Transcript Learning Styles and Generational Differences

Learning Styles:
Myth or Reality?
Jolly Holden, Ed.D.
Associate Professor, School of Education
American InterContinental University
Online Flash Presentation available at:
http://www.fgdla.us/fgdla_salt_conf_presentations.html
Why Are You Here?
Opinion: The concept of learning styles in predicting
learning outcomes is probably the most misunderstood and
misapplied instructional concept confronting educators and
trainers today.
Fact: Research has revealed that learning styles have little, if
any, effect on predicting learning outcomes. In fact, there is no
evidence that instructors succeed in improving learning by
attempting to diagnose student learning styles, and adjusting
instruction accordingly for the individual students.
Result: So why is there so much discussion on them and why
are they still widely perceived as having an effect?
Goals of This Presentation
Inform--What are learning styles and how do they differ from
learning modalities?
Educate--What does the research indicate? The facts based
on research, not Google.
Enlighten—So what? Why so much confusion? What can
trainers/instructional designers do to facilitate the transfer of
learning?
Do You Know Your Learning Style?
Are you a…
 Converger; diverger; assimilator; accommodator (Kolb’s
learning styles inventory)
 Concrete sequential; abstract random; abstract sequential;
concrete random (Gregorc’s learning style topography)
 Sensory/intuitive; visual/verbal; active/reflective;
sequential/global (Felder & Solomon four-dimension model)
 Activists; reflectors; pragmatists; theorists (Honey & Mumford's
learning styles)
 Messick: Analytic/non-analytic; conceptualizing
 Convergent/divergent thinking (Guilford’s model of intellect)
 Field dependent/field independent (Witkin’s cognitive styles)
 Visual, aural, kinesthetic (Dunn & Dunn VAK learning styles)
Presentation Menu
(Click any of the hyperlinks to go directly to that topic)






The “So What”
The Debate
What are Learning Styles?
• What are Learning Modalities?
• What’s the Difference?
• The Learning Style Hypothesis
• Review of the Research
• What Does it All Mean & What Can I Do?
What Do the Experts Say?
Cognitive Styles
Learning/Cognitive Style Resources
Prior Return Next
slide to Menu slide
Insight [and research] into
Learning Styles
• A recent study published in the Psychological Science in the
•
Public Interest challenged the prevailing concept of learning
styles and their affect on student performance. The
investigators (four prominent cognitive psychologists) found
“no evidence…for validating the educational applications of
learning styles into general educational practice.”
To that end, in a 2010 article appearing in the Australian
Journal of Educational Research stated “research conducted
over the last 40 years has failed to show that individual
attributes can be used to guide effective teaching practice”.
This is not surprising…these results and conclusions have been
supported repeatedly in the research for the past 30 years.
So What?
• This is not a new debate but a continuing investigation into the
•
•
efficacy of learning styles that has spanned 60 years.
To that end, there is a strong intuitive appeal to the notion
there are individual preferences and styles of learning.
That said, we’re not going to solve the problem today, but… at
the end of this presentation, you will better understand the
concept of learning styles, the reliability and variability of
the instruments used to identify them, and impact [or lack
thereof] on learning.
Given the Research, Why the Debate?
You can thank Google for that…the Google “effect” blurs one’s
perception when attempting to distinguish valid research from lore.
Google search results
Search terms
learning styles
“learning styles”
“learning styles” (site:com)
“learning styles” (site:org)
“learning styles” (site:edu)
Results
>37,000,000
>13,500,000
~4,990,000
~840,000
~380,000
Note: Google can only search the WWW…it cannot search the deep web.
The majority of research data is only available on the deep web.
What Google Doesn’t Know
and Can’t Find: The Deep Web
Now, let’s see what a comprehensive, university library database
reveals when searching the Deep Web. Note: Google currently indexes
~23.5 billion out of the 300+ billion pages out there...less than 8% of all
available internet content. The other 92% is located in the deep web.
Search terms
learning styles
cognitive styles
Results
5,608
950
This university library has the capability to search thousands of databases
comprising over 18,000 peer reviewed (refereed) journals encompassing
~1,464,000 annual journal articles in specific disciplines from the past 2
decades. The total articles searched exceeds 28,000,000.
What are Learning Styles?



Basically, learning styles refers to the concept that individuals
differ in regard as to what specific mode in acquiring
information is most effective for them, and that learning styles
are not a fixed trait, but a differential preference for learning.
However, learning style definitions are characterized by
considerable conceptual confusion and the lack of any
generally accepted definition.
Many educational/cognitive psychologists believe learning
styles are a myth…that while individual differences in learning
exists, they are a result of acquired/innate preferences but do
not affect learning anymore than the truck delivering groceries
to your local store affects your dietary habits.
What are Learning Modalities?



Learning, or perceptual modalities, are sensory based and
refer to the primary way our bodies take in information
though our senses: visual (seeing), auditory (hearing),
kinesthetic (moving), and tactile (touching).
Humans are multi-sensory in that the brain performs several
activities at once when processing information (e.g., tasting
and smelling, hearing and seeing), but are processed through
different channels in our brain.
While the brain processes wholes and part simultaneously,
learning engages the whole body.
Note: Multi-sensory processing is not the same as multi-tasking (partial
tasking) in that the brain is not very good at multi-tasking, per se, attempting to
perform multiple tasks simultaneously.
What’s the Difference?
• Not surprisingly, there is substantial confusion between
•
•
learning styles and learning modalities where the terms are
often used interchangeably.
One of the reasons is the complexity of how the human brain
functions as it relates to one’s modalities in receiving
information (visual, aural, kinesthetic) and how the brain
processes that information (cognition).
An important finding from that research is that retention is
generally independent of the modality used to acquire
whatever is learned.
What’s the Difference?
• You typically store memories in terms of meaning-- not in
•
•
•
terms of whether you saw (visual), heard (aural), or physically
(tactile/kinesthetic) interacted with the information.
To that end, our brain is constantly searching its memory for
context based on prior knowledge/experience.
In the absence of visual cues, our brains create “mental
pictures” based upon our schema to add context to what is
printed/spoken. Click here for an example.
The fact is, we don’t learn based upon style…we learn based
upon meaning (context). Click here for a example.
The Essence of the Debate
[and the disagreement]

Learning style theorists look at how students learn, not what
they learned.
•
•
Based upon information acquisition theory of multimedia learning
which holds that learning consists of receiving information
Assumes people learn by adding information to memory, “as if the
mind were an empty vessel that needs to be filled with information”
(Clark & Mayer, E-learning and the Science of Instruction, 3rd Ed., 2011)

By emphasizing the how of instruction, learning styles
practitioners lose sight of the what of instruction and tend to
“profile” learners based upon perception.
Note: Neuroscience has estimated 85% of the human brain is wired to process
visual information, and that 90% of what the brain processes is visual
information, so one’s primary learning modality is visual.
The Essence of the Debate
[and the disagreement]

No current holistic [overall] theory of learning preferences.
•
The point being that what is commonly referred to as learning
styles, others have labeled as cognitive styles, learning
preferences, learning capabilities, cognitive control, multiple
intelligences, etc.
• Not supported by available research evidence that
“visualizers” learn better with visual forms of instruction and
“verbalizers” learn better with verbal modes of instruction.
“Review of 150 studies found none supported learning styles. The mind is so
complex and malleable that variance within a person is so great as to make the
point [learning styles] moot.”
Busted Learning Myths, Chief Learning Officer Magazine, Feb 2012
Predicting Learning Styles: The Basis
of the Theory [and the confusion]

The genesis of the [VAK] theory of learning styles is that if you
can design instruction that matches a student’s “style”, they
should learn better:
•
•
•
The visual learner will understand best when information (content)
is presented to the visually.
The auditory learner will understand best when information is
described to them orally.
The kinesthetic learner will understand best when they can
touch/fell the what is being presented to them.
These are statements of predictability, per se, you are
predicting learning outcomes based upon learning “styles”
Predicting Learning Styles: The Basis
of the Theory [and the confusion]
• The assumption is once you identify a specific style, you can
design instruction that best fits the style.
•
•
However, there is no evidence that knowledge of one’s learning
styles is a benefit to learning.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that instructors succeed in
improving learning by attempting to diagnose student learning
styles, and adjusting instruction accordingly for the individual
students.
The Learning Style Hypothesis:
True or False?
The hypothesis of the learning styles theory is as follows:
Learning is optimal if the learning method is matched to the
student’s learning style. As with any scientific hypothesis, two key
questions should be asked:
1. How would we know the hypothesis is true, or what type of evidence
would show that the hypothesis is true?
2. How would we know the hypothesis is not true, or what type of
evidence would show that the hypothesis is not true?
The Learning Style Hypothesis:
True or False?
“Based upon the most thorough review of experimental studies
known to date, which sought to objectively find answers either in
support of or against the hypothesis described prior, did not
find evidence in favor of the learning styles hypothesis, per se,
that learning is more effective when teaching matches the
learner’s style”.
* Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2008
The theory of learning styles is attractive, and it sounds like common sense. It
is also convenient, offering a rationale of escaping accountability and getting
rid of responsibility.
Learning Styles Fray: Brilliant or Batty? Performance Improvement, Vol49, Number 10 , 2010
What Does the Research Reveal
About Learning Styles?
• Simply stated, the research has not revealed a compelling
•
argument as to the impact of learning styles and their effect
on predicting learning outcomes.
Research does not support designing instruction to match
learning styles.
•
After more than 30 years of research, no consensus has been
reached about the most effective instrument for measuring
learning styles and there is no agreement about the most
appropriate pedagogical interventions.
•
No substantial, uncontested, and hard empirical evidence has been
found to prove that matching the styles of learner and instructor
improves learning and attention.
What Does the Research Reveal
About Learning Styles?
• Postulates learning/cognitive styles have <5% effect on the
•
•
variability in learning.
The majority of research does not support a significant
statistical relationship between learning/cognitive styles and
learning outcomes.
Small sample sizes, flawed sampling methodology, and nonexperimental research designs casts doubt on the results of
VAK learning style research.
Based on several decades of empirical evidence, matching learning activities/
strategies with specific learning styles does not often result in improved learning.
Dr. Allan Jeong, Associate Professor, Dept. of Educational Psychology and Learning
Systems, Florida State University
What Does the Research Reveal
About Learning Styles?
• Low validity and reliability scores of the VAK instruments
•
used to identify specific learning styles raise serious doubts
about their psychometric properties.
In other words, if the tests used to identify learning styles are
not reliable or valid, then any conclusions or results based
upon them are suspect.
•
These tests are not controlled in their distribution and/or
reproduction, or administered under controlled conditions.
What Does the Research Reveal
About Learning Styles?
•
•
•
•
•
Scores on the VAK learning style tests vary greatly among same
individual.
VAK test questions focus on out-of-context preferences which allows
for wide range of interpretations.
Learning style instruments tend to be self-assessments that rely on
students to answer honestly and to have enough self-awareness to
answer accurately.
Intervening variables confound the results
Assessment of learning styles based on sensory modality has no
correlation with learning and memory.
Research reveals that most learning style instruments have such serious
weaknesses (e.g. low reliability & poor validity) it is recommend their use in
research and practice should be discontinued. Investigations of the
properties of a variety of scales have revealed that even the most widely used
are inadequate in this regard. Australian Journal of Education,Vol. 54, No. I, 2010, 5-17
Given the Research,
Why all the Confusion?
• It’ s not surprising the reference to learning styles is one of
the most misunderstood and overused issues confronting
educational and training communities.
• Part of the reason is the wide disparity in the definition of learning
styles and their relationship to cognitive styles.
• Furthermore, there is continued debate as to whether learning
styles even exist, with the only current evidence of their existence
being the tests used to identify them.
• Confusion is further exacerbated in that research has
identified over 71 different types of learning styles (Table 1),
summarized into the 13 most influential models (Table 2), and
families (Table 3).
Cut to the Chase—What Can I Do?


Cognitive science has revealed learners differ in their
abilities with different modalities, but teaching to a learner’s
best modality doesn't affect learning outcomes.
What does matter is whether the learner is taught in the
content's best modality…people learn more when content
drives the choice of modality.
Note: Although neuroscience has revealed 90% of what the brain processes is
visual information, most learners are multi-modal and multi-sensory and adapt
their strategies accordingly.
Design Techniques: Facilitating
the Transfer of Learning

Avoid cognitive overload in multimedia design .



Cognitive Overload Theory focuses on the role of working memory
in instructional design.
Meaningful learning depends on active cognitive processing in
learner’s working memory.
If learners encounter too many elements in the presentation of
multimedia information (animation, graphics, sound, text), working
memory can be overwhelmed
 Result is excessive cognitive load that impedes learning.
Design Techniques: Facilitating
the Transfer of Learning



Integrate cognitive learning strategies into the design of
instructional to facilitate transfer of knowledge (click here for
more)
Review the Cognitive Information Processing model (click
here for more).
Integrate Cognitive Flexibility Theory in design of instruction
(facilitates the acquisition of knowledge).

Accomplished by revisiting the same material, at different times,
in rearranged contexts, and from different conceptual
perspectives.
Design Techniques: Facilitating
the Transfer of Learning

Employ dual-coding theory: When content is presented
through two different channels (visual and auditory),working
memory can be increased (click here for more on dual-coding
theory).
•
•
Adds context to the written/spoken word.
Retention is improved through words and pictures (visual media)
rather than through words alone.
Conclusion
• Learning styles provide no indication of what the students are
•
•
•
capable of, nor are they legitimate excuses for poor academic
performance.
Assume all students have an intrinsic motivation to learn.
Recognize the complexity in learning and that individuals do
learn differently.
Don’t constrain learning by “profiling” (aka categorizing/
labeling) students based on learning styles.
“learning styles‘ theory appeals to the underlying culture's model of the
person ensures the theory's continued survival, despite the evidence
against its utility. Rather than being a harmless fad, learning styles theory
perpetuates the very stereotyping and harmful teaching practices it is
said to combat.” Australian Journal of Education,Vol. 54, No. I, 2010, 5-17
Final Note
 The research on how we learn has generally ignored the
agility of humans in being able to adapt to different learning
environments.
 The research has grossly understated the internal fortitude
of humans to employ multiple learning “preferences” in
their endeavor to learn.
 As educators and trainers, we must never underestimate the
ultimate trump card that represents the single most
important variability in learning…the will to learn.
Research has indicated prior knowledge and intrinsic motivation account for
~70% of the variability in learning.
The End: Questions?
“A man only needs two tools in life: WD-40 to make things go, and duct
tape to make them stop.”
G. M. Weilacher, American humorist
“and a hammer to pound things in and a screw driver to pry them out.”
my wife
Prior Return
slide to Menu
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
What are Cognitive Styles?


Cognitive styles are viewed as a bipolar dimension
representing a person's typical or habitual mode of problem
solving, thinking, perceiving and remembering; are
considered stable over time, and related to theoretical or
academic research.
Cognitive styles primarily focus on cognition and how
information is processed in the brain.
What Does the Research Reveal
About Cognitive Styles?
• The research pertaining to cognitive styles is quite different
•
than learning styles in that the reliability and the validity of
the instruments used to identify them are much more robust.
The most researched cognitive style is Herman Witkin’s Field
Dependence/Field Independence (more on FD/FI here).
•
The test used to identify Field Dependence (FD) and Field
Independence (FI) is the Embedded Figures Test
•
Highly reliable and valid (Cronbach Alpha >80%)
• However, research on cognitive styles has declined in recent
years due to the fuzziness between cognitive styles and
abilities, assumption that cognitive styles are innate while
abilities are acquired.
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Describing and “Seeing” the
Constellation Orion
•
•
Return to main
presentation
•
•
•
The constellations are totally imaginary things that have been made
up over the past 6,000 years . So how would you describe something
imaginary to your students?
You may begin by describing the three bright stars in a row that
form Orion’s belt and the other stars that form his sword.
But your students have trouble “visualizing” how the stars shape the
figure of Orion. To assist them in creating a mental picture, you show
them a star chart of Orion to help them “visualize” this imaginary
figure.
But they still can’t quite get it, so to further enhance their mental
image, you show them another detailed chart depicting Orion.
The aha moment…they got it because they now can “see” Orion, so
they conclude they must be visual learners.
But…are they really visual learners or did you create the
visual image for them by adding context to the description?
Orion Star Chart
Return to
prior slide
Orion Figure Outlined
in a Star Chart
Return to
prior slide
The Constellation Orion
Return to
prior slide
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Example
Given the depiction of a power
line in the map on the left, identify
the power line in the aerial photo
on the right.
Return to main
presentation
Example
If you cannot find the power line, it may be due to your prior knowledge
(schema) of what power lines should look like, such as the ones depicted
below. Since there are no other visual cues to add context to your prior
“visual images”, and due to lack of past experiences, you may not be able to
locate the power line.
Return to main
presentation
Example
So lets add some context (meaning).
Don’t look for the actual power line
structure…instead look where the
power line might be.
Return to main
presentation
It’s not a matter of “seeing” the actual
power lines or visual acuity…it’s a
matter of context.
Example
Return to main
presentation
Still can’t locate it? Here’s another
image – look for the path of the
power line (right-of-way) instead of
the actual structures.
Result: Given a different context,
you identify the power line path not
from your prior knowledge but
instead based upon an entirely
different context.
You have now added a new concept
to your schema, which could also
be applied to similar situations.
Click for final
image/click
again to turn off
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Table 1: Types of
Learning/Cognitive Styles*
Return to main
presentation
 convergers vs. divergers
 verbalisers vs. imagers
 holists vs. serialists
 deep vs. surface learning
 activists vs. reflectors
 pragmatists vs. theorists
 adaptors vs. innovators
 assimilators vs. explorers
 field dependent vs. field
independent
 globalists vs. analysts
 assimilators vs.
accommodators
 imaginative vs. analytic
learners
 intuitionists vs. analysts
 extroverts vs. introverts
 seeing vs. hearing
 sensing vs. intuition
 thinking vs. feeling
 non-committers vs.
plungers
 common-sense vs.
dynamic learners
 concrete vs. abstract
learners
 random vs. sequential
learners
 initiators vs. reasoners
 judging vs. perceiving
 left brainers vs. right
brainers
 meaning-directed vs.
undirected
 theorists vs. humanitarians
 activists vs. theorists
 pragmatists vs. reflectors
 organizers vs. innovators
 analytics/inductives/succe
ssive processors vs.
globals/deductivess/simul
taneous processors
 executive, hierarchic,
conservative vs.
legislative, anarchic,
liberal
* Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. Learning Skills
and Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.leerbeleving.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/learning-styles.pdf
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Table 2: Most Influential Models of
Learning/Cognitive Styles*
Return to main
presentation













Allinson and Hayes’ Cognitive Styles Index (CSI)
Apter’s Motivational Style Profile (MSP)
Dunn and Dunn model and instruments of learning styles
Entwistle’s Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST)
Gregorc’s Mind Styles Model and Style Delineator (GSD)
Herrmann’s Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI)
Honey and Mumford’s Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ)
Jackson’s Learning Styles Profiler (LSP)
Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory (LSI)
Herman Witkin’s Field Dependent (FD) & Field Independent (FI)
Riding’s Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA)
Sternberg’s Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI)
Vermunt’s Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS)
* Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. Learning Skills
and Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.leerbeleving.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/learning-styles.pdf
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Table 3: Families of
Learning/Cognitive Styles*
Return to main
presentation
Learning styles are largely
sensory based
Learning styles reflect deepseated cognitive structure
Learning styles reflect
relatively stable
personality type
Betts (1909) Betts Inventory
Bartlett (1932)
Gordon (1949) Scale of
Imagery Control
Scheehan (1967) Shortened
Betts Inventory
Paivio (1971) Individual
Difference Questionnaire
(IDQ)
Marks (1973) Marks
Vividness of Visual Imagery
Questionnaire
Dunn and Dunn (1975, 1979,
1992, 2003) VAK Learning
Style Learning Theory
Torrance (1990) Style of
Learning and Thinking
Riding (1991) Cognitive Style
Analysis (CSA)
Guilford (1950)
Convergent/divergent
thinking
Prettigrew (1958) Scale of
Cognitive Style
Gardner et al. (1959)
Tolerant/ intolerant
Broverman (1960)
Kagen (1967) Matching
Familiar Figures Test
Messick (1976) Analytic /
non-analytic conceptualizing
Hunt (1978) Paragraph
Completion Method
Cooper (1997) Learning
Styles ID
Weinstein, Zimmerman,
Palmer (1988) Learning and
Study Strategies Inventory
Witkin (1962) Field
Dependent (FD/Field
Independent (FI); Group
Embedded Figure Test
(GEFT)
Apter (1998) Motivation
Style Profile (MSP)
Epstein-Meier (1989)
Constructive Thinking
Inventory (CTI)
Miller (1991) Personality
typology: cognitive,
affective
Harrison- Branson
(1998) revised Inquiry
Mode Questionnaire
Jackson (2002) Learning
Style Profiles (LSP)
Learning styles are flexibly
stable learning preferences
Kolb (1976, 1985, 1999)
Learning Style Inventory
(LSI)
Schmeck (1977) Inventory
of Learning Processes
Honey and Mumford
(1982) Learning Style
Questionnaire (LSQ)
Felder and Silverman
(1989) Index of Learning
Styles (ILS)
Kaufmann (1989) The A-E
Inventory
Allinson and Hayes (1996)
Cognitive Style Index (CSI)
Herrmann (1995) Brain
Dominance Instrument (BDI)
* Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. Learning Skills and
Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.leerbeleving.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/learning-styles.pdf
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Resources





Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and
pedagogy in post-16 learning. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London.
Retrieved from http://www.leerbeleving.nl/wpcontent/uploads/2011/09/learning-styles.pdf
Clemons, Stephanie (2005). Brain-Based Learning: Possible Implications for Online
Instruction. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning,
September 2005, Vol. 2. No. 9. Retrieved from
http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Sep_05/article03.htm
Cognitive/Learning Styles (n.d.). Theory Into Practice, Retrieved from
http://tip.psychology.org/styles.html
Curry, L. (1990). A critique of research on learning styles. Educational Leadership,
56(2), 50-56. Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_199010_curry.pdf
DeTure, M. (2004). Cognitive Style and Self-Efficacy: Predicting Success in Online
Education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 21-38. Retrieved from
http://test.scripts.psu.edu/users/k/h/khk122/woty/AJDE/DeTure%202004.pdf
Resources





Dumbo, Myron H., & Howard, K. (2007). Advice about the Use of Learning Styles:
A Major Myth in Education. Journal of College Reading and Learning, v37 n2 p101109 Spr 2007. Retrieved from:
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ER
ICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ767768&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accn
o=EJ767768
Howles, S. (n.d.). Learning styles: What the Research Says and How to Apply it to
Designing E-Learning. Session TH101, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Retrieved
from http://isg.urv.es/library/papers/learning%20styles_overview.pdf
Learning Orientation Research: Individual Differences in Learning (2004).
Retrieved from http://www.trainingplace.com/source/research/cronbach.htm
Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review.
(2008). Learning and Skills Research Centre, Department for Education and Skills,
UK (2004). Retrieved from
http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/edskas/learning%20styles.pdf
Liu, Y.& Ginther, & Ginther, D. (1999). Cognitive Styles and Distance Education.
Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Volume II, Number III, Fall
1999. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/liu23.html
Resources




Matching Teaching Style to Learning Style May Not Help Student. (Dec 15, 2009).
Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from
http://chronicle.com/article/Matching-Teaching-Style-to/49497/
Merrill, David M. (2000). Instructional Strategies and Learning Styles: Which takes
Precedence? Retrieved from
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBkQFjAA&url=http
%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.
22.3996%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&rct=j&q=Instructional%20Strategies%
20and%20Learning%20Styles%3A%20Which%20takes%20Precedence&ei=czy4
TaTaOsmDtgfHnczeBA&usg=AFQjCNFRR9qlyzSSM3L_YzhcksffPlkmGg
Multimodal Learning Through Media:What the Research Says. (2008). Metiri
Group--Commissioned by Cisco. Retrieved from
http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/docs/education/Multimodal-LearningThrough-Media.pdf
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning Styles:
Concepts and Evidence, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Retrieved
from http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf
Resources





Reeves, T. (2006), Do Generational Differences Matter in Instructional Design?
Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper104/ReevesITForumJan08.pdf
Scott, Catherine (2010) "The enduring appeal of ‘learning styles’," Australian
Journal of Education: Vol. 54: Iss. 1, Article 1. Available at:
http://research.acer.edu.au/aje/vol54/iss1/1
Sharp, J. G., Byrne, J., & Bowker, R. (2008). The Trouble with VAK. Educational
Futures Vol.1(1) August 2008. Retrieved from
http://www.educationstudies.org.uk/materials/sharp_et_al_2.pdf
Stahl, Steven A. (1999). Different Strokes for Different Folks: A Critique of Learning
Styles. The American Educator, Fall, 1999. Retrieved from
http://home.centurytel.net/msv/Documents/Learning-StylesDifferent%20Strokes.pdf
Willingham, D. (2005). Do Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learners Need Visual,
Auditory, and Kinesthetic Instruction? American Educator, Summer 2005. Retrieved
from http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/summer2005/willingham.cfm
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
What are Cognitive
Learning Strategies?

Cognitive learning strategies are methods used to help
learners link new information to prior knowledge in
facilitating the transfer of learning through the systematic
design of instruction
•
•
Focuses on how the learner processes the knowledge
•
Supports the learner as s/he develops internal procedures that
enable him/her to perform tasks that are complex, and can
increase the efficiency with which the learner approaches a
learning task.
•
Provides a structure for learning when a task cannot be
completed through a series of steps (scaffolding)
Tailoring instruction for different levels of prior knowledge
What are Cognitive
Learning Strategies?
•
•
•
Learning these strategies are aided by their incorporation into
instruction.
The utility of cognitive learning strategies can be employed by
faculty to facilitate the activation and retention of prior
knowledge by focusing on knowledge construction.
Knowledge construction is a methodological approach that
assumes knowledge needs to be constructed
–
–
Involves the opportunity to critically analyze information, dialogue
with others about its meaning, reflect how the information fits within
one’s belief and value systems (schema), and arrive at a meaningful
understanding of that information
In this process, information becomes transformed into knowledge
What is Schema?
•
•
•
•
The contents of long term memory are sophisticated
structures that permit us to perceive, think, and solve
problems, rather than a group of rote learned facts.
These structures are known as schemas (a mental framework
for understanding and remembering information) and permit
us to treat multiple elements as a single element.
Schemas are the cognitive structures that make up our
knowledge base and assist us in knowledge construction.
Schemas can be “activated” through the use of cognitive
learning strategies
What is Schema Activation?
•
•
•
Schema activation refers to an array of activities designed to
activate relevant knowledge in students’ memory prior to
encountering new, to be learned information.
Schema activation is the process of engaging prior knowledge,
which is organized in the brain in schemata .
Schema activation is an important scaffolding tool where learning
depends upon the activation of old knowledge to provide an
appropriate schema into which new knowledge can be
incorporated .
Schema
Activation
Prior knowledge: Schema activation
engages prior knowledge
New knowledge: Schema
activation links prior knowledge
to new knowledge
Comprehension: Schema
activation creates connections
which increase comprehension
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Spatial Contiguity Principle
Spatial Contiguity Principle
Distance
Depicted in this concept map is the
Learning
blended learning model three
main components and
subcomponents. The degree of Synchronous
Asynchronous
integration of each of the
subcomponents is based upon
evaluating specific attributes of
Collaborative
Tools
each component, resulting in the
most appropriate blend to ensure
attainment of the instructional goal.
Traditional
Classroom
Learning
Environment
Component
Instructional
Objectives
Instructional
Component
Content
Instructional
Strategies
Media
Component
Complexity
Rapidity
of Change
Multimedia
(aural/visual)
Synchronicity
Interactivity
Symmetry
Asynchronous
Instructional
Media
Asymmetrical
Media
Symmetrical
Media
Synchronous
Instructional
Media
Asynchronous
Collaboration
(P2P)
Didactic
Synchronous
Collaboration
(P2P)
Dialectic
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Temporal Contiguity Principle
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Characteristics of Field Dependent
and Field Independent Learns
dependent learner…
• Field
Processes information globally
•
•
•
•
•
•
Holistic approach to problem solving
Views the perceptual field as a whole
Socially oriented
Uses spectator approach for concept attainment
Relies on external cues to guide their behavior
independent learner…
• Field
Highly analytical
•
•
•
•
•
•
Relies on internal cues (gravity and vestibular) to guide their
behavior
Breaks the field down into its component parts
Not influenced by the existing structure
Impersonal orientation
Uses hypothesis-testing approach to attain concepts
What Does the Research Reveal
About Cognitive Styles?
•
Results of Field Independent (FI) and Field Dependent (FD)
cognitive styles reveal:
•
•
•
•
•
FI attracted to engineering, hard sciences, mathematics,
computer sciences/engineering
FI able to extrapolate detailed information from complex figures
FI correlated in predicting success in engineering courses
FI less influenced by visual effects in media
No difference in learning outcomes based on instructional media
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Group Embedded Figures
Test Example (GEFT)
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
What is the Cognitive Information
Processing Model?
• Cognitive Information Processing (CIP) model views learning
•
when information is received from the environment via the
senses (modalities), processed and stored into memory, and
then output in some form of learned capability.
The flow of information is generally conceived to occur in
three basic stages: sensory memory, short-term memory, and
long-term memory.
Sensory Input
attention
(seeing, hearing,
touching, etc.)
pattern
recognition
Sensory
Memory
(visual,
aural,
kinesthetic)
Shortterm
Memory
(cognitive
learning
strategies)
• Rehearsal
• Chunking
• Spatial
encoding
retrieval
Longterm
Memory
context
meaning
Memory
Storage
What is the Cognitive Information
Processing Model?
• The first stage of information processing, sensory memory, is
•
•
associated with the senses (seeing, hearing, touching, etc.)
where information is stored briefly for processing.
Working memory, also referred to as short-term memory, is
the stage where further consciousness processing occurs, per
se, actively thinking about what has occurred.
While working memory holds limited information for a
limited amount of time, by employing cognitive learning
strategies (rehearsal, chunking, spatial, etc.) the transfer of
information from working memory to long term memory can
be facilitated.
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
Dual Encoding Theory
Applied to Multimedia Design
• Modality Principle – People learn more deeply from
•
•
multimedia lessons when graphics are explained by audio
narration than onscreen text.
Spatial Contiguity Principle - People learn better when
corresponding words and pictures are presented near rather
than far from each other on the page or screen (click here for
an example)
Temporal Contiguity Principle - People learn better when
corresponding words and pictures are presented
simultaneously rather than successively (click here for an
example)
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
The Essence of the Debate:
What Do the Experts Say?
• Foremost ISD text: The Systematic Design of Instruction
(Walter Dick, Lou Carey, & James Carey, 2009)
•
Learning styles are personal “preferences” rather than “psychological traits” and cannot predict “how a student will learn best.”
• Popular ISD text: Instructional Design (Smith & Ragan, 2005)
•
“View learning styles with extreme caution…not sufficiently
prescriptive to aid instructional designers in making design
decisions.”
• Foremost text on multimedia design for e-learning: e-
Learning and the Science of Instruction (Ruth Clark & Richard
Mayer, 2011)
•
“There is little evidence to support most learning styles”
The Essence of the Debate:
What Do the Experts Say?
• Leading learning theory text: Psychology of Learning for
Instruction (Marcy Driscoll, 2005)
•
Doesn’t even address learning styles
• Popular learning theory text: Cognitive Psychology and
Instruction (Bruning, Shaw, Norby, Ronning, 2004)
•
Des not mention learning styles
• Leading text on cognitive science: Learning Theories (Dale
Schunk, 2004)
•
Differentiates between learning styles and learning modalities,
where [VAK] learning styles are essentially “modalities”
The Essence of the Debate:
Quotable Quotes from the Experts
•
•
•
•
Dr. Richard Clark: Learning styles do not predict learning under
different instructional conditions. There are no "visual" or "verbal"
learners, etc.
Dr. Allison Rossett: Why have generations of educators glommed on
to learning styles when the research is settled or pretty darn so?
Why Is the Research on Learning Styles Still Being Dismissed by
Some Learning Leaders and Practitioners?
(http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=2070611#comments)
Dr. Sigmund Tobias (Eminent Research Professor): The persistence
of the learning style concept is amazing—a testament to the
gullibility of even well-informed individuals who ought to know
better. It seems that advocates of learning styles have never heard
of the history of ATI research…
The Essence of the Debate:
Quotable Quotes from the Experts
•
•
Ruth Clark: “The learning style myth leads to some very
unproductive training approaches that are counter to modern
evidence of what works…the time and energy spent perpetuating
the various learning style myths can be more wisely invested in
supporting individual differences that are proven to make a
difference—namely, prior knowledge of the learner.”
Harold Stolovitch: More than 25 years of research on this and
related themes have not provided any form of conclusive evidence
that matching the form of instruction to learning style improved
learning or even attention.
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide