Week 5 Learning Journal

Points to Ponder

Once again this week there has been conversation about learning styles.  I thought it was interesting that  after all this consideration, the Merriam, Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2007, p. 410) tell us that Kolb's Learning Style Inventory meet the minimum criteria for a psychometric instrument.  Why did we spend time on Kolb's LSI if it isn't valid?

So, what instruments are credible?   Is it just the instrument that is not credible, what about the theory?

Ruminations

Minimum standard for any instrument used for the purpose of pedagogy is internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct and predictive validity (Kanninen, 2008).

Kanninen (2008) identifies 71 learning style models, of which 60 have their own questionnaire.  Only three meet the criteria for redesign of pedagogy. Why do we have 71 different learning models??!! Coffield, Mosely, Hall and Ecclestone (2004) studied 13 most popular learning style models and determined that only three came close to showing validity:  

  

1. Allison and Hayes Cognitive Style Index

2. Apter's Motivational Style Profile

3. Vermunt's Inventory of Learning Styles

I found it interesting that Kolb has since developed the Adaptive Style Inventory (ASI) to measure how flexible a leaner is in adjusting a learning style depending on life situation and the Learning Skills Profile (LSP) to differentiate learning styles from learning skills (Coffield, et. al 2004).  Although the Experiential Learning Theory has merit and is widely used independently as well as a base for other developing theories, the LSI's reliability is disputed; the construct validity is questionable and the predictive validity is low (Ibid, 2004).

Of the three instruments listed above, Vermunt's Inventory is considered worthwhile in higher education to assess approaches to learning and for consideration in pedagogy (Kanninen, 2008).  One criticism  is the narrow focus of this model.  It only addresses higher education and may not be applicable to adult general education or vocational education (Coffield, et al 2004).  However, as a student of adult education, I would like to have more awareness of this assessment.  

Vermunt identifies 4 learning styles that make up a "coherent whole of learning activities that students usually employ" (Coffield, et al 2004): meaning-directed, application-directed, reproduction-directed, and undirected.  He does not believe that a learning style is fixed and is the result of an interplay between personal and contextual influences.  Within the framework, each of the 4 learning styles has distinguishing features in 5 areas which suggests each learning style links to behavioral, affective, conative, and metacognition characteristics (Ibid, 2004).  The focus is one the strategies a learner uses to process knowledge (Cassidy, 2004).  The research indicates that Vermunt uses Kolb's Experiential Theory (as well as others) as influence to his approach to assessment of learning styes (Ibid, 2004) 

The chart below explains how each learning style approaches learning (Coffield, et al 2004):

The following graphics offer the learners perspective on how they go about the process of learning (Ibid, 2004).

I can see why this is appealing to educators since it deals directly with how students approach academic learning.  I tried to find an instrument to take to determine my own learning style, but I couldn't find one.   I think I am more of an application-directed learner, but I have certainly engaged in learning from a meaning-directed focus.  Good thing Vermunt's model is fluid and not mutually exclusive (Coffield, et al 2004).  

Bottom line on learning preferences...as an educator, my intent is to offer content in a variety of modes to help students learn not only in their preferred style, but also in other styles so that they become better learners.  While it is a good idea for me to be aware of various learning styles, it should not dictate how knowledge in presented, but instead provide me with some guidelines and strategies to enable me to facilitate the learning process.  71 learning styles, really?

Cassidy, S., 2004.  Learning Styles: A Overview of Theories, Models, and Measures.  Educational Psychology, vol. 24, no 4.  Retrieved from http://www.acdowd-designs.com/sfsu_860_11/LS_OverView.pdf  on November 18, 2012.

Coffield, F.; Mosely, D.; Hall, E.; Ecclestone, K., 2004.  Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 Learning.  Learning Skills and Research Centre.  Retrieved from http://www.leerbeleving.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/learning-styles.pdf on November 18, 2012.

Kanninen, E., 2008. Learning Styles and E-Learning.  Tampere University of Technology, Master's Degree Thesis.  Retrieved from http://hlab.ee.tut.fi/video/bme/evicab/astore/delivera/wp4style.pdf on November 18, 2012.  

Merriam, S.B., Caffarella, R.M., Baumgartner, L.M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide, (3rd ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass