the SPSS version of AMOS v4.0. The model treats the aspects of learning styles as experimental exogenous analyst factors and academic performance as the observed endogenous variable.

The findings established that confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses did not back the occurrence of the two bipolar elements recommended by Kolb and the four learning styles theorized by Mumford and Honey (Duff & Duffy 2002). An item evaluation and pruning effect did not yield the internal constancy reliability to a suitable degree or offer sufficient model fit to the information. The outcomes of a structural equation model failed to ascertain a stable connection involving scores on the four learning styles, two bipolar aspects, and scholarly performance between the samples. The assessments of factorial invariability do not offer support for the generalisability or consistency of the model.

The essential setback with Kolb’s Experiential Learning Model is the failure to unravel knowledge from learning and formation from the process. Though Kolb has come up with scores of the four learning styles, hence operationally distinguishing the formations, no operation or technique for assessing the practices implicit in the structures is offered (Duff & Duffy 2002). The Learning Style Questionnaire is anchored in a model that is not adequately refined to describe the learning that occurs in institutions of higher education. It is delineated with respect to a management trainee’s learning instead of that of learners who are pursuing higher education.

Care should be observed when adopting the Learning Style Questionnaire to choose suitable instructional techniques or classify individual learners. This study affirms that the Learning Style Questionnaire is not an appropriate alternative to the Learning Style Inventory.

Reference List

Duff, A & Duffy, T 2002, ‘Psychometric properties of honey & Mumford’s learning styles questionnaire (LSQ)’, Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 147-163.

Teachers are very important. They play a major role in the development, growth, and maturity of almost all human being, especially those who have become a student. They were part of the improvement of the whole society and will remain to be a part of it.

An educator needs to be very effective. To her/him lies the future of all of his/her students. To become an effective teacher, one must realize that there are certain aspects which he/needs to master and take a very firm grip on to – and these include meeting expectations that the students have on him/her and at the same time having a well-balanced expectation to students, enough knowledge with the subject he/she is to teach, efficient instructional strategies, strategic classroom management and a strong commitment to teaching and of course having the ability to adapt to various learning styles of the learners.

Rochford (2003) stated that learning style is the way a particular student concentrates on, absorbs, processes internalizes, and recalls new information. This implies that every student will have their own preferred learning style depending on their own capabilities to gather and absorb data, and in how they process and organize such data (Felder & Silverman, 1988; Van Zwanenberg, 2000). There are five factors that influence the learning style of an individual. These factors include (Dunn and Dunn, 1993):

• environmental situation – which involves the level of noise, the temperature, the amount of light available
• personal emotional characteristics – with which motivation from other people and from the self, persistence, perseverance, and sense of responsibility and dependability are very important
• sociological preferences for learning – which pertains to the idea of choosing a learning endeavor done alone or a learning endeavor with another peer
• physiological characteristics – that refers to the motor abilities, the visual and auditory stimulus
• global aspects – which involves the combination of the above-stated factors

Knowledge of the learning styles is beneficial for both the students and the educators. As for the educators and aspiring ones, knowledge on various learning styles of the students will help them facilitate the learning undertaking and manage the classroom and the students properly. Meanwhile, if the students know the specific learning style apt for their personality and needs, then they could maximize the use of that particular learning style which will result in the students’ enhanced educational achievement.

Like for example if I am the educator and I noticed that one of the students is like me, who is more inclined to learning using the perceptual modality (where visuals and auditory functions are highly used), I could then focused on giving more examples and explaining the topics through the use of pictures and sounds. I can make use of various instructional materials where the students could make use of their perceptions in a dynamic way.

Students’ learning styles are a good way of measuring their ability to grasp the subjects very well. This alone is enough reason why understanding the various learning styles can play a crucial role in facilitating an effective learning undertaking.

References

Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1993). Teaching secondary students through their individual learning style. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning styles and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78, 647-681.

Piskurich George M. 2006. Learning ID Fast & Right. Pfeiffer; 2 editionISBN-10: 0787980730.

Rochford, R. A. (2003). Assessing learning styles to improve the quality of performance of community college students in developmental writing programs: A pilot study. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 27, 665-678.

Van Zwanenberg, N. (2000). Felder and Silverman’s index of learning styles and Honey and Mumford’s learning styles questionnaire: How do they compare and do they predict academic performance? Educational Psychology, 20, 365-381.

Studying is the way of getting knowledge and depending on the type of learning, people are able to consume information. Visual, auditory and physical are three main types of learning.

Visual style of learning requires the learner to see some parts of the data connected to what should be learnt. Auditory learning style is connected to oral data representation, and physical learning style requires the touching or other physical involvement. Each of these methods has both advantages and disadvantages which are defined while learning the material.

I have always known what type of learning is the most effective for me. Learning some new material, I perceive it better when I can see something devoted to the data. Being a visual style learner I have a number of advantages connected with this style as well as the disadvantages which are also inherent to it.

It is obvious for me that while lectures I perceive the information better if the lecture offers some visual material. Power Point slides or hand outs are the most effective for me, as in this case I have an opportunity to see the information discussed by the lecture and I remember it better.

If a lecture is led without any visual materials, I try to make notes as seeing the data I hear, I remember it better as well. The inability to make notes while lectures puts me into complicated situation as I know that I will not be able to remember the data in this case. Considering the advantages of this learning style, it should be mentioned that most people in the world use this learning styles due to its effectiveness.

Moreover, having seen the place and the way to it I will surely remember it. One more advantage of the visual learner is while working on a problem, I can see the whole picture in my mind and act in accordance of the predicted outcomes and further actions.

However, there are a number of disadvantages which prevent me from effective learning in different situations. I have already written that I am unable to perceive oral information. It is difficult for me to remember the data which is told without any visual support. Listening audiotapes or referencing to the radio programs is not the best way of data remembering.

When I am told the way it is very difficult for me to visualize the issue, I need something what I can see. There are the situations when the data is said and I should remember it, but this is a real problem for me. I usually should make notes to make sure that I remember everything.

Time is really important while learning. I understand that having a visual support I will remember the information better and faster rather than I will be presented the data orally. It is not complicated for me to make notes while lectures as I know that I will save time in the future.

Looking at my notes after classes I can remember all the details discussed while the lesson. I know that oral learning style is more convenient as having heard the data, a person easily remembers it, but all my tries to learn to remember oral information were spent in vain. Those people cannot remember information and therefore have difficulties in learning should change the type of learning. Who knows, maybe they use a wrong type of learning.

In the field of education, there is a wide range of literature that addresses learning styles and the way they should be used in the classroom. In that regard, it can be seen that the constant progress in the educational field implies the occurrence of new methods of learning as well as new findings regarding the implementation of these styles in the classroom.

The issue of accommodating the learning styles and the instructions is also in focus, as the individualization of the teaching methods can be seen to take a separate direction in taking the students through the curriculum. Defining learning styles, it can be said that the wide range of definitions mostly ranges from the preferred sensory modalities to descriptions of personality characteristics, and cognitive information processing. (Smith & Renzulli, 1984, p. 44)

Taking the perspective of the wide array of learning styles definitions and the results of studying the correlation between learning styles, teaching instructions and the outcomes on students’ performance, an evaluation of the research methodologies implemented in each study might help to evaluate each study and accordingly the value of their evidence and findings. In that regard, this paper presents an evaluation of studies presented in four articles based on the methodologies and the design of each study.

The evaluation would be addressed to answer the question “Should instruction be matched to student learning style?”, as well as recommending the design and the method suitable to address such question, based on the results of the evaluation. The main evaluation criteria used in this paper are based on the consistency of the study as well as the appropriateness of research methods.

Research Problem

It should be noted that despite the fact that the studies presented had a common subject, the formulation of the research problem and the accordingly the conclusions made differed from study to study, as narrowing the questions to specific setting might change the statement of the study. Accordingly, the research questions and hypotheses formulations can differ according to the type of the study chosen for the research, i.e. quantitative, qualitative or mixed.

Generally, the research statement can be considered as the signpost which “establishes the central direction of the study” (Creswell, 2003, p. 105), after which the focus of the study can be narrowed to “specific questions to be answered or predictions (i.e. hypotheses) to be tested (Creswell, 2003)

In Adkins and Brown-Syed (2002), the main question posed in the study was related to the identification of the learning styles by the students and the accommodations necessary to make to exhibit styles and creating learning activities in practice. The explicit statement of the question was “whether information-oriented students are more likely than a control group to exhibit sequential and visual learning styles” (Adkins & Brown-Syed, 2002, p. 3). The study is of a descriptive type, and although the choice of using a control group might imply the establishment of a cause and effect relationship, the nature of the question posed implies a descriptive type of study.

The question complied with the chosen type of study, i.e. quantitative, where the authors used a hypothesis, i.e. “a prediction the researcher holds about the relationship among variables” (Creswell, 2003, p. 108), where the authors shaped and focused the purpose of the study. Additionally, the hypothesis can be stated as directional, as it specifies the direction that the researcher expected to emerge in the study. The hypothesis can be represented as “Library and Information Science (LIS) students are more likely to be oriented toward visual information and technology-based learning.

In Felder and Spurlin (2005), the questions posed in the study complied with the qualitative type, where the questions asked were in the form of associated subquestions, although the research implemented a mixed study approach. Due to the study being focused on Index of Learning Styles (ILS), “an instrument designed to assess preferences on the four dimensions of the Felder-Silverman learning style model” (Felder & Spurlin, 2005, p. 103), choosing a common ground for the evaluation of the studies led to selecting the closer question in context from the list of the subquestion stated in the study. The question is “What conclusions regarding the reliability and the validity may be inferred from the research studies, which were conducted using the ILS.” The reliability and the validity of the questionnaire was part of the study, where the authors’ assessment of the test-retest reliability, internal reliability and construct validity was a part of the study, as the scores obtained through the qualitative part of the study did not include such measurements.

A closer study question was formulated in McNeal and Dwyer (1999), in terms of studying the relation between the learning style, the instructions and the performance outcome. The study’s problem was stated as investigating “the relationship that exists between students’ expressed learning style and method of instruction… in terms of performance on specific criterion measures” (George & Francis, 1999, p. 337). Thus the study’s question was stated as “Whether congruence between learning style and instruction affect the performance of students.”

Finally, the problem established in Yildirim et al. (2008), investigates the differences in influence between the leadership style of the teachers and the learning style of the students, in terms of the influence on students’ performance outcomes. Similarly, the selection of a quantitative type of study implies the formulation of a question and a hypothesis, which nevertheless, was not explicitly stated in the study. Thus, the question that could be extracted based on the methodology implemented in the study was “Which factor affected students’ performance more: leadership of teachers or learning style of the student.” Accordingly, it can be seen that problems statement in this study did not include the instructions matching the learning style.

Literature Review

Basically, the literature review in a study is the section where the researcher refers to the efforts which already have been done in the topic, including the results of previous studies, and additionally, provides a background of the ideas used in other works. In that regard, the assessment of the literature review in a study can be based on the relevancy of the covered readings, clarity of the material, credibility of the literature and what most important, the review should indicate to the gaps in knowledge, which the conducted study should fill in.

In McNeal and Dwyer (1999), the literature review can be characterized through the reliance on mostly one source, where the focus on Kolb’s Learning Study Inventory was reflected in the review. In that regard, the lack of the extensive reading was seen through the reference to works accomplished on this topic by “most of the researches” (George & Francis, 1999, p. 337). In that regard, although the study merely utilized the previous work, i.e. the utilization and assessment of Kolb’s inventory, narrowing the area of research to nursing programs, it did not refer to other works to justify the need for such study.

Similarly, mostly Kolb’s work was cited in Felder and Spurlin (2005). However, as the study included a summary of previous works’ results and definition, the author referred to other researches, although they were spread throughout the paper. Nevertheless, the researcher did not distinguish between the research, theory, own results and opinion in the paper. On the other hand, in Yildirim et al. (2008), the literature review was considered in the beginning of the study setting the background of the knowledge used in the paper.

Additionally the review pointed out to the gaps in knowledge, e.g. “Given the lack of evidence in favour of matching teaching and learning styles” (Yildirim, Acar, Bull, & Sevinc, 2008, p. 74). Although the review can also be characterized by unselective referencing, i.e. using a long string of references for single information, indicating that the author was not selective in the works to cite, specifically for general information, e.g. “It is argued that students’ learning styles differ (Kolb, 1976, 1981; Marton & Saljo, 1976; Richardson, 1990)” (Yildirim, et al., 2008, p. 73).

In Adkins and Brown-Syed (2002), the literature review sets the background to the study’s problem statement, in terms of referring to the suggestions of the literature in that regard. However, the most of the reference of the work is taking place through the discussion section, where the results are compared to the earlier suggestions, without critiquing the earlier information or justifying the reasons for the new study.

The Research

As quantitative studies examine the relationship between variables in a measurable way, it can be seen that the selection of quantitative approach is mostly justified. In educational research related to methods, styles, and instructions, mostly the independent variable will be associated with performance, which accordingly is a measurable entity. In that regard, it can be seen that all of the studies implemented quantitative designs, except for the Felder and Spurlin (2005) study, in which a mixed methods was used. In the quantitative studies, or in quantitative parts of the studies, the problem was identifying the factors influencing the outcome, i.e. the dependent variable.

Accordingly, the dependent variable across the studies can be identified as follows:

• In Adkins and Brown-Syed (2002), the dependent variable is the score of xxx derived or measured by the Learning Styles Inventory.
• In Yildirim et al. (2008), the dependent variable is the academic achievement in the course.
• In Felder and Spurlin (2005), a mixed method was used, where the qualitative part was used to identify the variables through an analysis of the literature, while the quantitative part was used to assess the relation between the variables. In that regard, the dependent variable can be said to be the preferences of learning styles across students, and the strengths of such preferences.
• In McNeal and Dwyer (1999), the dependent variable measured is the test score of the achievement resulted from combining four individual criterion measures.

Additionally, all of the studies were cross sectional, i.e. the data were collected at one point of time. (Creswell, 2003) In general, the methods of research included in there of the articles can be classified as quantitative experimental and cross-sectional, where only in Felder and Spurlin was in the usage of a mixed method. The exception can be seen Felder and Spurlin (2005), where the study can be characterized as a descriptive type for the quantitative part, while it exploratory for the qualitative part. In that regard, the qualitative part was exploratory. The experiment part of the design implies that the researchers did intervene in the observation by altering one or more factors in the research and studied the effect of doing so.

Resolution

One of the main aspects of assessing a research study is the determination of its validity, i.e. investigating whether the study measuring what it is intended to measure. In that regard, the study should clearly indicate the measured aspects, and accordingly operationally define them if necessary.

Analyzing the internal validity of the studies, the main purpose is to investigate whether causal relation between the variables cannot be explained by a confounding variable which was not considered and controlled by the chosen research design. The confounding or extraneous variable serves as a threat to the internal validity of a study. This makes one difficult to conclude the true effect of an independent variable on the dependent or outcome variable. Accordingly, such criterion can be considered related to the consistency of the study, based on which it will be assessed. The issue of controversy can be seen through the work of Yildirim et al., where the perception of teachers’ leadership style indicated by the students can have several confounding variables such as personal attributes of the teacher, the course difficulty, and the success in other subjects. Similarly, in Adkins and Brown-Syed, the study involved perception in identification of learning styles, where being a cross-sectional study, the instant measurement can be accordingly confounded by several factors, e.g. the personal preferences of the students, the perception of specific learning style, educational history, and etc.

Another factor to consider, in terms of limitations is the instruments used in measurement and the possibility of the interpretation. Instrument decay can be defined as the possibility of changing the nature of the instrument and the scoring procedures, as a result of which a different interpretation of the result might occur. (Wallen & Fraenkel, 2001) In that regard, some of the instruments lacked the necessary description regarding the way the instrument were used , while for the modifications made to existent instruments, mentioned through the introduction or the literature review part, the nature of such modifications was not mentioned, e.g. inventory questionnaire in Adkins and Brown-Syed, and behavioral theories’ evaluation in Yildirim et al. The evidences of reliability can be seen through the usage of Cronbach’s alpha in Yildirim et al., in which the items lowering the Cronbach’s coefficient were excluded. Generally, it can be seen that the researcher used a value of over.60 for the item to be acceptable. Statistical analysis was used to establish the validity of that study. Additionaly, the method of sampling, with the exception of Yildirim et al., implied non-random selection, and random assignment, whereas in Adkins and Brown-Syed, the assignment was also non-random, all of which can be reflected through the generalizability of the findings, being related to the specific setting of the research.

On the other hand, in two other studies, the procedures and the instruments used were identified with various degrees of descriptiveness. This can be evident in the criterion measures, which were used to measure the achievements in McNeal and Dwyer, and the procedures used to measure the validity in Felder and Spurlin.

In terms of the appropriateness of the methods used, three of the articles, i.e. George, H. M., & Francis, D. (1999), “Effect of learning style on consistent and inconsistently designed instruction”, Yildirim et al.(2008), “ Relationships between teachers’ perceived leadership style, students’ learning style, and academic achievement”, and Adkins, D., & Brown-Syed, C. (2002), “Accommodating All Learners: Critical Inquiry and Learning Styles in the LIS Classroom”, examined the relation between the variables, where the independent variables were in some way or another related to the learning styles, instructions, the congruence between them, their perception and identification.

Dependent variable was always related to the performance and achievement, as mostly such indicator is the most important in assessing the effect and the success of the intervention made. In Felder, R. M., & Spurlin, J. (2005), “Applications, Reliability and Validity of the Index of Learning Styles”, the mixed approach was of analytical nature rather than examining the correlation between the variables.

Mixed method research is an “approach to inquiry that combines or associates both qualitative, [exploring and understanding the meaning individuals and groups ascribe to a social or human problem], and quantitative forms” (Creswell, 2003). Thus, the method used can be seen appropriate for the objectives stated in the study, determination of the dimensions of the ILS model (qualitative), testing the reliability and the validity of the studies conducted using ILS (quantitative).

In general, three of the studies, which were related to the examination of the relation between the learning styles and the performance, stated that a positive correlation exists.

Recommendation

Generalizing the studies used in the context of the question posed in this paper, i.e. should the instruction and the learning styles should be matched, certain modifications should be considered, based on the evaluation of the four researches on education. Thus, the problem of matching the learning styles with the instruction can be stated as a directional hypothesis that “matching the instructions to the learning style positively affects the performance of the students”.

Defining the variables, where the independent variables would be a defined scale rate of congruence between the style and the learning style and the dependent is the score of the students, an important step would the inclusion and the definition of any confounding variable s that might affect the process of measurement. In that regard, a quantitative longitudinal study, where the measures would be taken through a defined interval would minimize the interference of the confounding factors.

Additionally, an important aspect to consider is the validity and the reliability of the study, where based on the analysis of the articles, it could be recommended that the instruments of measurement would be tested by an independent education board, or through conducting a preliminary pilot study, after which modifications can be made to the measuring instrument, the sample or the variables included in the study. In terms of generalizability, the sampling techniques can be adjusted in case a random sample cannot be obtained through repeating the repetition of the study.

Conclusion

In the paper four articles in were evaluated, in order to have a representation of the factors to consider when researching the question of matching the instructions and the learning styles of the students. Three of the four articles were closely related to the aspects considered in this paper, and they were fairly consistent in their methods. The recommendations outlined were related to the area of validity, instruments used, and confounding factors. Generally, the methods used were appropriate for the problems stated, and they established a relation between the examined variables. The fourth article, with more distant approach to the theme examined, was nevertheless, exemplary in terms of examining the reliability and the validity of the results, in terms of definition, description and clarity. These considerations were outlined in the recommendations sector on how to develop the study for the main question formulated in the paper.

References

Adkins, D., & Brown-Syed, C. (2002). Accommodating All Learners: Critical Inquiry and Learning Styles in the LIS Classroom. Paper presented at the 68th International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA).

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design : qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Felder, R. M., & Spurlin, J. (2005). Applications, Reliability and Validity of the Index of Learning Styles. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 103-112.

George, H. M., & Francis, D. (1999). Effect of learning style on consistant and inconsistently designed instruction. International Journal of Instructional Media, 26(3), 337.

Smith, L. H., & Renzulli, J. S. (1984). Learning Style Preferences: A Practical Approach for Classroom Teachers Theory into Practice 23(1), 44-50.

Wallen, N. E., & Fraenkel, J. R. (2001). Educational research : a guide to the process (2nd ed.). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Yildirim, O., Acar, A. C., Bull, S., & Sevinc, L. (2008). Relationships between teachers’ perceived leadership style, students’ learning style, and academic achievement: a study on high school students. Educational Psychology, 28(1), 73-81.

Recent studies in the field of educational psychology have illuminated critical components on the learning process that could be harnessed and used to ensure that students achieve the best in education. According to Franzoni & Assar (2009), not only have the studies demonstrated that students are inclined to learn in different ways, they have also revealed that students choose to employ different teaching materials and resources.

A learning style, according to the authors, can be described as the attributes, strengths, and inclinations in the manner individuals receive and process stimuli or information. Research into the area has proven that every individual utilize his own set of tactics when learning, and as such, learning materials in the classroom context should be designed to satisfy all kinds of learners and all types of learning styles.

Lynn has an intrapersonal learning style. This implies that her learning style is solitary-like, and she is inclined towards conducting her own private studies with considerable amount of independence from what is taught in class (Franzoni & Assar, 2009). Such a learning style, though introspective in nature, assist the student to concentrate well in educational activities, and facilitate her to focus on own independent thoughts, feelings, and attitudes regarding a particular topic of interest.

Using the intrapersonal learning style, Lynn is actively conscious of her own thinking, and indeed spend considerable amount of time on self-evaluation and analysis. According to Franzoni & Assar (2009), students with intrapersonal learning style always take time to reflect on their own achievements or failures without necessarily being pushed to do so by external forces. They always preferring to spend their time alone, and like to set their own objectives in life since they feel they know the direction their lives will take.

Nakiba employs an interpersonal learning skill, implying that the student is highly sociable and communicate extremely well with other individuals, including the teachers. The student has well developed verbal and non-verbal communication channels, and is always sensitive to other people’s worldviews, attitudes, and feelings.

According to Long & Coldren (2006), such students are always adored by other students due to their accommodating and understanding nature. Consequently, Nakiba may be more willing to learn in groups, and may also prefer to spend lengthy periods of time with the teacher discussing issues that are not well understood.

Hlawaty (2009) posits that individuals using this style develop their cognitive capabilities by putting their thoughts across to their friends and then critically listening to their responses. Lastly, such students prefer to work through challenges and concepts with a synergistic assembly of people.

Tammy’s reading and writing learning style, also known as the verbal style, entails a learning scenario where the student find it easier to express her ideas, attitudes, or challenges through writing them down or verbally communicating them to others (Hlawaty, 2009).

Such students, according to the author, are always at home with reading and writing, and always admire playing with words and their meanings. They develop their oratory capacities to become the funniest tongue twisters and rhyme-stars in class. These students have extraordinary knowledge on the meanings of the words they use, and are always on the lookout to find the meaning and implication of new words and phrases.

Reference List

Franzoni, A.L., & Assar, S. (2009). Student learning styles: Adaptation method based on teaching strategies and electronic media. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 12, Issue 4, p. 15-29. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier Database.

Hlawaty, H. (2009). Lernen and learning styles. European Education, Vol. 40, Issue 4, p. 23-45. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier Database.

Long, H.E. & Coldren, T. (2006). Interpersonal influences in large lecture-based classes. College Teaching, Vol. 54, Issue 2, P. 237-243. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier Database.

The results of the inventory showed that among the seven offered learning styles, some are more suitable for me, while the others are less suitable. For instance, with the maximum possible score of 20, my results were: 13 for visual, 15 for social, 12 for physical, 8 for aural, 10 for verbal, 16 for solitary, and 12 for logical learning style. The given scores indicate what learning styles are more or less effective for me personally. They allow focusing on the styles with high scores and involve them more in my studying process. At the same time, the results show what learning styles are unsuitable for my perception and are better to be avoided.

Due to the fact that the solitary and social learning styles are the most suitable for me, it is better to use them in the learning process. In addition, the visual learning also has a high score of 13. This means that in order to learn things more effectively, I need to make some changes based on the mentioned results. For instance, using images, pictures, photography, and other things that involve visual perception will help me to remember things better and faster. The visual learning style can be applied both in personal tasks or in group works: the both cases will be equally effective for me.

On the contrary, together with the effective learning styles, I had a chance to know about the learning styles that are unsuitable for me. To be more precise, the aural and verbal styles scored correspondingly 8 and 10 points. This means that in my case it is undesirable to involve sounds words in learning things. Using these techniques will take much longer for me to understand and remember information. Therefore, in my future learning practice I will try to avoid these learning styles in order to save my time and efforts.

At first, the results appeared to be rather controversial, as far as, according to the inventory, I seem to prefer opposite learning styles. For example, I have got 16 for solitary learning style, which means that I prefer to work on my own; however, another high score of 15 was given to social learning style, which involves working in groups and interacting with other individuals. These styles are mutually exclusive, which confused me. However, with the further analysis of learning styles application it occurred to me that these styles can be combined, or used each in some specific situation.

Concerning the other results of the inventory, I totally agree with them. Having analyzed my learning experiences, I realized that the styles that have the highest scores were used most often by me, and those that scored the least appeared to be the least helpful. For instance, the posters on the walls of the classroom with the spelling rules were easily memorized by me, as far as visual learning style is effective for me. In contrast, learning and singing songs in the class was a challenge for me, because aural learning style is less suitable for me.

The results of the inventory made it possible for me to improve my further studying process. In order to do this, I am going to involve visual materials more in my learning process. In addition, there is no need for me to choose between the solitary or social learning, as far as both styles are equally effective for me.

Introduction

There are many different methods that have been established to categorize students into different learning styles. Some techniques used may include two opposite learning styles while others involve up eight different approaches to learning (Sims, 1995). For instance institution or company would seek to select a method of evaluating learners’ learning styles of their employees based on the viability of providing evaluation tool and the types of work performed within (Smith, 2006).

In most cases, the tools used to assist find learning styles are referred to as self-report instrument (Kaplan, 2009). This requires the learner to complete a designed questionnaire indicating certain likes and dislikes, the findings are then analyzed and calculated to determine the employees’ preferred learning style (Kaplan, 2009). This research paper reviews literature related to different learning styles, such as: deductive and inductive; visual, auditory, and tactile/kinesthetic; Kolb’s learning style inventory.

Deductive and inductive learning style

Deductive and inductive are classification schemes which divide learners into two categories focusing on how learners prefer to organize the information. In this category, learners approach the learning of new material from deductive or inductive point of view. Inductive learners prefer to move from specifics to the whole (Nielson, 2010. Deductive learners on the hand would first prefer to see the big picture and then learn about the details. The inductive learner (Smith, 2006)

A good example in inductive learning is the concept of “Just –In-Time” in inventory control (Nielson, 2010). At the beginning, inductive learners would first focus on what causes excessive stocks, such as; untrained personnel, mislabeled parts, parts placed in wrong bins (Sims, 2010). Once the learner gets to know the inventory characteristic of JIT, the learner would then approach the quality elements and then learner would then establish his or her own idea of the JIT philosophy (Nielson, 2010). The inductive learner then learns the concept from the small pieces of concepts presented during instruction. Inductive leaner applies facts and observation to determine a principal (Sternberg, 1995).

Just like inductive learning, the inductive learner would first require to understand the JIT philosophy. Presentation of the details to deductive learners at the beginning can confuse the learners (Smith, 2006). They require knowing what the general JIT elements are available. Once a leaner understands the overall, they would then examine the various elements in terms of the concept (Kaplan, 2009). Therefore, when a deductive understands that JIT is about sustained improvement, the he or she will examine inventory as a part of sustaining continuous improvement strategy. The deductive learner performs from a principle to determine applications and the consequences (Sims, 2006).

Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic/Tactile

These learning styles examine how learners perceive new information. The three primary techniques of perceiving new information include ability to; see, hear and interact. Each of these techniques are used to categorize learners as visual, auditory, or tactile (Nielson, 2010). The visual learner prefers the forms of pictures, diagrams, illustrations, charts and others (Kaplan, 2009). Visual learners prefer to sit in front of the classroom to notice the body language and facial expressions of the teacher; as well as gain a vantage view of any visual material presented. They draw pictures of concepts (Nielson, (2010).

The auditory learner can learn best through lectures, class discussions, conversation with classmates, and even the use of audio tape. Auditory learners tend to speak a lot in class, discussing conversations about the class topic, and require classification of what they will teach (Sternberg, 2001). Learners under this category prefer verbal explanations on charts, diagrams, charts and others. Auditory learners benefit from online learning that has been accompanied by audio music. They also like to study with the radio on (Sarah, 2005).

Tactile/kinesthetic learning style

Tactile learners on the other hand, like to move around touching models when learning new concepts. For instant, these learners learn best when educational games are used to simulate the manufacturing environment (Kaplan, 2009). The learners find it hard to remain still for long period. They often get up and pace in the back of the classroom while listening while listening to the instruction (Sternberg, 2001). This action helps learners to concentrate. Many employees in manufacturing environments use tactile/kinesthetic learners (Sims, Sims, 2006). They need to be involved actively in learning. For instance, instructions on inventory reduction methods or explanations on the material requirements planning logic on the factory floor are an effective technique for teaching learners at all levels (Smith, 2006).

Kolb’s learning style

In this learning style, an individual combines four theories to learning. Kolb posited that people combine the four different approaches into four different styles of learning. These learning styles include: one, converger of concepts and active experiments. Learners with this learning style are good variety of information, and placing them under concise and logic form: two, Accommodator which allows individuals to have the ability to learn from hands experience. Kolb’s learning style is significant for effectiveness in careers that are action oriented such as, direct production positions (Kaplan, 2009).

Conclusion

In summary, classrooms requirements must allow all the different perception styles to be accommodated. The teacher must involve hands-on-exercises for tactile or kinesthetic learner, lectures for auditory learner, and charts and graphs for the visual leader (Kaplan, 2009). In addition, once the instructor understands that learners need to pace around during class, or speak a little learning while learning, he or she should not be angry thinking that they are inattentive or are not interested in the material presented (Kaplan, 2009).

Knowledge of learning styles is significant several levels of education. In addition, it can assist organizations in training that meets the needs of all the employees. Knowledge of learning styles assists trainers within the organization to understand how best to present information to learners. Three, instructors tend to present and design training in the same learning style in which they are comfortable learning. This performs better when all the students have similar learning style with the instructor (Kaplan, 2009).

Reference List

Kaplan, E. (2009). Study Aides. New York: Kaplan Publishing.

Sarah , R., Komives., & Dudley, W. (2005). Student Service. New York: New York.

Sims, R., & Serbrenia, S. (2009). The Importance of Learning Styles. New York: Rutledge.

Smith, E., & Evans, C. (2006). Learning Styles. New York: Emerald Publishers.

Sternberg, R, & Zhang. (2001). Perspectives of Thinking, Learning., & Cognitive styles. New York: Rutledge Publishers.

Nielson, L. (2010). Teaching at it’s Best. New York: Wiley and Sons.

Within the recent decades, the principles of learning styles theories have been implemented in a number of academic disciplines, and nursing is among them. With the shift to the student-centered nursing education, the curriculum is adapted to the results of the learning styles inventories (LSI) for the purpose of creating the appropriate clinical and classroom settings and enhancing the effectiveness of the teaching-learning process.

Knowledge of various learning styles and one’s own strengths and weaknesses is helpful for optimization of the learning process and becoming a confident professional nurse. The fact is that abilities as well as learning preferences vary, and any assignment cannot be equally effective for developing the practical skills of the students of the group. Flexibility of the curriculum and individual approach is required for meeting the learners’ demands.

On the one hand, choosing a method of instruction that is the most appropriate for the student’s preferred learning style, an educator maximizes the student learning. On the other hand, learners should develop their skills that are necessary for using the styles besides their preferred one.

Billings and Halstead (2009) noted that “students who habitually use only their preferred learning style are disadvantaged when the situation demands that they use a different style” (p. 32). In other words, the results of LSI can be beneficial not only for adapting the curriculum to the learners’ personal needs, but for improving their skills that are required for using various learning styles.

Researching the learning style provides significant insights as to the effectiveness of particular strategies and approaches for students, giving preference to certain styles. Various contextual characteristics, such as cultural heritage, learning experience and the student’s age category have impact on defining the learning style and need to be taken into consideration while developing the programs and curricula.

However, constant lack of time and peculiarities of one’s own learning style might become hindrances preventing preceptors from implementing the results of the surveys in clinical and classroom settings. The first difficulty consists in realities of clinical practice depriving instructors of opportunities to devote much time to thinking their strategies over and choosing individual assignments for each learner.

Due to the necessity to act quickly, they often choose the approaches which they know best and which were effective previously. Another problem is that most instructors are inclined to use their own preferred leaning styles choosing approaches for training their students. Doing it almost unconsciously, instructors incorporate their own preferences into the learning programs.

Even coming to realization of benefits of implementing the result of LSIs, preceptors have to meet the challenges of finding time for implementing them into practice and overcoming the temptation to use their own preferred learning styles for meeting the objective of enhancing the effectiveness of the learning process.

Young and Paterson (2009) noted that “the concept of learning style provides an opportunity for nurse educators to reflect on how open they have been to alternative styles in their teaching and in their own learning” (p. 92). Considering the principles of leaning styles theories is beneficial for both increasing confidence of students and professional growth of preceptors.

Learning style research tools are helpful for creating the awareness of one’s preferences, strengths and weaknesses and increasing the effectiveness of one’s learning efforts. Critical analysis of the LSI results is required for appropriate practical application of this useful information.

The problem is that going to extreme, each strong point might have devastating effects on the development of other skills. Myrick and Yonge (2004) noted that “it is important that you be aware of the effect that the unit has on the preceptees’ abilities to function and think” (p. 79) For example, according to the LSI results, I have got the highest score in intrapersonal strength. This means that I would feel comfortable working on case studies and problem-based assignments.

It would be beneficial for diagnosing patients and developing the health care plans considering every detail of the case. However, the score of interpersonal and verbal strengths are much lower and might cause problems with establishing the personal rapport with the patients and collaborating with one’s colleagues.

Being aimed at balancing various learning styles and enhancing my competence, I should put more emphasis on group projects, requiring cooperation with peer, improvement of communicative skills and effective communicative exchange. The high score of kinesthetic strength means that I writing the information with my fingers and touching the visual aids would be the most effective way for acquiring information.

At the same time, the score of the visual strength is much lower. Using the approaches aimed at taking advantages of my kinesthetic preferences, it is important to pay attention to development of visual memory. Logical and naturalist strengths are required for becoming a competent nurse and I managed to consider peculiarities of my learning style choosing the profession. The results of LSI provided me with food for thought and influenced my learning behavior and preferences.

Implementation of the learning style theories is beneficial for enhancing the effectiveness of the student-centered nursing education and improving skills required for becoming a competent preceptor and successful preceptee.

Reference List

Billings, D. & Halstead, J. (2009). Teaching in nursing: A Guide for faculty (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: PA. W. B. Sanders.

Myrick, F. & Yonge, O. (2004). Nursing precentorship: Connecting practice and education. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Young, L. & Paterson, B. (2007). Teaching nursing: Developing a student-centered learning environment. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Abstract

Learning styles are an important part of the education system since they deal with the manner in which learners are able to acquire new knowledge and skills. It is these different learning styles that are examined in this paper. An introduction places the learning styles in their context and the way in which they are grouped.

The learning styles are then examined individually with concrete examples to elucidate their practice. In the conclusion, the importance of the use of learning styles together and individually is stressed for a wholesome learning experience in education.

Introduction

Learning styles are an important part of the education system since they greatly determine how education is impacted on learners. Learning styles are important to teachers and all those who are involved directly with instruction at whatever level of learning. According to Advanogy, (2007), there are three basic learning styles that have been recognized in education. These are visual, kinesthetic and auditory.

The minor ones are aural, logical, social and solitary (Advanogy, 2007). These styles are used by educators to determine the way in which courses and instruction flows for the maximum benefit of the learners. These styles differ in the way that they present materials to the learners according to the manner in which learners interact with information.

Visual learning style

The visual learning style concentrates on the use of visuals in instruction. In this style, information, data, concepts and ideas are linked through images (Advanogy, 2007). This style is one of the basic styles and is widely used especially in elementary education. The style incorporates the use of idea maps, illustrations, graphics and other means with visual basis that can increase the learning of skills and thinking.

Visual learners have some unique characteristics including organization, visualization and direction. They rely on the visual learning style to help them make sense of information and ideas that they come across in their learning process.

According to Walker, (2010), it is important for teachers to assist students make sense of the new information they acquire and use it to relate to what they already know. Examples of this learning style include the use of diagrams, maps and visual aid during instruction.

In a classroom setting this may include use of visual letters to teach the alphabet to young students. For adult learners this would entail the use of maps and simulation for example.

Kinesthetic learning style

The kinesthetic learning style involves the use of physical activities during instruction so that learners are given an opportunity to physically perform activities for themselves instead of listening or viewing demonstrations (Advanogy, 2007). This learning style has also been described as hands-on learning.

This learning style includes the use of personal experience in areas like language where students are encouraged to give their own explanations, use their own vocabulary and be creative (Advanogy, 2007). This style uses the idea that learning takes place often with minimal interference from outside forces (Walker, 2010).

The learning process in itself has much to offer and incidental learning is also a welcome part of the process. As a result this style is excellent for such courses as sports and experiments whether in chemistry or other subjects. An example of the use of this learning style is the use of acting to dramatize and experience certain concepts during instruction. It can also include role playing.

Auditory learning style

According to Advanogy (2007), this is the learning style whereby individuals learn by listening. It also utilizes the use of speech to improve learning. This style emphasizes the use of spoken words. In order to make sense of information and data that they encounter, learners who use this style as the dominant way of learning depend on carefully listening in order to process the material (Advanogy, 2007).

An important example of the use of this learning style is the use of repetition in instruction. This skill is important so that learners can have enough time to interact with new information and gain new knowledge. Repetition can be used in elementary levels while lecturing can be used for adult learning.

Logical learning style

This style refers to learning that is impacted through the use of mathematical and logical reasoning (Advanogy, 2007). According to Advanogy (2007), this style therefore entails the use of reasoning, grouping and patterns so that connections can be made when apparently meaningless information is encountered.

This style also uses numbers and calculations. An example of the use of this style is the application of problem solving during instruction. This process allows learners to engage their reasoning capacities in order to acquire new knowledge and skills to build systems.

Organization of data to make sense is also a mark of this style whereby individuals learn from making logical patterns and building on these for further learning (Advanogy, 2007). Another example of this style of learning is the use of brainstorming. This method allows the learners to explore new problems in light of skills and knowledge they already have to come up with logical and practical solutions. This method can be used for all levels of learning.

Social learning style

This learning style refers to the use of social setting or extensive one-one instruction to facilitate learning (Advanogy, 2007). Learners who use this style dominantly excel when they work with others and can offer their ideas as well as absorb those of others as they try to make sense of new data or skills. This style also incorporates use of social activities during learning or as part of the learning (Advanogy, 2007).

Interpersonal communication is very important in this style and much of the learning occurs during the interaction as opposed to quiet learning or individual learning activities. An example of this style is the use of groups. Group work and discussions are vastly used in this style and learners can learn from each other as well as use the social setting to pass knowledge and skills. Peer learning can be utilized for young as well as older learners.

Solitary learning style

According to Advanogy (2007), this style of learning refers to learning whereby a learner does most of the learning by their own effort with little guidance from instructors. In this style, the individual will attempt to gain knowledge through their own independent efforts like research, study and use of other methods of learning that can add to their domain of knowledge and skills.

An example of this style in use is research work and projects. Although these may be accompanied by guidance from instructors, they largely use the independent work of the learner. Learners who largely like this style like working y themselves and making sense of information or skills on their own (Advanogy, 2007). This style is common in higher learning institutions where considerable knowledge may already have been gained in a certain area of study.

Aural learning style

This style is a combination of the auditory learning with the use of music. This style goes beyond the use of audio to incorporate use of music. This style uses sounds to enhance the learning and to make it easier to create memories.

Although it is not one of the basic learning styles, this style of learning is also used widely especially in elementary education (Sims and Sims, 1995). This style mostly works well with learning that requires memorization.

Learners who take musical courses and largely use this learning style mostly excel at acquiring the skills of playing different musical instruments. They may also excel at other skills that require use of auditory skills. An example of this style is the use of song and dance in instruction.

Some courses can really utilize music to make the material memorable and captivating. Audio tapes can also be used instead of lectures so as to give some variance to the lectures. This is especially in use with younger students. Songs can be used to teach a variety of subjects including mathematics, sciences and language.

Conclusion

As in indicated by Sims and Sims (1995), the learning styles have something to offer to education; no one method is treated as superior to others since they are all used by learners. During learning more than one style may be used to enhance the learning for most students.

Instructors are usually conversant with different styles although some styles may be dominant. The right style also needs to be used for the right kind of learners, for maximum benefit to the learners and to achieve the aims of education.

According to Sims and Sims (1995), balance is required during learning so that learners can have diverse ways in which they can learn better. In addition, not utilizing as many styles as possible might lead to the neglect of some learners who might end up performing below their potential (Sims and Sims, 1995). Knowledge of learning styles is therefore important to educators at all levels.

References

Advanogy. (2007). Overview of learning styles. Retrieved from: https://www.learning-styles-online.com/overview/

Sims, R. R. and Sims, S. J. (1995). The importance of learning styles. Understanding the implications for learning, course design and education. Westport, CT: Green Press.

Walker, B. J. (2010). Literacy coaching: learning to collaborate. Boston, MA: Ally and Bacon.