A New Look at Learning Styles - By Barbara S. Bonham and Hunter R. Boylan
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
A New Look at Learning Styles
By Barbara S. Bonham and Hunter R. Boylan
individuals, not just different “styles.” Each
Learning styles has become
instrument measures different preferences,
something of a “hot issue” in developmental
characteristics, or traits; has different
education during the past decade. Each year,
degrees of reliability; and is used for
more presentations on the topic are given at
different purposes. It is, therefore, important
national conferences. Articles on learning
for practitioners to determine the dimensions
styles have appeared more frequently in
recent literature. And, more learning styles they wish to measure and what they want to
inventories are appearing on the educational do with the resulting information before
market. In spite of the increasing attention selecting a learning styles inventory. In an
paid to this issue, however, our conception effort to assist in this process, this issue of
of learning styles remains somewhat limited. Research in Developmental Education will
explore an organizational framework for
Many professionals in the field
understanding learning styles issues and
consider learning styles to represent a
instruments and discuss some of the
singular, monolithic concept. Differences in
implications of this framework.
learning styles are often considered to be
represented by the nomenclature used to An Organizational Framework
identify the modalities of learners, such as Curry (1983), proposed a framework that
“iconic” versus “direct experience” has since been used by many researchers
(Canfield, 1976) or “accommodator” versus attempting to classify human styles of
“converger” (Kolb, 1986). All of these learning. In Curry’s model, learning styles is
labels are assumed to measure some simply a generic term under which three
characteristic of learners that falls under a distinct levels of learning behavior are
general category called “learning styles.” subsumed. These levels include the
following:
In actuality, various learning styles
instruments really measure different
dimensions and characteristics of
Page 1 of 81. Cognitive personality style: the
individual’s approach to adapting
and assimilating information.
2. Information processing style: the
intellectual procedures used my
individuals in assimilating
information.
3. Instructional preference: the Figure 1. Learning Style Theories.
individual’s preference for learning Cognitive Personality Style
environments and activities.
Cognitive personality styles are, in
Curry presents this model graphically as effect, attributes of an individual’s
an onion with the various levels of learning personality that influence approaches to
styles represented as layers of the onion. learning. In theory, at least, any instrument
As this representation suggests (see designed to measure personality attributes
Figure 1), cognitive personality styles are would be related to cognitive style.
central to individual approaches to learning. However, the two best known cognitive
They influence all other aspects of learning personality style instruments are those of
styles. Cognitive personality styles are then Witkin (1976) and Myers and Briggs (1985).
translated through the middle layers of The research of Witkin and
information processing and attain their final associates is probably the most extensive
expression as instructional preferences. Each work on cognitive personality style (Witkin,
of these layers is discussed below in detail Moore, Goodenough, & Cox. 1977).
and a fourth layer is postulated. Witkin’s research suggests that there are two
basic types of cognitive personality styles:
field dependent and field independent. Field-
dependent learners tend to be more sensitive
to people and social situations whereas field-
independent learners tend to be more
sensitive to situations requiring analytical
and problem-solving abilities. Field-
Page 2 of 8dependent learners do better in math and McCaulley and Natter (1980) suggests that
science. According to Witkin (1976), field instructors “tend to understand and
dependence or independence influences not appreciate students whose minds work like
only such factors as how well students do in their own” (p. 185).
a given subject area but also what course, Originally developed for use in the
majors, or careers they may select. The most military, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
common measurement of field has found a variety of applications in
dependence/field independence is the civilian counseling and training and
Embedded Figures Test developed by development. It can be administered to
Witkin et al. (1977). groups or individuals and may be used to
It is worth noting that field help individuals understand themselves,
dependence is a personality style that understand how they learn, or increase their
influences ways of learning. sensitivity to other ways of learning. Unlike
many other instruments, however, it requires
A similar set of personality styles is
measured by the Myers-Briggs Type a trained counselor to administer.
Indicator (1985). This instrument is based The personality attributes measured
on the concepts of Carl Jung (cited in by field dependence/field independence and
Myers. 1976). It has been used extensively by the MBTI are at the inner level of
to provide information of 16 categories Curry’s “onion.” They tend to be central to
related to learners’ ways of thinking and the development of preference or
feeling, sensing and perceiving, intuiting organizational patterns for learning. They
and judging, etc. not only influence characteristics at other
levels, they are also more stable than other
Research suggests that the Myers-
characteristics at the outer level. Assessment
Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is most
measures at this level will, consequently,
effective when the resulting information is
have greater test-retest reliability than
used with instructors as well as students.
measures at the outer levels. Cognitive
Lawrence (1982), for instance, found that
personality styles, therefore, are the most
instructors of different MBTI types are
attracted to different levels of teaching and constant and least likely to change over
time.
different subject areas. The work of
Page 3 of 8It should be noted that instruments as a mediator between cognitive personality
measuring cognitive personality styles do styles and instructional preference.
have their limitations. Several researchers, most notably
Chief among these is that they are Kirby (1979) and Schmech, Ribich, and
measures of personality, not learning Ramanaiah (1977), have found that there is a
preferences. They do not measure learners’ relationship between information processing
attitudes toward conditions in the learning style and academic success. Students with
environment nor do they measure student highly developed well organized, sequential
modalities or expectations of learning. processing styles are more likely to be
Unfortunately, the MBTI is frequently used successful academically than those with less
for these purposes even though there is no developed processing styles.
research or other evidence to support such Information processing styles are
applications of the instrument. internal and do not involve environmental
Information Processing Style factors. As a consequence, they are
The second layer of learning styles somewhat less stable than cognitive
and learning styles assessments is that of personality styles yet somewhat more stable
than instructional preferences. Furthermore,
information processing style. This refers to
unlike personality styles, these
intellectual processes and procedures
characteristically by individuals to characteristics are modifiable through
instruction (e.g. the teaching of learning
assimilate, organize, and make sense of
strategies).
information. Examples of information
processing styles would include Claire Weinstein at the University of
characteristic learning strategies, Texas – Austin (Weinstein and Mayer,
metacognitive approaches, or critical 1986) has, indeed, provided evidence that
thinking skills. These styles are, to some learning strategies and metacognition can
degree, determined by personality styles. not only be taught but that the teaching of
Furthermore, they contribute to student them can improve student performance. Her
preferences for instructional environment work has been central to our understanding
and presentation. They function, therefore, of information processing styles.
Page 4 of 8Information on the teaching of &Mueller. 1987) are among the best known
learning strategies through special courses examples of study skills assessments
can be obtained by contacting the Cognitive instruments. As Bliss and Mueller point out,
Learning Strategies Project at the University however, what students report as appropriate
of Texas (University Station, Austin, TX study skills are not, necessarily, the same
78712).Kurfiss (1988) has also provided a skills they actually apply to studying.
guide to the integrating of critical thinking Fortunately, both knowledge of study skills
skills into disciplinary courses. techniques as well as study skills behaviors
are modifiable through instruction.
A variety of measures exist for
assessing information processing styles. The Instructional Preference
Learning and Study Strategies Inventory The outer layer of the onion
(Weinstein, Schulte, & Palmer, 1987), the represents students’ preferences for various
Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal subjects, modes of instruction, and learning
(Watson & Glaser, 1980), and the Cornell environments as well as students’
Test of Critical Thinking Ability (Ennis & expectations of learning. Discussions with
Millmanin, 1962) are among the best known practitioners suggest that these
of these instruments. Each of these characteristics are the ones they most
instruments can be administered to frequently associate with the term learning
individuals or groups. Furthermore, styles. In reality, however, these
specialized training is not required to characteristics are only the most external
administer and interpret them. reflection of a complex interaction between
In addition to critical thinking and personality styles and information
metacognition, study skills may also be processing styles. They are also the least
considered to be a part of the family of stable of all learning styles characteristics.
characteristics associated with information There is some evidence to suggest
processing skills. As in critical thinking and that students learn better when taught
metacognitive strategies, study skills may according to their instructional and
also be measured through a variety of environmental preferences (Byrne, Hattie, &
instruments. The Survey of Study Habit and
Fraser, 1986; Canfield, 1986). Furthermore,
Attitudes (Brown & Holtzman, 1967) and gathering information on learning styles
the Study Behavior Inventory (Bliss
Page 5 of 8preferences may help instructors identify skills more rapidly. On the other hand, the
those students who might have difficulty stronger developmental student or those who
with their particular mode of instruction and have already mastered more basic skills
enable them to provide assistance in might be better served by teaching in a
advance. There is also some evidence to variety of instructional modes.
suggest that simply knowing their own In either case, the assessment of
learning styles contributes to student
instructional preferences does offer a variety
comfort in the learning environment of benefits to developmental instructions.
(Rabianski-Carriuolo, 1989). Among the best known measures of
At present, there are two schools of instructional preference are the Canfield
thought regarding the use of learning Learning Style Inventory (Canfield, 1986)
preferences information for instruction. and the Learning Style Inventory (Kolb,
Canfield (1986) suggests that instructors can 1986). Both of these inventories provide a
improve learning by adjusting their relatively quick and simple way of assessing
instructional activities to accommodate students’ preferences for learning
individual’s student’s learning styles. environments and modalities.
McCarthy (1982) suggests that, instead of
Cultural Styles
teaching directly to individual learning style,
In addition to those styles of
instructors should deliberately and
learning and cognition included in Curry’s
systematically teach in a variety of modes.
(1985) framework, it is possible that another
This enables students to learn in their own
set of styles may also exist. While research
preferred style some of the time while
on this is, as yet, limited (Anderson, 1988;
forcing them to learn in other styles the rest
Decker, 1983; Hilliard, 1989), there is some
of the time, thereby creating more flexible
speculation that different cultural groups
learners.
may have different learning styles and
For the practice of developmental preferences indigenous to their particular
education, both schools of thought may have culture. It is possible that a particular
their place. The very weakest development cultural or ethnic group may have
students may be best served by instructors experiences, mores, or shared values that
keyed directly to their learning preferences. cause them to prefer certain types of
This might enable them to master basic
Page 6 of 8learning experiences or to approach learning c) some attributes are more stable than
in particular ways. others;
There is evidence (Anderson, 1988; d) students do tend to learn better when
Shade, 1982) that some ethnic groups are material is presented in a manner
more likely to prefer different learning consistent with their preferences;
experiences or to relate to learning in e) students can become more flexible
different ways than others. Whether these
learners when material is presented in a
differences are based on personality variety of different ways; and
characteristics, information processing
f) some cultural groups may have
styles, or instructional preferences or
particular styles or preferences unique
whether the represent an entirely different
to their particular.
“layer of the onion,” such as socio-economic
background, is not yet known. They It is probably not possible to assess
represent yet another area for further every student on every dimension of
research. learning styles. Similarly, it is equally
impossible to teach each student according
Conclusion
to his or her preferred mode of learning.
It is hoped that the framework for
What developmental educators can
categorizing types of learning styles is not a
do is to determine whatever dimension of
monolithic concept. Instead it is an
learning styles is most consistent with their
umbrella term describing several aspects of
programs and services and use the
human personalities, processing styles, and
appropriate instruments accordingly. If no
preferences. In order to implement learning
follow-up is available, for instance, it would
styles assessment and use the resulting
probably be pointless to administer the
information properly, it is important to
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Myers &
understand that:
Briggs, 1985) or the Embedded Figures Test
a) different instruments measure entirely (Witkin et al., 1977) for any purpose other
different attributes of learning; than discussion. If a particular course is
b) some attributes are more amenable to required to be taught in a particular way, it
modification through instruction than would be equally pointless to administer the
others; Canfield Learning Styles Inventory
Page 7 of 8(Canfield, 1976) for any purpose other than critically and use more sophisticated
discussion. strategies.
In the absence of more research on the References
subject, developmental educators are Anderson, J. (1988). Cognitive styles and
probably best served by doing five things.
multicultural populations. Journal of
First, the should read the technical manual
Teacher Education, 39 2-9.
thoroughly for any instrument they are
considering for use. Second, they should (ugh these references suck ass!)
take the instrument themselves. Third, they
should choose a learning styles instrument
that they understand and discuss the results
with students in such a way as to promote
the students’ understanding of their own
learning. Fourth, they should deliberately
and systematically use as many different
types of learning activities as possible in
their classes. Fifth, they should attempt to
integrate training in critical thinking,
learning strategies, and metacognition into
their classes.
Although these five actions may not
improve the performance of all students,
they will make it more likely that students
will understand the consequences of their
own styles of learning. They will make it
possible for students to learn according to
their own preferences more often than would
be the case with any single mode of
instruction. Finally, they will improve the
likelihood that students will think more
Page 8 of 8You can also read
