Learning styles

Introduction

A combination of political, social and economic drivers has effected major changes in higher education. Much of the change is centred on the ever-widening diversity of students entering the sector and academics are realising that a change to their teaching is required to accommodate this. We can no longer assume all students will achieve by being taught the same way, and consequently new teaching practices are required. Adopting new methods and techniques is aided greatly by the appreciation of the existence of different learning styles. The paragraphs that follow illustrate differing styles and offer suggestions as to how these may be embraced within the engineering curriculum.

Theory

The basic principle behind the theory of learning styles is that different people learn in different ways. There is much literature on learning styles and as with much educational theory, there are some differences of opinion particularly in classification of the different styles. It does not help us in the engineering community that much of the literature is from the business world where several inventory questionnaires have been developed to help people discover their learning styles or preferences, and part with significant amount of money in the process!

A common approach to viewing learning styles is linked to a learning cycle of experience, observation and reflection, formation and then testing of concepts. Although commonly referred to as the “Kolb Learning Cycle” this cycle was proposed by Kurt Lewin who got the idea from control engineering. David Kolb (1984) popularised Lewin's proposal (hence the common title).

The four stages of the Experiential Learning Cycle are:-

Concrete experience
Observation and Reflection
Abstract Conceptualisation
Testing concepts in new situations

The cycle is a continuous process with the current 'concrete experience' being the basis for observations and reflections, which allow the development of a 'theory'. The 'theory' is then tested in new situations to lead to more concrete experience.

Kolb developed from the Lewin model the idea that students have a dominant phase of the cycle during which they prefer to learn and therefore will have preferred modes of learning. In order to identify the preferred study and learning styles, Kolb developed a Learning Style Inventory that identified student's preference for the four modes corresponding to the stages in the learning cycle.

Subsequently Honey and Mumford (1986) developed a Learning Style Questionnaire building upon Kolb's work. They felt that the learning style inventory was not accessible to managers with whom they worked. They identified four styles of learning, which had much in common with Kolb's work and had strong correlations with the learning cycle, (See Figure 1).

Work in the United States has looked at learning styles and engineering and the impact of students' approaches to the effectiveness of learning. Richard Felder and colleagues developed The Index of Learning Styles, a self-scoring instrument that assesses preferences for learning in four dimensions.

Figure 1. The Lewinian Experiential Learning Model (after Kolb, 1984, p21) with the linked Honey and Mumford Learning Styles in italics (Honey and Mumford, 1986)

Felder and Silverman (1988) develop their models' dimensions through student preferences to the following aspects to learning:

What type of information does the student preferentially perceive: sensory (external)
- sights, sounds, physical sensations,or intuitive (internal)
- possibilities, insights, hunches?
Through which sensory channel is external information most effectively perceived: visual - pictures, diagrams, graphs, demonstrations, or auditory - words, sounds?
How does the student prefer to process information: actively - through engagement in physical activity or discussion, or reflectively - through introspection?
How does the student progress toward understanding: sequentially - in continual steps, or globally - in large jumps, holistically?”

From answers to these questions, they developed four dimensions of learning:

Visual: Verbal Learners
Sensing: Intuitive Learners
Active: Reflective Learners
Sequential: Global Learners

Learning Styles in Use:

For the student it may be important to recognise their own learning preferences, though it is impractical for us to pander to these preferences. Students should not be labelled as having one fixed learning style, instead we need to recognise that individuals will have particular modes of learning that are more dominant than others. We need to adopt approaches to teaching that enable students who have different learning styles to learn effectively. This means that we need to design our learning with different learning opportunities (and appropriate assessments - see Constructive Aligment), to ensure that the learning is accessible to the largest number of students.

Felder and Silverman found in their study, and it has been demonstrated in follow up studies, that certain approaches to managing the learning and teaching environment have a strong positive benefit on the learner, (see Table 1). Applying a mix of teaching approaches to the classroom and in planning the learning opportunities for students should benefit the maximum numbers of students.

Table 1. Approaches to teaching that enable learning to a wide range of learning styles. Adapted from Felder and Silverman (1988)
Relate the material being presented to what has come before and what is still to come in the same course, to material in other courses, and to the students' experience (global).
Balance concrete information (sensing) with the abstract concepts such as theories and mathematical models (intuitive).
Balance practical problem-solving methods (sensing/active) with material that emphasizes fundamental understanding (intuitive/reflective).
Provide concrete examples of the phenomena the theory describes or predicts (sensing); then develop the theory (intuitive / sequential); show how the theory can be validated (sequential); and present applications (sensing/sequential).
Use pictures, diagrams and graphs liberally before, during, and after the presentation of verbal material (sensing/visual). Show films or use multimedia simulations (sensing/visual.) Provide demonstrations (sensing/visual), and hands-on experience (active).
Use multimedia, and computer-assisted assessment, sensors respond very well to it (sensing/active).
Provide intervals in teaching-however brief-for students to think about what they have been told (reflective).
Small-group brainstorming activities that take no more than five minutes are extremely effective for active learners (active).
Mix type of problems, so provide practice in the basic methods being taught through 'drill' exercises (sensing/active/sequential) but do not overdo them (intuitive/reflective/ global); and use some open-ended problems and exercises that call for analysis and synthesis (intuitive/reflective/global).
Use group learning and team learning exercises to the greatest possible extent (active). Active learners generally learn best when they interact with others; if they are denied the opportunity to do so they are being deprived of their most effective learning tool.

References

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning, Prentice Hall.

Honey, P. and Mumford A. (1986). A Manual of Learning Styles, Peter Honey, Maidenhead

Source

The chapter above was taken from Houghton, Warren (2004) Engineering Subject Centre Guide: Learning and Teaching Theory for Engineering Academics. Loughborough: HEA Engineering Subject Centre.

In this Section: