Pro By Anna Baldwin

Learning Styles 1 Running Head: Learning Styles: Optimizing Student Learning

Learning Styles: Optimizing Student Learning Anna E. Baldwin University of Montana C&I 510

Learning Styles 2

Famous polymath Goethe cautioned, “Treat people as if they were what they ought to be and you help them to become what they are capable of being.” Most educators would agree that is their mission: to instruct students and in doing so, to help them reach their academic and personal potentials. Yet according to proponents of learning styles, much of formal education ignores the individual needs of students. Teachers present material in ways that are less accessible to students than is optimal and ways that assess their learning in inappropriate ways as well. Learning styles, the ways students are predisposed to learn best, should be implemented in educational environments to capitalize on students’ strengths and optimize their classroom achievements. The concept of learning styles is grounded in the indisputable fact that all humans are different. Not only do we look, sound, and act distinct from one another, but we learn in different ways. Some people receive and process visual information more easily than they do auditory information; others are deductive thinkers rather than inductive. Dr. Rita Dunn, one of the foremost scholars in the field of learning styles, believes that teachers need to match their instruction to students’ learning styles, although students must know their own styles first (Koch, 2007). Dunn and Dunn propose 21 learning style elements categorized into five distinct groups: environmental, emotional, sociological, physiological, and psychological (Dunn and Dunn). According to critics Coffield, Moseley, Hall, and Ecclestone (2004), Dunn attributes 60% of people’s learning styles to genetics. Other learning styles theoreticians have developed different models, including Kolb’s four-stage model, which describes a process of four stages: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation (David); and Gardner’s famous multiple intelligences, a series of eight strengths: linguistic,

Learning Styles 3

logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalist (Gardner, 1983). The list of theoreticians and those who have expanded on their forebears’ ideas goes on. Beyond simply identifying one’s learning style, these proponents argue that effective teachers match their instruction to their students’ preferences or modalities. In an interview with Dr. Rita Dunn, Koch (2007) relates her words about her own approach to instruction, which one could assume she would advocate for all teachers: “So when I am teaching, I’ve got multisensory materials. I start globally. I tell them what my style is. I am collegial versus authoritative with different students. I never ask just for term papers, I mean that’s ridiculous.” She advocates multiple kinds of assignments for her students to show what they know in the method most suitable for them. Likewise, Gardner (1997) generalizes that assessments must reflect the kind of learning students are doing; if the classroom is student-centered, “it does no good to have the same kind of multiple-choice tests we had 50 or 100 years ago” – rather, assessment should be performance- or product-oriented and public. Taking this logic a step further, Gardner might say that assessment should also reflect students’ strengths. Other scholars take a different angle on learning styles. Pewewardy (2002) acknowledges learning styles but rejects the idea that they are genetic. Rather, he grounds his argument in Vygotsky’s theory that all learning is socially constructed (Kozulin, Gindis, Ageyev, & Miller, 2003) and posits that students’ learning styles are shaped by their cultural background. He claims that “certain generalizations based on research can be made regarding the impact of culture on learning styles of American Indian/Alaska Native students” (Pewewardy, 2002). Specifically, these cultural differences arise from societal organization and priorities; the author claims that these students “have distinct cultural values, such as conformity to authority and respect for elders, taciturnity, strong tribal social hierarchy,” and so on. These deeply rooted values and

Learning Styles 4

cultural beliefs affect students’ approach to traditional public school, argues Pewewardy, because they can create obstacles to participation structure. While understanding learning styles may be important to cultural exchange of knowledge, they may also play a role in transmission of knowledge in specific fields of study. Felder & Silverman (1988) studied engineering education and the match-up, or lack thereof, between teaching styles and learners’ preferences. For example, they claimed that most engineering students are sensors, meaning they prefer “facts, data, and experimentation,” while most professors are intuitors who provide lectures on concepts, favoring intuitive learners – not sensors. In a more familiar example, the authors explored visual vs. auditory learning. They said that “most people of college age and older are visual, while most college teaching is verbal.” They claim that these mismatches lead to the loss of potentially brilliant engineers to the field because of student frustration during the educational process. The authors provide 13 suggestions that engineering professors should add to their repertoire of teaching techniques in order to meet all their students’ needs. Such helpful suggestions include “Provide a balance of concrete information …and abstract concepts”; “Use pictures, schematics, graphs, and simple sketches liberally before, during, and after the presentation of verbal material”; and “Do not fill every minute of class time lecturing and writing on the board.” Presumably, these authors have experienced successes with their emphasis on meeting students’ needs regarding their learning styles. Other authors tell of their own accomplishments in other fields and grade levels. In one case described by Dunn & DeBello (1999), 27 students who failed algebra II at a Texas high school were placed in a total learning-styles class, where they studied algebra using their own strengths; the results of the TAAS, which was the gateway to a diploma, demonstrated the power of the learning-styles approach: 100% of the senior class passed the TAAS math examination. Another example showcases a middle school teacher in

Learning Styles 5

Oakland who used learning styles in her class to help her students reach their potential in reading. To be relevant to current and future classroom education, learning-styles approaches have to keep up with technology. In one fascinating study, Özpolat and Akar (2009) devised a method to detect learning styles electronically so that a researcher using the program would enter search keywords and identify further subtopics from the information returned; these responses are then processed through a series of conversion tables until a learner profile is created. “The abovementioned process is done for each learner only at their first log on to the system as an offline process. Then, in the consecutive logons of the same learner, his learner model based on his learning characteristics is used to return the learner most effective and suitable results for his submitted generic query” (p. 357). Further research shows many more similar studies in progress. What about online course formats and learning styles? Diaz and Cartnal (1999) summarize the situation: “There is not an overabundance of research in the area of learning styles and distance education. Most of the studies focus on the discovery of relationships between learning styles and specific student achievement outcomes: drop rate, completion rate, attitudes about learning, and predictors of high risk.” However, they also note some findings of other studies: face-to-face students tend to be collaborative and more interested in being a good class citizen, while online students tended to think conceptually and prefer to work independently. Other studies and monographs (Diaz & Cartnal, 1999; Papp, 2001; Florida Center, 2009) suggest that learning styles inventories be used to counsel students whether to take online or face-to-face courses. Learning styles have long been a part of educational theory and continue to hold significance for all teachers and students. In order to optimize learning for students, teachers

Learning Styles 6

should pay close attention to their students’ needs and preferences as evidenced by results of learning styles inventories frequently used, including those designed by Kolb and Dunn & Dunn. Doing so will enable educators to help their students achieve their potential.

Learning Styles 7

References Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. London: The Learning and Skills Research Centre. David Kolb's learning styles model and experiential learning theory (ELT). Retrieved November 28, 2009, from http://www.businessballs.com/kolblearningstyles.htm Diaz, D. P., & Cartnal, R. B. (1999). Students' learning styles in two classes: Online distance learning and equivalent on-campus. College Teaching 47(4), 130-135. The Dunn and Dunn learning style model of instruction. UCLA. Retrieved November 27, 2009, from http://www.ethica.dk/doc_uflash/The%20Dunn%20and%20Dunn%20Learning %20Style%20Model%20of%20Instruction.htm Dunn, R. & DeBello, T. C. (1999). Improved test scores, attitudes, and behaviors in America’s schools: Supervisors’ success stories. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey. Felder, R. M. & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78, 674-681. Florida Center for Instructional Technology. (2009). A teacher’s guide to distance learning. Retrieved November 29, 2009 from http://fcit.usf.edu/distance/chap1.htm Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1997). Interview. Retrieved November 28, 2009 from http://www.edutopia.org/howard-gardner-interview Koch, K. (2007). A conversation with Dr. Rita Dunn. Institute for Learning Styles Journal. 1. Retrieved November 28, 2009, from http://www.auburn.edu/~witteje/ilsrj/Journal

Learning Styles 8

%20Volumes/Volume1Fall2007%20PDFs/Conversation%20with%20Dr.%20Rita %20Dunn.pdf Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V., & Miller, S., Eds. (2003). Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context. New York: Cambridge University Press. Özpolat, E. and Akar, G. (2009). Automatic detection of learning styles for an e-learning system. Ankara, Turkey: Middle East Technical University. Papp, R. (2001). Student learning styles and distance learning. International Academy for Information Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED474077) Pewewardy, C. (2002). Learning styles of American Indian/Alaska Native students: A review of the literature and implications for practice. Journal of American Indian Education. 41. Retrieved November 27, 2009 from http://jaie.asu.edu/v41/V41I3A2.pdf