Learning style theory in post secondary education - Research Paper Example

? Number: LEARNING STYLE THEORY IN POST SECONDARY EDUCATION Empirical support for the use oflearning styles theory in post-secondary education. A learning style refers to the approach of educating an individual that presumably allows such an individual to acquire the best education. The ideology of learning styles can be considered somewhat not yet established deduction regarding the observation that there is an exhibition of preference by many, over certain interactions of learning compared to others. Taking such a concept, the ideology of personalized "learning styles" was realized and afterwards popularized by the renowned “Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligence Model” (Jackson, 2005). There are many types of the models used in the implementation of learning styles. The occurrence of the auditory learning style involves the art of listening to the spoken word. The other model is the Kinesthetic learning that occurs via acting and interacting. Eventually, the visual learning involves looking at mind-maps, images, body language and demonstrations. The theory of learning models aims at explaining why school grades, classroom performance, and aptitude tests often than not, fail in identifying ones real ability (Sternberg, 1991). The Learning Style Profiler is a new measurement by Professor Chris Jackson that aimed at implementing a neuropsychological learning model in personality. The approach argues that Sensation Seeking presents a key biological motivation of learning, exploration and curiosity. He notes that a high exploration drive results in consequences of dysfunctional learning. Evidence regarding this argument alleges impression although it is yet to be verified through independent research (Jackson, 2005). As early as the 70s, a research body on learning conducted a holistic exploration, active perspective of strategies and approaches – in contrast to styles – which accounts for the previous events’ effects, contextual feelings and experiences. This research body based in the UK has been operation for a period of twenty five years, drawing on the contributions of Marton and Saljo and Pask , additionally, from Northern Europe, there is a renowned model of learning, Vermunt’s is used. Vermunt’s model is referred to as the Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS). The model is influential especially in the institution of higher education (Vermunt, 1994). The ILS models in its broader view states that, learners are highly influenced by the contextual and strategies; there resultant is a multifaceted perspective of teaching. The ILS emphasis motivates a pedagogy approach that is broad thus encompassing institutional culture, subject discipline , previous experience of students’ and the manner of organizing and assessing the curriculum. Every other theory belonging to this learning family tend to elevate ‘styles’ as they favor ‘approaches’ and ‘strategies’ since past ideologies regarding styles improved the ideology of particular interventions with an intention of to matching existing styles or encouraging a styles’ repertoire (Honey & Mumford, 1992). The Entwistle’s model features a strategy describing the manner in which learners decide to address a particular task of learning. By adopting such a strategy, they account for the perceived demands. The approach is thus less fixed compared to a style; a style tends to be a wider characterization of the manner in which students show general preference in tackling tasks of learning (Entwistle, 1998). Some of the general support of ILS is that the application is on learning and thinking of students in the university. It implements new versions used in preparing for learning at work as well as 16–18 age group students. The approach is featured in studying various styles of learning for both the students and teachers themselves. Regarding the design of the model, the approach can be described as an experientially grounded approach that involved interviewing of students. The model seeks in the metacognitive, cinative, cognitive and affective processes. Additionally, there is the inclusion of learning motivation, strategies, and preferences essential in the organization of information. The model displays validity and reliability and can therefore be used in assessing approaches involved in the validity and reliability of learning. Additionally, the model indicates a high degree of contextual independence, implying that a learning style can be viewed as the interplay of contextual and personal influences. The art of providing a common language which would facilitate mutual communication between teachers and students in order to engage in a discussion that would amount to promoting significant changes in the system of teaching and learning. The approach does not emphasize on personal differences, rather on the overall teaching–learning contextual environment. The Creative Brain, a contribution by Hermann presents numerous detailed and constructive suggestions significant for expanding preferences of the mind through the change of the reference frames in terms of reasoning, values, and decision making. Hermann claims that there might be a resistance in the process of shifting the opposing modes, although the effort can potentially provide enormous pressure, resulting in an advance creative mental capacity. Additionally, the realized mental capacity tends to be interesting and varied (Herrmann, 1989). Hermann describes a new approach of the ‘whole brain’ and how that concept relates to both the learning and teaching processes and how it seemed to significantly benefit a company with a large client base, based in the UK. Although there were indications of impressed performance of the Herrmann Group as well as the documentation of a six page testimonial emerging from various participants involved in Applied Creative Thinking fields, the outstanding issue was a limited evidenced that had been published in order to convince sceptic people regarding the capabilities of the Need Herrmann’s approach for extensive use in especially for post-16 training and education. However, Need Hermann’s model indicates an optimistic and inclusive stance as well as the fact that the approach is not dependent on suspicious techniques places it on a very positive end (Hermann, 1989). Often, any that any two-dimensional or four-category model of approaches to learning and thinking tend to be over-simplistic to meet accomplish certain purposes. Herrmann being aware of the attribute and thus he avoids the attempt of labeling or confining individuals or even organizations. Positively, he encourages growth as well as significant growth; these could be for short-term purposes that are adaptive, or for the overall longer term, based on the advancements in attitudes and values. With the use of his model in collaboration with the HBDI, Need Herrmann has made a provision for a space of creativity that is already enriched via “empirically-checked revisions.” To conclude on this point, his contribution certainly calls for further research work in order for it to be featured with an extensive integration of less experienced, younger, as well as semiliterate post-16 learners, compared to those available at higher ranks of accountability in the world of business. Empirically, there are sound reasons that would make one support the recommendation of the application of the HBDI, be it from the individual’s perspective or a collective one, concerning preferences of learning and thinking. HBDI shows more detailing of evidence and is also focused on situations than any other approach used in the same domain. The model accommodates numerous constructs known for receipt of less reliable, incomplete and valid coverage while applying other instruments. The model by Need Herrmann concerns thinking, doing and feeling, individually and in a social context. The scope of the approach covers the personality traits and long-established habits as well as preferences that are situational. As the model concerns the process instead of the product, one can thus state that the model is extensively independent while referring to the ability of cognition. There is a possibility of causing considerable advantages which can be acquired through the use of the model by course designers and policy-makers. Other institutions that would be interested in such benefits include the various organizations concerning education and training. Notably, the art of designing and delivering long-lasting learning experiences might therefore more effectively improve ‘whole organization’ ‘whole person’ and strike a balance. The other positive feature of HBDI (Hermann’s Brain Dominance Instrument) is that it is used as transparent instrument and that it should be excluded while making decisions regarding an individual with the control beyond that person (Herrmann, 1989). Additionally, the HBDI can be featured as a tool for teaching, to be used in a climate with the attributes of trust and openness. However, like any other tool (for example Honey, Kolb’s LSI, McCarthy’s 4MAT, and Mumford’s LSQ), the HBDI’s potential in improving the value learning and teaching, formal and informal, is not yet rigorously substantiated, above its proponents’ satisfaction. CSI is a model developed by Christopher Allinson and John Hayes after they identified factors of ‘action’ and ‘analysis’. They faced challenges with many existing approaches of cognitive measuring, single dimension with intuition and analysis at the counter-extremes. The initial applicability of the CSI was in the organizational contexts of adults, as well as a tool for research nationally and internationally. Studies on different people from different cultures have been conducted, with the facilitation of respective translations for example the Finnish (Allinson & Hayes, 2000). The two contributors perceive intuition-analysis to be most fundamental measurement of cognition. The experiment involved the 38 CSI items in order to display their belief; intuition, which is the future of the orientation of the right-brain. Additionally, intuition refers to the feeling based immediate judgment as well as the manner in which people adopt a global perspective. On the other hand, analysis refers to the orientation feature of the left-brain; mental reasoning and detailed focus form the basis of the judgment analysis. The study on the items indicate that numerous items bear a relationship with behavior considering or not considering the concept of time pressure; some people emphasize on decisive actions instead of the organized action; some people focus on spontaneity instead of than in adhering to the rules; some people concentrate on valuing or ignoring the underlain details; and others tend to be risk takers and risk avoidance. 2. Describe the limitations or concerns with incorporating learning styles-based activities in post-secondary education. While learners usually bear individual preferences regarding the various types of experiences in learning, of their preference, there is yet no achieved research in support of the ideology that one can be somehow referred to belong to a unique "type" of learners’ group. Usually, learners’ preferences depend more on the past individual experience compared to the cognitive differences in individuals. An example would be that of a learner attending a lecture facilitated by one lecturer everyday may therefore get bored by too much art of listening. Such an individual may therefore prefer another model of learning but not through listening to spoken words. On the other hand, a learner with an experience of an engaging lecturer may confidently state that they prefer learning through listening as someone else speaks. Therefore, different people have different preferences in learning methods, although the basis of their preference is not on the acquaintance on a typical righter’s’ group. The learning style, Dunn and Dunn, is amongst the widely-known approaches assessed by Coffield and his team. The style is a VAK model, and is one of the widely used models in learning institutions in the US. Inspite of the extensively large programme of research, there are forceful claims that have been presented regarding this model. Again, the blame was on the absence of supportive studies as well as independently conducted research on this model (Dunn, 1984). A contradicting result was realized in 2005, which sought to confirm the model’s validity of the model Dunn and Dunn. The report concluded that the art of matching students’ with the individually preferred learning-style with instructions which complement the learners indicated an improvement in achievement of their studies as well in their attitudes toward the processes of learning (Dunn, 1984). Coffield and his team did not stop at Dunn Dunn, but he also presents a claim, that Gregorc's Style Delineator (GSD), another learning model, was “psychometrically and theoretically flawed" and thus unsuitable for conducting individual assessment. On top of the absence of valid research, the approach has a feature of labeling learners, a practice that may eventually result into a more destructive situation than it realizes positive results. Theories of learning have also been criticized by professionals with varying thoughts. Some neuroscientists and psychologists have raised questions regarding the scientific foundation upon which these models are assessed. A few psychologists in education hold to the argument; the available evidence is insufficient to prove the efficiency and effectiveness of most of the proposed and adopted models of learning styles. Additionally, these schools of thought argue that most of these models usually rest on theoretical grounds that are dubious. Evidently, there exists a total failure in finding that the practices of assessing various learning styles of do not match with the instructional approaches and thus has no eventual on the students’ learning process (Curry, 1990). Taking the example of ILC, the method generally says little regarding the manner in which personalities interact with such a learning style. Regarding the model’s design, the model indicates exclusion of preferences involved in information representation. The model shows no comprehension, with the absence of the control items of motivation, attention or emotions. The interpersonal environment of learning is also underemphasized an art that might reduce the scope of applicability. Additionally, the model is limited in applicability, in every stage and type of learning. Notably, key notions of ‘destruction’ and ‘construction’ friction are enormously untested. Regarding the evidence of analysis, there is so far little evidence to impact the field of pedagogy. The evidence cannot be used in predicting the outcomes of learning. Although the psychometric features of the HBDI seem to be sound, there is also a pressing call for a current and independent study regarding the HBDI instrument as well as the varying number of uses. Regarding the design of the HBDI (Hermann’s Brain Dominance Instrument) model, similar to numerous self-report generating instruments, there is a possibility of completing the report in order to attain the desired profile. Some people find the model of the HBDI elements hard while reading and in seeking for understanding. Concerning reliability and validity, HBDI, there are minimal independent studies covering the attributes of validity and reliability the model. Taking the implications of the HBDI model as the other parameter, the pedagogical implications concerning the model of the ‘whole brain’ is not yet fully tested and explored. Eventually, the last parameter of the evidence of the impact of HBDI on pedagogy can also help in realizing a limitation of such a theory of learning. Although HBDI is well founded in the world of business, the application of the model is yet to be largely validated in the field of education (Hermann, 1989). Regarding the CSI (Cognitive Style Index) model, the existing relationship between the scores and abilities of cognition need further investigation; a preferred region would be based on a longitude. Students that exhibit intellectually capacity tends to be flexible in thinking as well as learning and can thus adopt an approach that is somewhat analytical, when necessary. Students with good reasoning capacity as well as problem-solving capabilities, they exhibit the creativity, confidence, and the drive which plays a key role in developing an achievers attitude in them. Given all the conditions surrounding the CSI, it is not yet time to do the assessment of the catalytic potential (value) of this model essential in improving the value of learning for organizations or individuals. Although the initial development of the CSI had nothing to do with the pedagogical purposes, future research can potentially indicate that it plays a part in helping people gain more awareness of significant features bestowed in them as well as in other people, thus leading to benefits that can be measured in performance and communication. However, so far, the hypothesis that tends to match is not yet upheld with the CSI for studies, and thus there is an absence of the essential grounds for using CSI in selecting or grouping varying people for varying purposes. Additionally, from the considerably high interest since 1996, the publication year, it is therefore clear that the model is significantly considered a way of presenting pertinent questions regarding the manner in which adults engage their mind in thinking, behave as well as acquire knowledge in the world of employment. 3. Learning experience that you could implement that provided learning in several learning-style areas. The best online learning should exhibit as many positive attributes of theories of learning as possible. However not a single online learning experience fully satisfies learners that use it. Although this is the case, different online learning programmes have tried to incorporate as many beneficial features as possible. The first impression of the learning experience would determine the effectiveness of such a programme currently and in the future. Considering some of the theories of learning discussed above, we can therefore draw some desirable features of an online learning experience, aiming at achieving the best system that serves the learner optimally. The concept of the (Inventory of Learning) ILS features such facets as the institutional culture, subject discipline, previous experience of students’ and the manner of organizing and assessing the curriculum. The ILS models in its broader view states that, learners are highly influenced by the contextual and strategies; there resultant is a multifaceted perspective of teaching (Vermunt, 1994). The institutional culture helps in defining the integrals of a learning institution, in reference to the norms, standards of performance, management history, ethics, the institutional picture both to students and other external viewers. A good online learning platform of choice should display a positive institutional culture, particularly of performance. Additionally, in accordance to the ILS model, the strategies of the learning context that I would implement would feature strategies that are easily understood, and whose processing is easy and can be done online (Vernmunt, 1994). The art of executing an online curriculum should be standardized to ensure that the scope of the studies as outlined helps the learners accomplish the desired qualifications, skills, and knowledge. The scope of every curriculum in every discipline should be easy to understand and the resources required for studies be made available to every student with the account with the institution supporting the online education. Students who have utilized more than online system tend to be more informed and thus they are able to not when the system is excellent, underperforming or is misrepresenting the institution in any way. Such learners do not need lots of directions on how to navigate or use the online facilitated study guides. They ca n therefore optimize from the online system and thus excelling better than first timers to the online system. However, one of the problems of such students with past experiences is that they tend to have a perception that a given system of learning should display, and failure to that they may consider quitting or just develop a poor learning attitude towards the studies delivered by the institution that hosts the online system. Students value the contextual attribute of a system and thus the system whose context is friendly in access; that in uploading and downloading materials and class work. The student should access all content that is rightful to access as a learner. If the student is doing an exam online, the system should display integrity as expected. Borrowing the idea of Need Herrmann, the online learning platform that I would prefer implementing should avoid the attempt of labeling or confining individuals or even organizations. The platform should seek to motivate learners to grow in every aspect of life, and especially in matters pertaining studies. The system should accommodate first timers as well as the experienced learners. The learner should use the platform with an attitude of achieving growth, both for short-term or long-term purposes. Such advancements basically depend on attitude and the value of the contextual aspect of learning (Hermann, 1994). The platform should also help learners realize their individual values as well as appreciating the value of other people and thus attaining the overall growth. With the use of his model in collaboration with the HBDI, Need Herrmann has made a provision for a space of creativity that is already enriched via “empirically-checked revisions.” The learning platform should also motivate creativity in providing interaction sites that involve the exchange of ideas between the system developers and/or administration, and the learner on the consuming end. Additionally, the HBDI can be used as a learning tool, to be used in a climate with the attributes of trust and openness. A learner should own the privacy of the setting due to him/her and that provision should not be interfered with. Every detail that the user hosts on the system should be kept concealed per the privacy terms of operation of the platform. Neither the administrator nor the fellow students should access privately maintained information on an online learning platform. This attribute displays trust in the system and in the organization that supports it the online learning system. The other attribute is transparency as displayed by the HBDI theory of learning. The way that a given learner sees the system from a certain region should be the same way that another learner sees the same system despite the geographical distance between such learners. The degree of applicability should be uniform. Additionally, the action of another user of the system should not affect the activities of another learner accessing the same at the system. Borrowing the idea of CSI, intuition refers to the feeling based immediate judgment, as well as the manner in which people adopt a global perspective. On the other hand, analysis refers to the orientation feature of the left-brain; mental reasoning and detailed focus form the basis of the judgment analysis. The online learning platform should also take into account the concept of CSI, regarding intuition and analysis. Despite the fact that we are all humans, there are various reasons that makes do things the way we do. The conviction that gives such a drive could be a resultant of the two factors mentioned above. The decision that a learner would reach at in judging the online learning platform would based on either on analysis or intuition. For learners who exhibit intuitive judgments, their decision is based on mere feeling. In order to accommodate such user groups, I would develop and implement a system that is friendly even in the combination of colors and the organization of various links, figures, and access routes such as logins. A poor combination of colors may render some elements and materials invisible. It may also scare selective users, yet they are needed as the key stakeholders of the organization. If the first few materials that a first timer accesses on the system did not satisfy, they may opt out in a feeling the content is poor. It is also paramount to get the views of different users of the online system to ensure that optimum implementation is done in order to serve the end user sufficiently. If a user informs of a fault with the system, it is not my work to defend the system, but I would reassess the point of that user. For the sake of the learners that tend to be analytical in passing judgments on issues like the online learning platform, it is wise to open to criticism, of which may or may not be essential. If a judgment is justifiable, then as the developer I would ensure that the fault is corrected. If the user is questioning the credibility of the published materials, then it would be good to provide even some free downloads for personal studies for better understanding. The occurrence of the auditory learning style involves the art of listening to the spoken word. The other model is the Kinesthetic learning that occurs via acting and interacting. Some students prefer listening than reading. In order to ensure that this group of learners is accommodated by the online learning programme, it would be great then to provide lectures in audio formats, all hosted and ready for downloading. This would help in ensuring that no a single group of learners is left out. On the other hand, students who prefer reading textual information more than listening to audio products should also be catered for by providing properly resourced materials, and be hosted on online to be downloaded by such learners wherever they are. Such materials should be prepared with a standard format of information to avoid incompatibilities on the user’s side while reading the material downloaded, from the home. Timely posting and accessing of learning materials should be emphasized to avoid inconveniencies of any sort. Every theory of learning tries to better the learners’ habits of its group member. Although self assessment may tend to indicate that some theories do not apply to some individuals, the overall intent of these approaches is to motivate everyone to study, and ensure that the value of the education obtained is of the standards qualities. In order to achieve an online learning system, the concept of technological integration would also have also act as a drive. The integration of technology does not only involve the realization of the essential computer skills, rather it also involves a process through which students access, try, fail, analyze, evaluate, and apply operations including though not limited to research work, data analyses, knowledge application and representation, collaboration as well as communication. Therefore, the technological integration into education implies that the technology is utilized as a teaching tool for the subject discipline, to promote approaches of problem-solving as well as cultivating skills of a higher order of thinking. This is not computer literacy or computer awareness. The implication is the use of computer as the best medium of supporting the goal of gaining knowledge. This calls for necessary changes in a learning institution. The range of stakeholders involved is the students, community of the school, teachers, administrators, and parents; all these parties have to comply with the idea that computers refers to an integral of daily school life (Scheffler & Logan, 1999). A computers’ social network, including the ones used by organizational support, teachers from the district resources and school consist of the paramount elements whose contribution is experienced in realizing a healthy integration of information technology (Becker, 1994). Regarding technology and mostly the information technology, is most significant in learning and teaching when teachers adopt it as a teaching tool into daily classroom practice as well as into the curricula of the subject-matter. Technological integration practices form the only approaches through which the idealistic and aspired technological claims can be realized (Collins, 1991). The above concept calls for readily as well as flexibly integrating technologies into daily practice in compliance to the subject discipline they teach. Technological incorporating would therefore involve actively engaging in learning, not to be overdependence on the instruction of the whole-group, and encouraging independence as well as self-motivation learning (Hadley & Sheingold, 1993). References: Allinson, C.W., & Hayes, C.J. (2000). Cross-national differences in cognitive style: implications for management. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(1), 161–170. Becker, H. J. (1994). How exemplary computer-using teachers differ from other teachers: Implications for realizing the potential of computers in schools. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26, 291-321. Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre. Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre. Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre. Collins, A. (1991). The role of computer technology in restructuring schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 28-36. Curry, L. (1990). One critique of the research on learning styles. Educational Leadership, 48, 50-56. Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G. E. (1984). Learning style inventory. Lawrence, K.S., USA: Price Systems. Entwistle. N. (1988). Styles of learning and teaching. London: David Fulton. Hadley, M., & Sheingold, K. (1993). Commonalties and distinctive patterns in teachers’integration of computers. American Journal of Education, 101, 261- 315. Herrmann. N. (1989). The creative brain. North Carolina: Brain Books, The Ned Hermann Group. Herrmann, N. (1996). The whole brain business book. New York: McGraw-Hill. Heffler, B. (2001). Individual learning style and the Learning Style Inventory. Educational Studies, 27(3), 307–316. Honey, P. & Mumford, A. (1992). The manual of learning styles. Maidenhead: Peter Honey Publications. Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (2000). The learning styles helper’s guide. Maidenhead: Peter Honey Publications Ltd. Jackson, C. J. (2005). An applied neuropsychological model of functional and dysfunctional learning: Applications for business, education, training and clinical psychology. Cymeon: Australia. Sternberg, R.J & Wagner, R.K. (1991). MSG Thinking Styles Inventory. Unpublished manual. Vermunt, J.D. (1994). Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS) in higher education. Tilburg: University of Tlburg. Read More