A CRITICAL ANALYSIS ON CORELATION BETWEEN LEARNING STYLE AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF STUDENTS
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
INTRODUCTION
Our focus in this chapter is to critically examine relevant literatures that would assist in explaining the research problem and furthermore recognize the efforts of scholars who had previously contributed immensely to similar research. The chapter intends to deepen the understanding of the study and close the perceived gaps.
Precisely, the chapter will be considered in three sub-headings:
Conceptual Framework
Theoretical Framework and
Empirical Review
2.1 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Concept of Learning:
According to Mangal,(2007), learning occupies a very important place in our lives. Most of what we do or do not do is influenced by what we learn or how we learn it. He opined that learning provides a key to the structure of our personality and behavior. However, this term has not been always interpreted in the same way by numerous thinkers and psychologists. Smith, in Mangal,(2007) defined learning as the acquisition of new behavior or the strengthening or weakening of old behavior as a result of experience. Crow and Crow in Mangal,(2007) also defined learning as the acquisition of habits, knowledge and attitudes. It involves new ways of doing things and it operates in an individual’s attempt to overcome obstacles or to adjust to new situations.
Basavanthapa,(2006) defined learning as the mental activity by which knowledge, skills, attitudes, appreciations and ideas are acquired resulting in the modifications of behavior which comes through knowledge and experience. Kolb sees learning as a core process of human development and makes a distinction between development and simple readjustment to change (Quinn,2004). Development results from learning that is gained through experience. As stated by Basavanthapa,(2006), learning involves a series of operations by the learner at a given time which includes observation, description, analysis, validation and evaluation. She opined that an effective learning is not a mere accumulation of facts but a discovery of a relationship between parts on the whole, between facts and principles and between principles and actions.
Mangal,(2007) stated that learning which is a process of bringing out relatively permanent changes in the behavior of an organism may be classified into a number of categories depending upon the domain or specific area of the behavior in which changes are introduced or the methods that are employed for the introduction of behavioural changes. She stated that if we follow the former criterion, learning can be classified as verbal learning, learning of motor skills ( such as walking, dancing, swimming), affective learning (such as learning of habits, interests, attitudes, appreciation) and cognitive learning( learning of concepts, principles, problem solving). She further stated that in terms of the later criterion, learning may be categorized as trial and error learning, classical conditioning, operant conditioning, chain learning, shaping, learning through generalization, learning through discrimination, serial learning, associative learning and insightful learning. In addition, Mangal (2007) stated that learning as a useful process may result in outcomes such as bringing desirable changes in behavior, attaining of proper growth and development, attaining balanced development of personality, and realizing of the goals of life. These outcomes can contribute significantly in the overall improvement and progress of the learner for helping him to lead an adjusted and satisfying life.
Factors affecting Learning
According to Mangal,(2007), the success or failure in the task of learning in terms of introducing desired modification in the behavior of a learner will automatically depend upon the quality as well as control and management of some factors which include the following: Mangal,(2007) stated that learning is greatly affected by the learner’s physical and mental health maintained by him particularly at the time of learning. She opined that a child that does not maintain satisfactory physical health have to suffer adversely in terms of gains in learning. He further stated that the mental state and health of a learner at the time of learning become potent factors in deciding the outcomes of learning. The results achieved by the learner through the process of learning depend heavily upon potentials which include learner’s innate abilities and capabilities, learner’s basic potential in terms of general intelligence, specific knowledge and learner’s basic interests, aptitude and attitudes related to learning. Basavanthapa,(2006) stated that mental processes vary from individual to individual. Individual differences such as educational background, experiences in the home, church, or business influence these responses. In addition, she opined that the same person may not respond the same way at all times because he may not always interrelate facts, emotions and opinions the same way.
According to Basavanthapa,(2006), most single learning experiences contribute to the attainment of more than one objective. She stated that the learner must perceive the learning experience as relevant as the objective. Mangal,(2007) stated that learning is greatly influenced by the level of aspiration and nature of achievement motivation possessed by a learner. She opined that too much aspiration makes it impossible for the learner to achieve gains in learning. She therefore stated that a learner has to maintain the level of his aspiration at a reasonable level. This means that his aspirations should neither be too high which will result in non achievement of any of his goals nor too low as not to try to achieve goals which is quite capable. Basavanthapa,(2006) stated that the teaching learning environment should be structured to provide opportunities to cope with the students’ individual differences. She opined that teachers should establish an environment in which learning will most likely take place. Berman, Synder, Kozier & Erb,(2008) stated that an optimal learning environment facilitates learning by reducing distraction and providing physical and psychological comfort. They stated that a learning environment should have adequate lighting free from glare, a comfortable room temperature and good ventilation. Noise can also distract the students and interfere with listening and thinking. According to Berman, Synder, Kozier & Erb,(2008), motivation to learn is the desire to learn which greatly influences how quickly and how much a person learns. Motivation is generally greatest when a person recognizes a need and believes the need will be met through learning. Readiness to learn is the demonstration of behaviours or cues that reflect the learner’s motivation to learn at a specific time. Readiness reflects not only the desire or willingness to learn but also the ability to learn at a specific time (Berman et al, 2008).
Berman, et al (2008) stated that when a learner is actively involved in the process of learning, learning becomes more meaningful. If the learner actively participates in planning and discussion, learning is faster and retention is better. They stated that active learning promotes critical thinking, enabling learners to problem solve more effectively.
The concept of learning style
Learning style is a concept which has provided some valuable insights into learning in both academic and other settings. It emerged in the second half of the 20th century. Although its origin has been traced back further, research in the area of learning style has been active around four decades. During this period, the intensity of activity has varied, with recent years seeing a particularly upturn in the number of researchers working in the area. Increasingly, research in the area of learning styles is being conducted in domains outside psychology. These domains include medical and health care training, management, industry, vocational training and a vast range of settings and levels in the field of education (Cassidy, 2004). It has been recognized for many years that individuals learn differently (Stevens & king, 2008). Learning style is used in the academic literature with a variety of different definitions. According to Dunn and Dunn, (2005), learning styles are individual’s preferences for the process of learning. She stated that these preferences may change slightly from situation to situation but are generally considered to be stable over time providing the learner with confidence and routine. She described learning styles as the way each learner begins to concentrate, process and retain new and different information. She noted that this information occurs differently for everyone. Dunn & Griggs (2010) explored historical and current learning styles research and confirmed the use of the definition by Dunn and Dunn which is still utilized today. Quinn (2004) also defined learning styles as the preferred ways of learning and processing information. She stated that individuals differ in their learning styles. The concept of learning styles builds on the idea that all individuals have a different way of learning. In recent years, interests in this concept have revived for many reasons. First, the concept does not concentrate on weaknesses and limitations but on strengths and talents. Secondly, it does not merely involve information processing within an individual but on person environment interaction. Thirdly, it does not relate to average persons and large populations but to individuals (Cassidy & Eachus, 2005). Felder & Spurlin, (2005) have shown that a more profound learning effect may occur when teaching styles match learning styles. This does not necessarily require assessing the student’s learning style preferences. The citation reinforces how important it is to identify each student’s learning styles. Since classes always consists of students with a wide variety of learning preferences, it suffices to select a model of learning styles and attempt to address all of its categories. The optimal instruction style should be balanced meaning that a wide range of learning styles is acknowledged and facilitated otherwise some students will always fall out of place which will minimize learning while others will not be challenged in their current learning habits. According to Stiller,(2010), it is essential to provide students with variety of learning experiences that will improve their academic performance. Every teacher and every parent hope that their students will succeed in school. Teachers and parents have the same final goals and objectives to promote and ensure that these children are enabled to perform well academically. Most parents can name their child’s learning style and by the first school quarter, teachers should be able to do same. Providing students with the knowledge of their individual learning styles ensures that they have an upper hand in performing well in school. Quinn, (2004) opined that teachers should use variety of techniques such as lecture, discussion, small group work, role playing, modeling, return demonstration, imitation, problem solving, games and question and answer sessions to match different learning styles of students. Quinn, (2004) further stated that the state or trait debate associated with so many human psychological characteristics such as personality is not surprisingly relevant with learning styles. She opined that learning styles may be considered as stable over time or as changing with each experience or situation.
From the above, learning style is described as the feature cognitive, effective, and psychosocial behaviors that serve as relatively stable indicators of how learners relate, perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment (Keefe, 1987). Hartley (1998) opined that learning style is a students consistent way of responding to using stimuli in the context of learning. A learning style is a preferential mode, through which a student likes to master learning, solve problems, thinks or simply reach in a pedagogical situation (Allison & Hayes, 1996). Learning styles are various approaches or ways of learning. They involve educating methods, particular to an individual that are presumed to allow that individual to learn best. Most people prefer an identifiable method of interacting with, taking in, and processing stimuli or information. Based on this concept, the idea of individualized "learning styles" originated in the 1970s, and acquired enormous popularity (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, and Bjork. 2009).Today that tradition belief, the learning differences are arising of intelligence differences and different cognitive abilities has been changed and it is verified that learning differences are arises of intelligence differences and other factors such as personality characteristics, task difficulty, and learning styles (Emamepur & Shams, 2007; YÕlmaz & Orhan, 2010). According to James and Gardner (1995) learning styles is the conditions that enables learners to percept, to process, to storage, and recall the learning contents. Peirce (2000) believes that learning style is the method that people prefer it over those other methods in learning such as learning in school. It is necessary that teachers, school managers and other members of instructional team take to account differences of learning styles of students. Research results revealed that pay attention to individual differences and learning characteristics of learners by teachers and others of instructional team had an important role in improving quality of learning and increase academic achievement of students (Safe, 2008; Tella & Adeniyi, 2009). Felder and Silverman (1988) used a five-dimension scale to categorize learning styles.
The concept of learning style is used to describe individual differences in the way people learn. Each person has a unique way to absorb and process experiences and information. Confounding research and, in many instances, application of learning style theory has begat the myriad of methods used to categorize learning styles. No single commonly accepted method currently exists, but alternatively several potential scales and classifications are in use. Learning styles is a term that is used to explain various ways that learners acquire knowledge. It seeks to give an explanation on how people learn. The issue of individual difference is very crucial in learning styles, as it works under the premise that no two persons learn in same way. Percept dimension (sensing-intuitive) and process dimension (active- reflective) are two dimensions that borrowed from Brigs and Kolb's model of learning styles. Sensing learners tend to like learning facts; intuitive learners often prefer discovering possibilities and relationships. Active learners tend to retain and understand information best by doing something active with it--discussing or applying it or explaining it to others. Reflective learners prefer to think about it quietly first. Other dimensions of Felder and Silverman model of learning styles are input (visual-verbal), organized (inductive-deductive), and understand (sequential-global) dimensions. Visual learners remember best what they see--pictures, diagrams, flow charts, time lines, films, and demonstrations. Verbal learners get more out of words--written and spoken explanations. Sequential learners tend to gain understanding in linear steps, with each step following logically from the previous one. Global learners tend to learn in large jumps, absorbing material almost randomly without seeing connections, and then suddenly "getting it." There is the understanding that every student learns differently. Learning styles therefore is an individual’s unique way of absorbing, processing, comprehending and retaining information. Students’ learning styles are influenced by environmental, emotional and cognitive factors alongside their previous experiences. Learning style is primarily concerned with ‘’how’’ students learn, not ‘’what ‘’they learn (Gokalp, 2013; Fardon, 2013). Knowledge of the various learning style preferences of students admitted in Science Education programme will eventually lead to more effective learning experiences. Alavi and Toozandehjani (2017) revealed that learning styles of students can enhance their learning. In the same vein, Barman et al. (2014) study on learning style and academic performance of students conclude that students’ knowledge of their learning style can improve their academic performance. Therefore, in every school environment, be it primary, secondary or tertiary institutions, the academic performance of students is a pointer to the quality of learning experiences. Academic performance is evaluated in terms of students' remarkable scores across their subjects. This can be assessed through formative and summative evaluation.
Most of these scales and classifications are more similar than dissimilar and focus on environmental preferences, sensory modalities, personality types, and/or cognitive styles. Lack of a conceptual framework for both learning style theory and measurement is a common and central criticism in this area. It is also likely that cognitive style-at the very least- can be regarded as one significant component of learning style. Hartley (1998) provides the following definitions: cognitive styles are the ways in which different individuals characteristically approach different cognitive tasks; learning styles are the ways in which individuals characteristically approach different learning tasks.
Types of Learning Styles
The following are the types of learning styles;
(1) Visual learning Style:
Students with visual learning styles learn by seeing. They think in pictures and have vivid imaginations. They have greater recall of concepts that are presented visually. Picture and images help them to understand ideas and information better than explanations. A drawing may help more than a discussion about the same. When someone explains something to them, they may create a mental picture of what the person talking describes. They prefer to watch a speaker talk, as well as listen to what is said and are able to work from the general to the specific. They like to receive information from many sources when learning new concepts. They see the “big picture”, (the forest) before seeing its part (the trees) and like to “see” things to understand them. They find verbal instructions difficult as their minds tend to wander during lectures. They like to read and generally are good at spelling. They doodle frequently but organize well. They have good hand writing and take notice of details (Cassidy, 2004).
It is a style in which a learner utilizes graphs, charts, maps and diagrams. It also involves Sight; emphasis on seeing, watching, viewing, drawing. Visual learners think in pictures and learn best in visual images. They depend on the instructor‟s or facilitator‟s non-verbal cues such as body language to help with understanding. Sometimes, visual learners favour sitting in the front of the classroom. They also take descriptive note of other materials being presented.
(2) Auditory learning style:
Students with auditory style preferences learn best by hearing and remembering information they hear. They are distracted easily either by noise or music. These individuals talk to self aloud and actively participate in class discussions and would prefer to tape and then listen to lectures. To recall information, they use mnemonic devices. They enjoy listening, but cannot wait to have a chance to talk. These students respond well to lectures and discussions. Often they find themselves talking to those around them. In a class setting, when the teacher is not asking questions, they must find a way to express their emotions verbally. (Kolb,2005). Out of the school too, they remember things said to them and make the information of their own. They may even carry on mental dialogues and determine how to continue by thinking back on the words of others.
Auditory learning is a learning style in which a person learns through listening. An auditory learner depends on hearing and speaking as a main way of learning. They also use their listening and repeating skills to sort through the information that is sent to them. It also entails words; emphasis on listening and speaking. These individuals discover information through listening and interpreting information by the means of pitch, emphasis and speed. These individuals gain knowledge from reading out loud in the classroom and may not have a full understanding of information that is written.
(3) Kinesthetic learning style:
Kinesthetic describes a learning style which involves the stimulation of nerves in the body’s muscles, joints and tendons. Kinesthetic try things out, touch, feel and manipulate. They express their feelings physically. They gesture when speaking, they are poor listeners and lose interest in long speeches. These students learn best by doing. They need direct involvement in what they are learning. More than thirty percent of students may have a kinesthetic/tactile preference for learning. Often, they do not thrive in traditional schools because most classrooms do not offer enough opportunity for movement and touching. Most assessments group Kinesthetic and tactile styles together, though they can mean different things. Their similarity is that both perceive information through nerve ends in the skin as well as organs through muscles, tendons and joints. Kinesthetics are usually well coordinated with a strong sense of timing and body movements. In some cases, they often wiggle, tap their feet or move their legs when they sit. Some of these children were often labeled as hyperactive before this learning style was discovered (Cassidy, 2004).
A kinesthetic-tactile learning style requires that you manipulate or touch material to learn. Kinesthetic-tactile techniques are used in combination with visual and/or auditory study techniques, producing multi-sensory learning. It also involves movement and action; emphasis on doing, direct involvement, demonstrating, showing etc. Individuals that are kinesthetic learn best with and active “hands-on” approach. These learners favour interaction with the physical world. Most of the time kinesthetic learners have a difficult time staying on target and can become unfocused effortlessly.
Factors Affecting Learning Styles
Most of the problems of majority of the schools and even in the entire country are their learning styles. According to Dizney (2003) some reasons why students fail are as follows:
(a) No Vision: Many students do not have a clearly articulated picture of their future, may intend to create one. Thus, they may take programs of study without a clear career goal or objective. In essence, they choose the wrong major.
(b) Lack of Passion: Successful students work out of passion, a love for what they want to do, and recognize the importance of the benefit it will bring others as well as themselves. Without passion, study becomes a chore and not a method for achieving clearly defined goals.
(c) Lack of personal, work, school, family balance: Whatever is going on in a student‟s personal life, will inevitably affect what is going on in school. Whatever is happening in school will affect what is going on in their personal life. A student needs time to be in class, and appropriate time for study.
(d) Lack of maturity and discipline: Some students are just not disciplined and lack good organizational skills. They often fall under the pressure of their peers. Rather than using good discretion, they feel compelled to follow others, when they really should be attending to their studies.
Learning Styles that Leads to Good Academic Performance.
In the view of Crow and Crow (2007), the following are learning styles that leads to good academic performance:
1. Attending classes regularly
2. Taking down notes during teaching
3. Concentrating on study
4. Studying with aim of getting meaning not cramming 5. Preparing a time table
Learning Style Inventory
A good way to discover a student’s learning style is by asking the student questions. Various instruments have been developed to assess learning styles. These instruments are referred to as learning styles inventory. Some of the learning styles inventory includes Kolb’s learning styles inventory, Pharmacist’s inventory of learning style, Honey and Mumford’s learning styles inventory and Grasha- Reichmann student learning styles scales. Irrespective of the instrument used, many studies have shown that learning styles play an important role in the academic performance of college students. The accommodation of student learning styles in learning environment have resulted in improved test scores while a mismatch in learning characteristics and learning environment resulted in poor students’ achievement (Cassidy, 2004). Grasha and Riechmann’s Style of learning is described as a social interaction scale which focuses on learner’s preferences but introduces social and affective dimensions to the measurement of style. The three dimensions described are avoidant-participant, competitivecollaborative and dependent-independent. It is believed that the style to some degree is fluid and will alter according to the learning situation. The Grasha’s scale is a 90-item scale presented in two versions, one to assess class style and one to assess individual style (Cassidy,2004).
Honey and Mumford’s description and measurement of learning style is grounded in Kolb’s experiential learning model with styles closely corresponding to those defined by Kolb. The learning styles questionnaire was developed for use with management trainees and has been proposed as an alternative to Kolb’s learning styles inventory. The four learning styles measured by the learning styles questionnaire are activist (Kolb’s active experimentation), reflector (Kolb’s reflective observation), theorist (Kolb’s abstract conceptualization) and pragmatist (Kolb’s concrete experience). The learning style questionnaire is an 80 item self report inventory based on Kolb’s experiential learning model. Individual’s tendency towards a preferred learning style is indicated by their ratings of behavioral and preference orientations. Although developed for use with management trainees, the learning styles questionnaires has been used in a range of settings including education. However, concerns regarding the psychometric qualities of the inventory have been raised. Duff and Duffy (2012) report a failure to support the existence of either the bipolar dimensions or learning style proposed by Honey and Mumford and found the learning styles questionnaire to have only modest levels of internal consistency ranging from 0.52 to 0.73 for the four subscales. Duff and Duffy (2012) therefore concluded that the learning style questionnaire is not an acceptable alternative to the learning style inventory and that it’s use in the field of higher education is premature (Garcia & Hughes, 2006). Dunn, Dunn and Price learning style inventory is a 100 item questionnaire asking individuals to respond to items relating to key factors of the construct: environmental (light, sound, temperature and design), emotional (structure, persistence, motivation and responsibility), sociological ( pairs, peers, adults, self, and group), physical (perceptual strengths : auditory, visual, tactile, kinaesthetic, mobility, intake and time of day) and psychological ( global-analytic, impulsive-reflective and cerebral dominance). Versions of the scale have been developed for use with primary and secondary schools children and with adults. Curry’s review of different learning/ cognitive styles model reports the learning styles inventory as having one of the highest reliability and validity ratings. The learning styles inventory has also been identified as being practitioner oriented and the most widely used assessment for learning styles in elementary and secondary schools (Cassidy,2004). The Kolb’s learning style inventory differs from other tests of learning style and personality used in education by being based on a comprehensive theory of learning and development. The Learning Style Inventory (LSI) was created to fulfill two purposes.
- To serve as an educational tool to increase individuals’ understanding of the process of learning from experience and their unique individual approach to learning. By increasing awareness of how they learn, the aim is to increase learners capacity from meta-cognitive control of their learning process enabling them to monitor and select learning approaches that work best for them in different learning situations. By providing a language for talking about learning styles and learning process, the inventory can foster conversation among learners and educators about how to create the most effective learning( Merill, 2005).
- To provide a research tool for investigating experiential learning theory (ELT) and the characteristics of individuals’ learning styles. When it is used in the simple, straight forward and open way intended, the learning style inventory usually provides a valuable self examination and discussion that recognizes the uniqueness, complexity and variability in individuals’ approaches to learning. The learning style inventory is constructed as a self assessment exercise and tool for construct validation of Experiential Learning Theory. Tests designed for predictive validity typically begin with a criterion, such as academic achievement, and work backward to identify items with high criterion correlations. Five versions of the learning style inventory have been published over the last 35 years. During the time, attempts have been made to openly share information about the inventory, its scoring and its technical characteristics with other interested researchers. The results of their research have been instrumental in the continuous improvement of the inventory. Kolb’s learning theory sets out four distinct learning styles (or preferences) which are based on a four – stage learning cycle. In this respect, Kolb’s model is particularly elegant since it offers both a way to understand individual people’s different learning styles and also an explanation of a cycle of experimental learning that applies to all.
Kolb’s model therefore works on two levels – a four stage cycle:
- Concrete Experience (CE), Reflective Observation (RO), Abstract Conceptualization (AC), Active Experimentation (AE),and a four type definition of learning styles (each representing the combination of two preferred styles, rather than a two by two matrix of the four stage cycle styles) for which Kolb used the terms – Diverging (CE/RO), Assimilating (AC/RO), converging (AC/AE), Accommodating (CE/AE). (Kolb, 2005)
Kolb explains that different people naturally prefer a certain single different learning style. Various factors influence a person’s preferred style, notably in his experiential learning theory model (ELT). Kolb defined three stages of a person’s development and suggests that our propensity to reconcile and successfully integrate the four different learning styles improves as we mature through our development stages. The development stages that Kolb identified are:
Acquisition: Birth to adolescence – development of basic abilities and cognitive structures.
Specialization: Schooling, early work and personal experiences of adulthood. - Integration: Mid career to later life – expression of non-dominant learning style in work and personal life. Whatever influences the choice of learning style, the learning style preference itself is actually the product of two pairs of variables or two separate choices that we make, which Kolb presented as lines of axis each with conflicting modes at either end. Concrete Experience CE (Feeling) Versus Abstract Conceptualization AC (thinking) Active Experimentation – AE (doing) Versus Reflective Observation – RO (watching) A typical presentation of Kolb’s two continuums is that the east – west axis is called the processing continuum (how we approach a task), and the north south axis is called the perception continuum (our emotional response, or how we think or feel about it). These learning styles are the combination of two lines of axis (continuums) each formed between what Kolb calls “dialectically related modes of ‘grasping experience’ (doing or watching) and transforming experience (feeling or thinking). According to Kolb, we cannot do both at the same time and to an extent our urge to want to do both creates conflict, which we resolve through choice when confronted with a new learning situation. We internally decide whether we wish to do or watch and at the same time, we decide whether to think or feel. The result of these two decisions produces the preferred learning style, hence the two by two matrix. We choose a way of grasping the experience into something meaningful and usable which defines our emotional response to the experience. Our learning style is a product of these two choice decisions.
Knowing a person’s learning style enables learning to be oriented according to the preferred method. Here are brief descriptions of the four Kolb learning styles (Kolb and Kolb, 2005)
Kolb’s learning Style Inventory and the Four Basic Learning Styles
In 1971, David Kolb developed the learning style inventory (LSI) to assess individual learning styles while individuals tested on the learning style inventory show many different patterns of scores. Research on the instrument has identified four statistically prevalent learning styles. Diverging, Assimilating, Converging and Accommodating. Diverging (feeling and watching – CE/RO): The Diverging styles dominate learning abilities are Concrete Experience (CE) and Reflective Observation (RO). People with this learning style are best at viewing concrete situations from many different points of view. It is labeled “diverging” because a person with it performs better in situations that call for generation of ideas such as a “brainstorming session. People with diverging learning styles have broad cultural interests and like to gather information. Research shows that they are interested in people, tend to be imaginative and emotional, have broad cultural interests and tend to specialize in arts. In formal learning situations, people with the diverging style prefer to work in groups, listening with open mind and receiving personalized feedback (Kolb, 2005). Assimilating (Watching and Thinking AC/RO): The assimilating styles dominant learning abilities are Abstract Conceptualization (AC) and Reflective Observation (RO). People with this learning style are best at understanding a wide range of information and putting into concise, logical form. Individuals with an Assimilating style are less focused on people and more interested in ideas and abstract concepts. Generally, people with this style find it more important that a theory have logical soundness than practical value. The Assimilating learning style is important for effectiveness in information and science careers. In formal learning situations, people with this style prefer readings, lectures, exploring, analytical models and having time to think things through.
Converging (Doing and Thinking – AC/AE): The converging style’s dominant learning abilities are Abstract Conceptualization (AC) and Active Experimentation (AE). People with this learning style are best at finding practical use for ideas and theories. They have the ability to solve problems and make decisions based on finding solutions to questions or problems. Individuals with a Converging learning style prefer to deal with technical tasks and problems rather than with social issues and interpersonal issues. These learning skills are important for effectiveness in specialist and technology careers. In formal learning situations, people with this style prefer to experiment with new ideas, simulations, laboratory assignment and practical applications.
Accommodating (Doing and Feeling – CE/AE): T he accommodating style’s dominant learning abilities are Concrete Experience (CE) and Active Experimentation (AE). People with this learning style have the ability to learn from primarily “Hand – on” experience. They enjoy carrying out plans and involving themselves in new and challenging experiences. Their tendency may be to act on “gut” feeling rather than on logical analysis. In solving problems, individuals with an Accommodating learning style rely more heavily on people for information than on their own technical analysis. This learning style is important for effectiveness in action – oriented careers such as marketing or sales. In formal learning situations, people with the accommodating learning style prefer to work with others to get assignments done, to set goals, to do field work and to test out different approaches to completing a project.
Factors that Shape and Influence Learning Styles
The above patterns of behaviour associated with the four basic learning styles are shaped by transactions between people and their environment at five different levels – personality, educational specialization, professional career, current job role and adaptive competencies. While some have interpreted learning style as a personality variable, Experimental learning theory defines learning style as a social psychological concept that is only partially determined by personality.
Personality Types
Although the learning styles and learning modes proposed by experiential learning theory are derived from the works of Dewey, Lewin and Piaget, many have noted the similarity of these concepts to Carl Jung’s descriptions of individuals’ preferred ways for adapting in the world. Several research studies relating to learning style inventory with the Myers – Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) indicate that Jung’s Extraversion/Introversion dialectical dimension correlates with Active/Reflective dialectic of Experiential Learning Theory, and the MBTI Feeling/Thinking dimension correlates with the learning style inventory Concrete Experience/Abstract Conceptualization dimension. The MBTI sensory type is associated with the LSI Accommodating learning style and the MBTI intuitive type with the LSI Assimilating style. MBTI feeling types correspond to LSI Diverging learning styles and thinking types to converging styles.
Educational Specialization
Early educational experiences shape people’s individual learning styles by instilling positive attitude toward specific sets of learning skill and by teaching students how to learn. Although elementary education is generalized, an increasing process of specialization begins in high school and becomes sharper during the college years. This specialization in the realms of social knowledge influences individual’s orientations towards learning, resulting in particular relations between beginning styles and early training in an educational specialty or discipline. For example, people specializing in the arts, history, political science, English and psychology tend to have Diverging learning styles, while those majoring in more abstract and applied areas such as medicine and engineering have converging learning styles. Individuals with Accommodating styles often have educational backgrounds in education, communications and nursing and those with Assimilating styles in mathematics and physical sciences (Kolb, 2005).
Professional Career
A third set of factors that shape learning styles stems from professional careers. One’s professional career choice not only exposes one to a specialized learning environment, but it also involves a commitment to a generic professional problem, such as social service that requires a specialized adaptive orientation. In addition, one becomes a member of a reference group of peers who share a professional mentality and a common set of values and beliefs about how one should behave professionally. This professional orientation shapes learning style through habits acquired in professional training and through the more immediate normative pressures involved in being a competent professional. Research over the years has shown that social service and arts careers attract people with a diverging learning style. Professions in the sciences and information or research have people with an Assimilating learning style. The converging learning style tends to be dominant among professionals in technology intensive fields such as medicine and engineering. The Accommodating learning style characterizes people with careers in fields such as sales, social service and education.
Current Job Role
The fourth level of factors influencing learning style is the person’s current job role. The task demands and pressures of a job shape a person’s adaptive orientation. Executive jobs, such as general management, that require a strong orientation to task accomplishment and decision making in uncertain emergent circumstances requires an Accommodating learning style. Personal job such as counseling and personnel administration, which require the establishment of personal relationships and effective communication with other people demand a Diverging learning style. Information jobs such as planning and research which require data gathering and analysis as well as conceptual modeling require an Assimilating learning style. Technical jobs, such as bench engineering and production require technical and problem solving skills which require a convergent learning orientation.
Adaptive Competencies
The fifth and most immediate level of forces that shapes learning style is the specific task or problem the person is currently working on. Each task we face requires a corresponding set of skills for effective performance. The effective matching of task demands and personal skills results in an adaptive competence. The Accommodating learning style encompasses a set of competencies that can best be termed as Acting skills; Leadership, Initiative and Action. The Diverging learning style is associated with Valuing skills. Relationship, Helping others and Sense making. The Assimilating learning style is related to Thinking skills: Information Gathering, Information Analysis and Theory Building. Finally, the Converging learning style is associated with Decision skills like Quantitative Analysis, Use of Technology and Goal Setting (Kolb, 2005).
Concept of Academic Performance
Academic performance or academic achievement is the outcome of education or the extent to which a student, teacher or institution has achieved their educational goals. (Stumm, Shell, Chamoro & Thomas, 2011). Academic performance is commonly measured by examinations or continuous assessment but there is no general agreement on how it is best tested or which aspect are most important – procedural knowledge such as skills or declarative knowledge such as facts. Individual differences in academic performance have been linked to differences in intelligence and personality (Stumm, Shell, Chamoro & Thomas, 2011). Students with higher mental ability as demonstrated by intelligence quotient tests (quick learners) and those who are higher in conscientiousness (linked to effort and achievement motivation) tend to achieve higher in academic settings. A recent meta-analysis suggested that mental curiosity has an important influence on academic performance in addition to intelligence and conscientiousness (Stumm et al, 2011). A student’s score or placement on the overall GPA is designed to be an indicator of such student’s performance level and is calculated annually. The final cumulative grade point average is obtained by adding all the grade points obtained by the students in all the courses he or she registered from the first year to the final year and dividing the figure by the total unit loads of all the courses registered from the first year to final year. The answer is then approximated to two decimal places. Most studies show that on average girls do better in school than boys. Girls get higher grades and complete high school at a higher rate compared to boys. Standardized achievements tests also show that females are better at spelling and perform better on tests of literacy, writing and general knowledge (National Centre for Education Statistics, 2003).
An international aptitude test administered to fourth graders in 35 countries for example showed that females outscored males on reading literacy in every country. Factors Affecting Academic Performance
Academic performance is one of the crucial areas of a learner’s life. This is because families as well as government invest in education of the child. Multiple factors come into play when it comes to academic performance of a learner. Determinants of learners’ performance have been the subject of on-going debate among educators, academicians and policy makers (Mbandeka, 2012). Different people believe that different factors affect learners differently under different circumstances. However, there is a form of consensus on general factors that affect performance. These include socioeconomic, psychological and environmental factors.
Socioeconomic factors
Socioeconomic status is a person’s overall social position to which attainments in both the social and economic domains contribute. It is determined by an individual’s achievements in education, employment, occupational status and income (Herminlo, 2005). Children from high socioeconomic status perform better at school compared to children from low socioeconomic status families. Socioeconomic status is commonly determined by combining parents’ educational background, educational level, occupational status and income level. On the other hand, students coming from disadvantaged socioeconomic and educational homes perform relatively better than those coming from higher socioeconomic status and educational strata. (Petrosa, Noberto, Fafael, Cibele and Benilton, 2006).
Psychological factors
Behaviours such as smoking and drug usage can affect academic performance of students as these interfere with brain functioning. Learners need to take good care of their personal health
which includes eating healthy, engaging in regular exercises, getting enough sleep and rest. Some attributes like motivation, readiness to learn and active involvement of the learner play a crucial role in improving academic performance of students in Universities.
Environmental Factors
Factors in the environment can affect academic performance of students in Universities either positively or negatively. These factors include increase workload, noise, incessant strike actions, inadequate accommodation, poor power supply, inadequate water supply, lack of assess-able departmental/ faculty libraries, and cult activities in institutions of higher learning. Students’ cults have a pronounced effect on academic performance in Universities because every member of students’ cult is expected to place members’ interest over any others ( Umar, Atituisi, Yakubu and Bada, 2006).
Relationship between Learning style and Academic performance:
Learning styles can be defined, classified, and identified in many different ways. It can also be described as a set of factors, behaviours, and attitudes that enhance learning in any situation. .Learning styles determine the academic performance of students to a great extent. Both learningstyles and academic performance are interrelated and dependent on each other. There arestudents who come from different environment, localities etc. and have different levels ofacademic performance i.e., high and low. They also differ in the pattern of learning styles. Somestudents possess higher level of learning styles while the others have lower. Better the learningstyles better is the academic performance. A better knowledge and understanding of learning styles may become important as classroom sizes increase and as technological advances continue to mould the types of students. Accommodating teaching to learning styles improves students' overall learning results and analysing students learning style will be very helpful and beneficial as it will help them to be attentive learners, which will eventually increase the academic performance Academic performance of the students is determined by their learning styles.
2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The theories to be used in this work are:
Kolb’s Experimental Learning Style
Honey and Munford’s learning style theory
Dunn and Dunn’s learning style theory and
Vermunt’s learning style model
Several theories and models have been developed over time by scholars in the field of learning styles. In their book, Coffield, Moseley, Hall and Ecclestone (2004) discussed various learning style theories which have been applied in research and whose inventories have been tested of their reliability and internal consistency. The main learning style theories include the Kolb„s Experiential Learning Theory, Honey and Mumford„s Information Processing Style, Vermunts Learning Style Theory, Allinson and Hayes Wholist-Analytics Theory and the Flemings Visual/Auditory/Kinesthetic (VAK) Theory whose basis has seen different inventories developed by several scholars including Jeffrey Barsch, and Victoria Chislett and Allan Chapman, among others.
Kolb’s Experiential Learning Style
Among the various learning style models, Kolb„s Experiential Learning Model (ELM) and Learning Style Inventory (LSI) (Learning-Centered Processed-Based Approach /Information Processing Style) has been widely utilized and modified to address the various educational contexts. Kolb proposes a four-stage hypothetical learning cycle. Individuals will show a preference for or will cope with some stages better than others and learning is seen as continuous, interactive process (Dizney, 2003). The four stages of the ELM are described as: concrete experience (CE; experiencing) which favors experiential learning; abstract conceptualization (AC; thinking) where there is a preference for conceptual and analytical thinking in order to achieve understanding; active experimentation (AE; doing) involving active trial-and error learning; and reflective observation (RO; reflecting) where extensive consideration is given to the task and potential solutions before there is any attempt at action.
Honey and Mumford’s Learning Style Theory
Kolb„s work formed the basis of Honey and Mumford„s theory in the field of learning style and management and the development of their learning styles questionnaire. Honey and Mumford„s description and measurement of learning style are grounded in Kolb„s experiential learning model, with styles closely corresponding to those defined by Kolb. The four learning styles measured propounded by Honey and Mumford are: activist (Kolb„s experimentation); reflector (Kolb„s reflective observation); theorist (Kolb„s abstract conceptualization; and pragmatism (Kolb„s concrete experience). In other words, there is arguably a strong similarity between the Honey and Mumford styles/stages and the corresponding Kolb learning styles.
Dunn and Dunn’s Learning Style Theory
Through their work in schools, they observed distinct differences in the ways students responded to instructional materials. They liked to learn alone, while others preferred learning in groups or from a teacher. Out of this preliminary work, they identified five key dimensions on which student learning style differed: (a) Environmental, (b) Emotional support, (c) Sociological composition, (d) Physiological, and (e) Psychological elements (Sternberg, 1997).
Vermunt’s Learning Style Model
The concept of learning style has also been described by Vermunt in the Learning-Centered ProcessedBased Approach/Information Processing Style in terms of: processing strategies, including an awareness of the aims and objectives of the learning exercise used to determine what is learnt; regulation strategies, which serve to monitor learning; mental models of learning, encompassing the learner„s perceptions of the learning process; and learning orientations, described as personal aims, interventions and expectations based on past experience of learning (Vermunt, 1992).
2.3 EMPIRICAL REVIEW
In a research carried out by Entwistle and Breman (2004) on the academic performance of students using a sample of 87 junior students from different universities, it was found out that students who had high attainment were those who had high motivation, good study methods, learning styles and examination techniques while those who had low academic attainment were those of average ability and of low motivation and ineffective study habits and learning styles.Salehi,(2007) investigated nursing students’ preferred learning styles in Khorasgan Islamic Azad University. A descriptive analytical research was employed. The instrument for data collection was Kolb’s learning style inventory. 294 students received the questionnaire. Analysis of Variance was used to investigate the possible relationship between learning styles and students’ grades in the curriculum ( i.e freshman, sophomore, junior or senior). The findings revealed that junior students preferred the converging learning style while the senior students preferred the assimilating learning style. Russian, (2005), also conducted a study to investigate the preferred learning styles of Respiratory care students at Texas State University using Kolb’s learning style inventory. Eighty two students voluntarily participated in the study. Of the eighty two subjects, 23.17% preferred the accommodator style, 26.83% preferred the diverging style, 24.39% preferred the converging style, and 25.61% preferred the assimilating style. Male subjects made up 23.2% (n=19) of the subjects and females consisted of 76.8% (n=63). Findings showed that there was no significant correlation between learning styles and gender. Wagner, Harsen, Rhee, Brunt, Terbizan and Christensen (2014) carried out a study on the learning style preferences of Undergraduate Dietetics, Athletic Training and Exercise Science Students. The study assessed the preferred learning styles of college students and compared learning style preferences among students using a cross- sectional study design. A convenience sample of undergraduate college students (mean age 20.6± 1.7 years) was obtained (N=590) from those currently enrolled in allied health courses at three different institutions in the region. Kolb’s learning style inventory was administered to all the students enrolled and present in selected allied courses on each campus. Results from chi square test for independence indicated a significant relationship between collage major and learning styles, X2 (21, N=590) =60.66,(p<0.05). Results from the chi square test for goodness of fit indicated dietetics (X2 (6, N=122) =226.74, p<0.05), athletic training (X2 (4,N=56=95.61, p<0.05) and exercise science (X2 (6, N=284) =413.437, p<0.05) majors each had a significant learning style preference. The preferred learning style of students in all three majors was the converging learning style. Alqahtani and Gahtani, (2013) conducted a study to determine the learning style preferences of Australian Health Science Students enrolled in 10 disciplines. Kolb’s learning style inventory was distributed to 2,885 students enrolled in dietetics and nutrition, midwifery, nursing, occupational therapy, paramedics, pharmacy, physiotherapy, radiation therapy, radiography and social work at one Australian University. A total of 752 usable survey forms were returned (response rate 26%). The results indicated the converging learning style to be most frequently preferred by health science students and that the diverging and accommodating learning styles were least preferred. Bhatti and Bart (2013) also used the Kolb’s learning style inventory to determine the effect of learning styles on scholastic achievement using a descriptive survey design. The participants were undergraduates at University of Minnesota from three randomly selected classes in sociology. A sample of 200 undergraduate students received the consent forms for the study. 193 students participated in the study. SPSS software was used in the analysis of the resulting data. Among the 179 participants who indicated their gender, there were 108 females and 71 males. Findings showed the frequencies of the participants in each learning style category and their respective percentages as follows; 76 Assimilators (39.4%), 49 Divergers (25.4%), 40 Accommodators (20.7%), and 28 Convergers (14.5%). More of the participants had the Assimilating learning style more than any other learning style. Among the 108 female participants, the frequencies of females in each learning style category and their respective percentages of the female subsample are the following; 35 Assimilators (32.4%) 29 Accommodators (26.9%) 28 Divergers (25.9%) and 16 Convergers (14.8%). Among the female participants, the Assimilating learning style category claimed the highest frequency. Among the 71 male participants, the frequencies of males in each learning style category and their respective percentages of the male subsample are the following: 38 Assimilators (53.5%), 17 Divergers (23.9%), 8 convergers (11.3%) and 8 accommodators (11.3%). The Assimilating learning style category claimed the largest frequency among the male participants as it did among the female participants. A two way analysis of variance and chi square test of independence was performed with gender (two categories) and learning style (four categories) being the two factors and GPA being the dependent variable. Results showed that there was a statistically significant main effect for gender with F (1,166) = 6.17, p=0.014, partial eta squared=0.036. There was also a statistically significant main effect for learning style with F(3,166)=2.92, p=0.036, partial eta squared=0.050.The converger participants had the greatest mean GPA. The chi square test of independence showed that the relationship between gender and learning styles is significant, X 2 (3, N=180) =10.72, p=0.013. Ghaffari, Ranjbarzadeh, Azar, Hassanzadeh, Safaei, Golanbar, Mazouchian and Abbasi, (2013) conducted a study on the analysis of learning styles and their relationship with academic achievement in Medical students of Basic sciences program. The study was carried out in Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Iran. A descriptive analytical design was employed. The sample consisted of all medical students of Basic sciences program at Tabriz University of Medical sciences in 2011-2012. The data was collected through a questionnaire which included respondents’ demographic information and overall grade point average as well as Kolb’s standard questions on learning styles. 140 out of 350 questionnaires were fully completed by the 41 respondents. The results showed that 41.7% of respondents were males with an average age of 20.58 ±1.87 and 58.3% were females with an average age of 20.41 ±0.75. 64 respondents (44.9%), 65 (47.8%), 4(2.9%) and 6 (4.3%) used converging, assimilating, accommodating and diverging learning styles respectively. No significant relationship was found between respondents’ preferred learning styles and their gender and age. Students’ calculated average GPA was 15 ±0.61. There was no significant difference between academic achievement of male and female students (p=0.616). Pearson chi squared test results showed a significant inverse relationship between students’ academic achievement and their age (p=0.013 and r= 0.214). One way ANOVA test was used to examine the relationship between students’ academic achievement and their preferred learning styles. The results indicated no significant relationship between the two variables (p=0.598). Cano and Justica (2010) demonstrated that students with better academic achievement scored higher in Concrete Experience, Abstract Conceptualization and Reflective Observation than those with poorer academic achievement. This result was further substantiated by Cano-Garcia and Hughes (2006) who also demonstrated that students with better academic achievement scored higher in Concrete Experience. Another study was conducted by Wei, Hoo and See (2011) on the relationship between learning styles and content based academic achievement among tertiary level students using a descriptive analytical design. Convenience sampling was used to draw 30 students from the field of Finance, Computer science and basic professional writing for Language classes. The instrument for data collection was Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory. Findings showed that majority of the female respondents preferred diverging, accommodating and assimilating learning styles while majority of the male students preferred the converging learning style. In terms of fields of study, findings showed that finance students prefer diverging learning style, computer science students prefer converging learning style while English Language students prefer accommodating learning style. The findings also showed that participants’ preferred learning styles have significant influence on student’s academic achievements. Ibe,(2015) also conducted a study on the effects of learning styles on the performances of senior secondary school biology students in Imo state using quasi- experimental design. The sample consisted of 300 SS 11 Biology students comprising of 150 males and 150 females obtained using simple random sampling. The Biology Achievement Test (BAT) was used to determine the schools’ performance in both pre-test and post-tests. Data were analyzed using Analysis of Covariance at probability level of 0.05. Findings from the study showed that the four learning styles of Kolb were represented amongst the Biology students, many students prefer to learn by more than one mode of information presentation and that the converging learners had the highest mean while the diverging learners had the least mean scores (p=0.67).