The field of larning manners is broad and affected by several inputs, accordingly taking to different constructs and positions. Many larning manner theoretical accounts are in literature, each is suggesting different descriptions, attack and categorizations of larning types. Coffield et Al. ( 2004b ) identified 71 theoretical accounts of larning manners and categorized 13 of them as major theoretical accounts with regard to their theoretical importance in the field, their broad spread usage, and their influence on other larning manner theoretical accounts. Furthermore, a batch of researches have been carried out in the last decennaries with regard to different facets of larning manner theoretical accounts.
Teachers and research workers have realized the importance of larning manners. Educators have for many old ages noticed that some pupils prefer certain methods of larning more than others ( Shell, 1991 ) . Researches on larning manners have found that pupils ‘ acquisition manners affect public presentation in a acquisition environment. Learning manners form a pupil ‘s alone larning penchant and aid teachers in the planning of learning/teaching environment ( Kemp, Morrison & A ; Ross, 1998, p. 40 ) .
As stated by Coffield et Al. ( 2004b ) , about 2000 articles have been written related to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ( Briggs Myers, 1962 ) between 1985 and 1995 and more than 1000 publications have been written about the Kolb acquisition manner theoretical account ( Kolb, 1984 ) every bit good as the Dunn and Dunn larning manner theoretical account ( Dunn and Dunn, 1974 ) . Numerous surveies have investigated the impact of larning manners in community college classs ( Jones, Reichard & A ; Mokhtari, 2003, Terry, 2001 ) . Few surveies to day of the month hold evaluated the pupils ‘ perceptual experiences in larning manners and blended acquisition environment ( Lemire, 2002 ; Raschick, Maypole & A ; Day, 1998 ; Terrell & A ; Dringus, 1999 ; Simpson & A ; Du, 2004 ; Richmond & A ; Liu 2005 ) . The surveies about larning manners largely focus on the success of scholars in traditional acquisition environments, attitudes towards larning environments or the rate of engagement in the acquisition environment ( Akkoyunlu & A ; Soylu, 2008 ) . The research worker did n’t happen in the literature any probe correlating the acquisition manners with the Maritime Education and Training field.
To day of the month, no individual definition of the term larning manner has been identified ; the term larning manner has been defined by many writers as follows:
Honey and Mumford ( 1992, p. 1 ) , for illustration, defined learning manners as “ a description of the attitudes and behaviours which determine an person ‘s preferable manner of larning ” . Felder ( 1996, p. 18 ) defined larning manners as “ characteristic strengths and penchants in the ways they [ scholars ] take in and procedure information ” . James and Gardner ( 1995, p. 20 ) defined larning manners more exactly by stating that larning manner is the “ complex mode in which, and conditions under which, learners most expeditiously and most efficaciously perceive, procedure, shop, and remember what they are trying to larn ” . Peoples learn in different ways as the inclination to follow a peculiar scheme in larning. Most pupils have a preferable acquisition manner but some may accommodate their acquisition manners harmonizing to undertakings ( Pask, 1976 ) . Learning manner may besides be defined as personal qualities that influence a pupil ‘s ability to get information, to interact with equals and the instructors, and otherwise take part in larning experiences ( Grasha, 1996, p.41 ) . Learning manners are traits that refer to how persons approach larning undertakings and procedure information ( Kemp, Morrison & A ; Ross, 1998, p. 40 ) . Jensen ( 2003 ) defined it as a preferable manner of thought, processing, and understanding information.
Depending on the thoughts and facets of the significance of larning manners, other footings such as larning scheme and cognitive manner are frequently used in a similar context or even interchangeable to the term larning manner. In the undermentioned paragraphs, definitions of the footings larning schemes and cognitive manners are introduced and the difference to larning manners is described.
Learning schemes can be seen as short term methods that pupils apply in a peculiar state of affairs. These schemes can alter with the clip, teacher, capable, and state of affairs. When larning schemes are often used by pupils, larning manners can be derived from these schemes ( Pask, 1976b ) . Based on Pask ‘s work, Entwistle, Hanley, and Hounsell ( 1979, p. 368 ) specify a acquisition scheme as “ the manner a pupil chooses to undertake a specific larning undertaking in the visible radiation of its sensed demands ” and learning manner “ as a broader word picture of a pupil ‘s preferable manner of undertaking larning undertakings by and large ” . Furthermore, they argued that distinguishable acquisition manners underlie larning schemes.
Harmonizing to Jonassen and Grabowski ( 1993 ) , larning manners can besides be seen as applied cognitive manners in the sphere of acquisition, removed one more degree from pure treating ability. As grounds of this remotion, acquisition manners are normally based on ego reported learning penchants. For mensurating them, instruments are used that ask scholars about their penchants. In contrast, cognitive manners are identified by task-relevant steps, which test the existent ability or accomplishment. The following subdivision introduces several normally used larning manner theoretical accounts.
Subsequently, the deductions of acquisition manners for instruction every bit good as unfavorable judgment and challenges of the field of learning manners are discussed.
2.1 Common Models of Learning Styles
As stated before, a high figure of larning manner theoretical accounts exists in literature. Coffield et Al. ( 2004b ) classified larning manner theoretical accounts into 5 households which are based on some overarching thoughts behind the theoretical accounts, trying to reflect the positions of the chief theoreticians of larning manners. The first household relies on the thought that larning manners and penchants are mostly constitutionally based including the four modes: ocular, audile, kinaesthetic, and tactile. The 2nd household trades with the thought that larning manners reflect deep-rooted characteristics of the cognitive construction, including forms of abilities. A 3rd class refers to larning manners as one constituent of a comparatively stable personality type. In the 4th household, acquisition manners are seen as flexibly stable larning penchants. The last class moves on from larning manners to larning attacks, schemes, orientations and constructs of acquisition.
Table 2.1: Summary of described learning manner theoretical accounts
This subdivision describes 10 normally used larning manner theoretical accounts. The choice of these theoretical accounts is based on Coffield ‘s reappraisal ( Coffield et al. , 2004a ) , including the theoretical importance in the field, their widespread usage, and their influence on other larning manner theoretical accounts. Additionally, the pertinence of the acquisition manner theoretical accounts in engineering enhanced acquisition was considered as of import standard, including the application of larning manner theoretical accounts in already bing systems every bit good as their possible to be used in a system. Since this thesis focuses on larning manners instead than on cognitive manners, theoretical accounts that step the cognitive abilities and accomplishments instead than self-reported learning penchants were excluded. Therefore, no theoretical accounts of the 2nd household were described, where acquisition manners are seen as characteristics of the cognitive construction. Table 2.1 shows the selected acquisition manner theoretical accounts grouped harmonizing to the categorization by Coffield et Al. ( 2004b ) and ordered harmonizing to the dependences of the theoretical accounts among each other.
2.1.1 Personality Types as defined by Myers-Briggs
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ( MBTI ) ( Briggs Myers, 1962 ) is a personality trial and is non focused specifically on larning. Nevertheless, the personality of a scholar influences his/her manner of acquisition and hence, MBTI includes of import facets for larning. Besides, other larning manner theoretical accounts are based on considerations of MBTI. Based on Jung ‘s theory of psychological types ( Jung, 1923 ) , the MBTI distinguishes a individual ‘s type harmonizing to four dualities: extroversion/introversion, sensing/intuition, thinking/feeling, and judging/perceiving. All possible combinations can happen, which result in a entire figure of 16 types.
The extravert and introvert dimension refers to the orientation of a individual. The preferable focal point of people with an extravert attitude is on the milieus such as other people and things, whereas an introvert ‘s preferable focal point is on his/her ain ideas and thoughts. Feeling and intuition trade with the manner people prefer to comprehend informations. While feeling people prefer to comprehend informations from their five senses, intuitive people use their intuition and prefer to comprehend informations from the unconscious. The judgement based on the perceived informations can be distinguished between thought and feeling. Thinking means that the judgement is based on logical connexions such as “ true or false ” and “ if-then ” while experiencing refers to “ more-less ” and “ better-worse ” ratings. However, judgement and determinations are in both instances based on rational considerations. The last duality describes whether a individual is more extrospective in his/her stronger judgement map ( believing or experiencing ) or in the perceiving map ( feeling or intuition ) . Judging people prefer measure by measure attacks and construction every bit good as coming to a speedy closing. Perceiving people have a penchant for maintaining all options open and tend to be more flexible and self-generated.
The penchants on the four dimensions interact with each other instead so being independent, and for a complete description of a individual ‘s type, the combination of all four penchants needs to be considered.
The standard version of the MBTI is the 93-item Form M ( Myers and McCaulley, 1998 ) . The old version is the Form G ( Myers and McCaulley, 1985 ) , which includes 126 points, and at that place be besides an abbreviate version with 50 points. The instruments include a series of forced-choice inquiries, related to the four bipolar graduated tables, and cipher the personality type based on the replies.
2.1.2 Pask ‘s Serialist/Holist/Versatilist Model
During the development of the conversation theory ( Pask, 1972, 1976a, 1976b ) , Pask studied forms of conversations between persons to place assorted manners of acquisition and thought. A critical method harmonizing to the conversation theory is the “ teachback ” attack, where pupils teach their equals. Different forms for planing, planning, and forming of idea every bit good as for choosing and stand foring information were investigated, ensuing in the designation of three types of scholars ( Pask, 1976b ) . Serialist pupils use a consecutive acquisition scheme. They tend to concentrate more narrowly on inside informations and processs before gestating an overall image. They typically work from the underside up, learn step-by-step in a additive sequence and dressed ore on good defined and consecutive ordered balls of information. Harmonizing to Pask, consecutive scholars tend to disregard relevant connexions between subjects, which can be seen as their acquisition shortage. In contrast, holists use a holistic acquisition scheme. They tend to concentrate on edifice wide descriptions and utilize a top-down attack. They focus on several facets of the topic at the same clip and usage complex links to associate
Multi leveled information. While they are good in constructing interconnectednesss between theoretical, practical, and personal facets of a subject, holistic scholars do non concentrate on adequate inside informations, which can be seen as their acquisition shortage. Versatile scholars employ both, series and holistic acquisition schemes. They engage in planetary and elaborate attacks and win in accomplishing a full and deep apprehension. Therefore, versatile scholars are adept at larning from most or all manners of direction.
Pask developed some trials such as the Spy Ring History Test ( Pask and Scott, 1973 ) and the Clobbits Test ( Pask, 1975 ) as step for consecutive, holistic and various thought. Some old ages subsequently, Entwistle ( 1981 ; 1998 ) and Ford ( 1985 ) developed self-report stock lists for placing a penchant for consecutive, holistic, and versatile larning manners.
The Study Preference Questionnaire developed by Ford ( 1985 ) provided pupils with braces of two statements ( one on the left side and one on the right side ) and asked them to bespeak their grade of understanding with either statements, or to bespeak no penchant, utilizing a 5 point graduated table. Entwistle ‘s learning manner theoretical account ( described in the following subdivision ) is based on Pask ‘s work. With regard to his theoretical account, Entwistle designed stock lists to tap into a figure of dimensions of survey attitudes and behaviors, including besides the serial/holistic/versatile dimension ( Entwistle, 1981, 1998 ) .
2.1.3 Entwistle ‘s Deep, Surface and Strategic Learning
The research conducted by Entwistle and his co-workers ( Entwistle, 1981, 1998 ; Entwistle, McCune, and Walker, 2001 ) trades with the engagement of pupils ‘ purposes, ends and motive in their acquisition attack. Entwistle argued that the pupils ‘ orientations to and constructs of larning lead to and are affected by the pupil ‘s typical attacks to larning. The theoretical account is based on research by Pask ( 1976b ) , Marton ( 1976 ) , and Biggs ( 1979 ) and distinguishes between three attacks for larning and analyzing ( Entwistle, McCune, and Walker, 2001 ) : scholars using a deep acquisition attack are per se motivated and have the purpose to understand the thoughts for themselves. They learn by associating thoughts to old cognition and experiences, looking for forms and implicit in rules, and look intoing grounds and associating it to decisions. They examine logic and statements carefully and critically, develop an apprehension of the subject, and go actively interested in the class content. In contrast, scholars who apply a surface acquisition attack are extrinsically motivated and take simply at run intoing the demands of the class. They treat the class content as unrelated spots of cognition, seek to place those elements of a class that are likely to be assessed and concentrate on memorising these inside informations. They carry out processs routinely and happen trouble in doing sense of new thoughts presented. They see small value or significance in either classs or undertakings set, analyze without reflecting on either aim or scheme, and experience undue force per unit area and worry about their work. In the strategic acquisition attack, pupils combine the deep and surface attack in order to accomplish the best possible result in footings of Markss. Students who adopt the strategic attack put consistent attempt into analyzing, manage clip and attempt efficaciously, find the right conditions and stuffs for analyzing, and supervise the effectivity of ways of analyzing. They are watchful to assessment demands and standards and gear work to the sensed penchants of instructors.
For mensurating the adoptive attack of larning and analyzing of pupils, several versions of a questionnaire have been evolved such as the Approaches to Analyzing Inventory ( ASI ) ( Ramsden and Entwistle, 1981 ) , the Course Perception Questionnaire ( CPQ ) ( Ramsden and Entwistle, 1981 ) , the Revised Approaches to Analyzing Inventory ( RASI ) ( Entwistle and Tait, 1995 ) , the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students ( ASSIST ) ( Entwistle and Tait, 1996 ) , and the Approaches to Learning and Studying Inventory ( ALSI ) ( Tyler and Entwistle, 2003 ) . Since Entwistle ‘s theoretical account is based on Pask ‘s consecutive and holistic acquisition scheme, this construct is besides included in the questionnaires. For illustration, in the ASSIST, the presently most frequently used instrument, the consecutive and holistic acquisition scheme is included as subcategory of the deep acquisition attack.
2.1.4 Grasha-Riechmann Learning Style Model
The Grasha-Riechmann acquisition manner theoretical account ( Grasha and Riechmann, 1975 ; Riechmann and Grasha, 1974 ) focuses on the pupils ‘ societal interaction with their instructors and fellow pupils in the schoolroom environment. Grasha and Riechmann identified three bipolar dimensions in order to understand the pupils ‘ behavior with regard to their societal interaction: the participant/avoidant, collaborative/competitive, and dependent/independent dimension. The participant/avoidant dimension indicates how much a pupil wishes to go involved in the schoolroom environment. Students who adopt a participant manner desire to larn the class content and bask go toing the category. They take duty for their ain acquisition and bask take parting in the acquisition activities. In contrast, pupils who adopt an avoidant manner do non like to larn and make non bask go toing the category. They besides do non take duty for their acquisition and avoid taking portion in the class activities.
The collaborative/competitive dimension measures the motive behind a pupil ‘s interactions with others. Collaborative scholars are characterised as scholars who are concerted, enjoy working with others, and see the schoolroom as a topographic point for acquisition and interacting with others. On the other manus, competitory scholars see their fellow pupils as rivals. They have the motive to make better than others, bask viing, and see the schoolroom as a win-lose state of affairs. The dependent/independent dimension steps attitudes toward instructors and how much the pupils desire freedom and control in the acquisition environment. Dependent pupils see the instructor as the beginning of information and construction. They want to be told what to make by governments and larn merely what is required. Independent scholars are characterised as confident and funny scholars. They prefer to believe for themselves and work on their ain.
For mensurating the penchant of pupils with regard to the six acquisition manners, a 90- point self-report stock list called Student Learning Styles Scale ( SLSS ) ( Grasha and Riechmann, 1975 ) was developed. The questionnaire is created in peculiar for college and high school pupils. It is divided in six subcategories, each for one acquisition manner.
Each subcategory consists of 15 inquiries. Students are asked to rate their understanding or dissension to these inquiries on a 5-point Likert graduated table. Sing the issue that the manners may alter from category to category for each pupil, two different signifiers are designed, one that assesses a general category, and the 2nd that relates to a specific class.
2.1.5 Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model
The Dunn and Dunn larning manner theoretical account ( Dunn and Dunn, 1974 ; Dunn and Griggs, 2003 ) was originally proposed in 1974 and so refined and extended over the old ages. The theoretical account distinguishes between grownups and kids and includes five variables where each variable consists of several factors. The environmental variable includes sound, temperature, visible radiation, and seating/furniture design. The sociological variable incorporates factors covering with the penchant for larning entirely, in a brace, in a little group, as portion of a squad, with an authorization, or in varied attacks ( as antonym to in forms ) . For kids, to boot the motive from parents/teachers is included as factor. The emotional variable consists of the factors motive, conformity/responsibility, continuity, and need for construction. The physical variable is comprised of factors sing perception/modality penchants ( ocular, audile, tactile/kinaesthetic external, kinesthetic internal ) , nutrient and imbibe consumption, clip of twenty-four hours and mobility. The psychological variable was added subsequently to the theoretical account and includes factors mentioning to global/analytic penchants, right or left hemisphericity, and impulsive/reflective penchants.
For observing the acquisition manner penchants harmonizing to the Dunn and Dunn larning manner theoretical account, different versions of questionnaires were developed. The Learning Styles Inventory ( Dunn, Dunn, and Price, 1996 ) was developed for kids and exists in three versions ( kindergarten to rate 2, grade 3 and 4, grade 5-12 ) . This stock list consists of 104 inquiries which employ a 3-choice or 5-choice Likert graduated table. The Building Excellence Inventory ( Rundle and Dunn, 2000 ) is the current version for grownups. It includes 118 inquiries and employs a 5-point Likert graduated table. As a consequence, a high or low penchant for each factor is identified.
2.1.6 Gregorc ‘s Mind Styles Model
Gregorc ‘s head manner theoretical account ( Gregorc, 1982a ; Gregorc, 1982b ; Gregorc, 1985 ) is based on two dimensions covering with the penchants for perceptual experience and ordination. Sing perceptual experience, people can prefer an abstract or concrete manner of perceptual experience, or some combination of both. Abstract perceptual experience refers to the ability to procedure information through ground and intuition, frequently unseeable to our physical senses. In contrast, concrete perceptual experience emphasises the physical senses and refers to the ability to procedure information through these senses. The telling dimension trades with the manner a scholar is set uping, prioritising, and utilizing information in either a consecutive or random order, or in a combination of both. While a consecutive manner pertains to utilize a additive, bit-by-bit organizational strategy, a random order manner refers to the usage of a network-like format which relates informations to each other in a assortment of ways. The perceptual and telling penchants can be combined into four basic mediation channels which lead to four types of scholars.
The concrete consecutive scholars prefer to utilize their five senses for treating information and are considered as orderly, logical, and consecutive. These scholars look for authorization and counsel in a acquisition environment and prefer to pull out information from hands-on experiences. The concrete random scholars are characterised by the demand to experiment with thoughts and constructs and will use trial-and-error in larning. They like to research the acquisition environment, are considered as insightful, can easy travel from facts to theory, and do non like important intercessions.
The abstract consecutive scholars have their strengths in the country of decrypting written, verbal, and image symbols. They prefer rational and consecutive presentations and are good in synthesizing thoughts and bring forthing new constructs or results to new decisions. They will postpone to authorization and has a low tolerance for distractions.
The abstract random scholars are characterised by a acute consciousness of human behavior and an ability to measure and construe atmosphere and temper. They prefer an unstructured acquisition environment and coactions with others, are good in seeing relationships, tend to be brooding and need clip to treat informations before responding to it. A more elaborate description about the features and penchants of the four types of scholars is provided by Gregorc ( 1982a ; 1982b ) . The Gregorc Style Delineator ( Gregorc, 1982b ; Gregorc, 1985 ) is a self-report instrument to observe scholars ‘ penchants for the two dimensions and therefore their preferable channels. The instrument presents the pupils with 40 words arranged in 10 columns of four points each. The scholars are so asked to rank the four words relative to how they fit to themselves ( 1 for being least and 4 for being most like themselves ) . Tonss for each of the four scholar types can run from 10 to 40, calculated by summing up the ranks of the several words for each channel.
2.1.7 Kolb ‘s Learning Style Model
The learning manner theory by Kolb ( 1984 ) is based on the Experiential Learning Theory ( for illustration, Kolb, 1984 ) , which theoretical accounts the acquisition procedure and incorporates the of import function of experience in this procedure. Following this theory, acquisition is conceived as a four-stage rhythm. Concrete experience is the footing for observations and contemplations.
These observations are used to organize abstract constructs and generalisations, which once more act as footing for proving executions of constructs in new state of affairss. Testing executions consequences in concrete experience, which closes the learning rhythm.
Harmonizing to this theory, scholars need four abilities for effectual acquisition: a ) Concrete Experience abilities, B ) Reflective Observation abilities, degree Celsius ) Abstract Conceptualization abilities, and vitamin D ) Active Experimentation abilities. On closer scrutiny, there are two polar opposite dimensions: concrete/abstract and active/reflective. Kolb ( 1981 ) described that “ as a consequence of our familial equipment, our peculiar past life experience, and the demands of our present environment, most of us develop larning manners that emphasize some acquisition abilities over others ” . Based on this premise, Kolb identified four statistically prevailing types of acquisition manners.
Convergers ‘ dominant abilities are abstract conceptualisation and active experimentation. Therefore, their strengths lie in the practical applications of thoughts. The name “ Convergers ” is based on Hudson ‘s theory of thought manners ( Hudson, 1966 ) , where convergent minds are people who are good in garnering information and facts and seting them together to happen a individual correct reply to a specific job.
In contrast, Divergers excel in the opposite poles of the two dimensions, viz. concrete experimentation and brooding observation. They are good in sing concrete state of affairss in many different positions and in forming relationships to a meaningful form. Harmonizing to Hudson, a dominant strength of Divergers is to bring forth thoughts and hence, Divergers tend to be more originative.
Learners excel in abstract conceptualisation and brooding observation. Their greatest strength lies in making theoretical theoretical accounts. They are good in inductive logical thinking and in absorbing disparate observations into an incorporate account.
Obligers have the opposite strengths to Learners. Their dominant abilities are concrete experience and active experimentation. Their strengths prevarication in making things actively, transporting out programs and experiments, and going involved in new experiences.
They are besides characterized as risk-takers and as people who excel in state of affairss that call for version to specific immediate fortunes. For placing larning manners based on Kolb ‘s learning manner theoretical account, the Learning Style Inventory ( LSI ) was developed ( Kolb, 1976 ) and revised several times. The current version of LSI ( Kolb and Kolb, 2005 ) uses a forced-choice ranking method to measure an person ‘s preferable manners of acquisition ( Concrete Experience, Reflective Observation, Abstract Conceptualization and Active Experimentation ) . Persons are asked to finish 12 sentences about their preferable manner of larning. Each sentence has four terminations and the persons are asked to rank the terminations harmonizing to what best describes how they learn ( 4 = most like you ; 1 = least like you ) . The consequences of the LSI indicate the persons ‘ penchants for the four manners. Furthermore, their mark for the active/reflective and concrete/abstract dimensions can be derived from the preferable manners, which once more lead to the preferable type of larning manner.
2.1.8 Honey and Mumford ‘s Learning Style Model
The acquisition manner theoretical account by Honey and Mumford ( 1982 ) is based on Kolb ‘s Experiential Learning Theory ( for illustration, Kolb, 1984 ) and is developed farther on the four types of Kolb ‘s learning manner theoretical account ( Kolb, 1984 ) . The active/reflective and concrete/abstract dimensions are strongly involved in the defined types as good. Furthermore, Honey and Mumford stated that “ the similarities between his theoretical account [ Kolb ‘s theoretical account ] and ours are greater than the differences ” ( Honey and Mumford, 1992 ) .
In Honey and Mumford ‘s learning manner theoretical account the types are called: Militant ( similar to Accommodator ) , Theorist ( similar to Assimilator ) , Pragmatist ( similar to Converger ) , and Reflector ( similar to Diverger ) . Militants involve themselves to the full in new experiences, are enthusiastic about anything new, and larn best by making something actively.
Theorists excel in accommodating and incorporating observations into theories. They need theoretical accounts, constructs, and facts in order to prosecute in the acquisition procedure. Pragmatists are interested in existent universe applications of the erudite stuff. They like to seek out and experiment on thoughts, theories, and techniques to see if they work in pattern. Reflectors are people who like to detect other people and their experiences from many different positions and reflect about them exhaustively before coming to a decision. For Reflectors, larning occurs chiefly by detecting and analysing the ascertained experiences. The Learning Style Questionnaire ( LSQ ) , a self-report stock list for placing larning manners based on the Honey and Mumford larning manner theoretical account, every bit good as its manual was ab initio developed in 1982 ( Honey and Mumford, 1982 ) , revised in 1992 ( Honey and Mumford, 1992 ) and so replaced in 2000 ( Honey and Mumford, 2000 ) and once more revised in 2006 ( Honey and Mumford, 2006 ) . Presently, two versions of the LSQ exist, one with 80 points and one with 40 points.
2.1.9 Herrmann “ Whole Brain ” Model
The Herrmann “ Whole Brain ” theoretical account ( Herrmann, 1989 ) is based on the split-brain research carried out by Roger Sperry ( 1964 ) , dividing the encephalon in the left and right intellectual hemispheres. In add-on, the Herrmann “ Whole Brain ” theoretical account considers, following MacLean ( 1952 ) , the hypothesized maps of the encephalon ‘s limbic system.
Consequently, persons are modeled with regard to how they process information utilizing either a intellectual manner, by believing about the job, or a limbic manner, which is a more active attack based on experimentation.
The Herrmann “ Whole Brain ” theoretical account distinguishes between four manners or quarter-circles. Learners who have a primary penchant for quarter-circle A ( left hemisphere, intellectual ) prefer logical, analytical, mathematical, proficient thought and can be considered as quantitative, factual, and critical. Learners with a primary penchant for quarter-circle B ( left hemisphere, limbic ) tend to be consecutive and organized, like inside informations, construction and programs and have a structured, organisational and controlled thought manner. Learners with a primary penchant for the quadrant C ( right hemisphere, limbic ) are characterized as emotional, interpersonal, centripetal, kinaesthetic, and musical. Learners who have a primary penchant for quadrant D ( right hemisphere, intellectual ) tend to be ocular, holistic, and advanced and prefer conceptual, synthesizing, and inventive thought. For placing the preferable quarter-circle, the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument ( HBDI ) was developed ( Herrmann, 1989 ) . The HBDI is a self-report stock list, incorporating 120 inquiries. As a consequence of the HBDI, a encephalon laterality profile is calculated, which shows the primary, secondary and third penchants.
2.1.10 Felder-Silverman Learning Style Model
In Felder-Silverman acquisition manner theoretical account ( FSLSM ) ( Felder and Silverman, 1988 ) , scholars are characterized by values on four dimensions. These dimensions are based on major dimensions in the field of larning manners and can be viewed independently from each other. They show how scholars prefer to treat ( active/reflective ) , perceive ( sensing/intuitive ) , receive ( verbal/visual ) , and understand ( sequential/global ) information. While these dimensions are non new in the field of larning manners, the manner in which they describe a learning manner of a pupil can be seen as new. While most learning manner theoretical accounts, which include two or more dimensions, derive statistically prevailing scholar types from these dimensions, such as the theoretical accounts by Myers-Briggs ( Briggs Myers, 1962 ) , Gregorc ( 1982a ) , Kolb ( 1984 ) , and Honey and Mumford ( 1982 ) , Felder and Silverman describe the acquisition manners by utilizing graduated tables from +11 to -11 for each dimension ( including merely uneven values ) . Therefore, the learning manner of each scholar is characterized by four values between +11 and -11, one for each dimension. These graduated tables facilitate depicting the acquisition manner penchants in more item, whereas edifice scholar types does non let separating between the strength of the penchant. Additionally, the use of graduated tables allows showing balanced penchants, bespeaking that a scholar does non hold a specific penchant for one of the two poles of a dimension. Furthermore, Felder and Silverman consider the ensuing penchants as inclinations, intending that even a scholar with a strong penchant for a peculiar acquisition manner can move sometimes otherwise.
The active/reflective dimension is correspondent to the several dimension in Kolb ‘s theoretical account ( 1984 ) . Active scholars learn best by working actively with the larning stuff, by using the stuff, and by seeking things out. Furthermore, they tend to be more interested in pass oning with others and prefer to larn by working in groups where they can discourse about the erudite stuff. In contrast, brooding scholars prefer to believe about and reflect on the stuff. Sing communicating, they prefer to work entirely or in a little group together with one good friend. The sensing/intuitive dimension is taken from the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
( Briggs Myers, 1962 ) and has besides similarities to the sensing/intuitive dimension in Kolb ‘s theoretical account ( Kolb, 1984 ) . Learners with a feeling learning manner like to larn facts and concrete larning stuff, utilizing their centripetal experiences of peculiar cases as a primary beginning. They like to work out jobs with standard attacks and besides be given to be more patient with inside informations. Furthermore, feeling scholars are considered as more realistic and reasonable ; they tend to be more practical than intuitive scholars and like to associate the erudite stuff to the existent universe. In contrast, intuitive scholars prefer to larn abstract larning stuff, such as theories and their implicit in significances, with general rules instead than concrete cases being a preferable beginning of information. They like to detect possibilities and relationships and be given to be more advanced and originative than feeling scholars. Therefore, they score better in open-ended trials than in trials with a individual reply to a job. This dimension differs from the active/reflective dimension in an of import manner: the sensing/intuitive dimension trades with the preferable beginning of information whereas the active/reflective dimension covers the procedure of transforming the sensed information into cognition. The 3rd, visual/verbal dimension trades with the preferable input manner. The dimension differentiates scholars who remember best what they have seen ( e.g. , images, diagrams, flow-charts and so on ) , from scholars who get more out of textual representations, irrespective of the fact whether they are written or spoken.
In the 4th dimension, scholars are distinguished between a consecutive and planetary manner of understanding. This dimension is based on the acquisition manner theoretical account by Pask ( 1976b ) , where consecutive scholars refer to consecutive scholars and planetary scholars refer to holistic scholars. Consecutive scholars learn in little incremental stairss and hence have a additive acquisition advancement. They tend to follow logical stepwise waies in happening solutions.
In contrast, planetary scholars use a holistic thought procedure and learn in big springs. They tend to absorb larning material about indiscriminately without seeing connexions but after they have learned adequate stuff they all of a sudden get the whole image. Then they are able to work out complex jobs and set things together in fresh ways ; nevertheless, they have troubles in explicating how they did it. Because the whole image is of import for planetary scholars, they tend to be more interested in overviews and in a wide cognition, whereas consecutive scholars are more interested in inside informations.
For placing larning manners based on the FSLSM, Felder and Soloman developed the Index of Learning Styles ( ILS ) ( Felder and Soloman, 1997 ) , a 44-item questionnaire. As mentioned earlier, each scholar has a personal penchant for each dimension. These penchants are expressed with values between +11 to -11 per dimension, with stairss +/-2. This scope comes from the 11 inquiries that are posed for each dimension.
2.2 Deductions of Learning Styles in Education
Many educational theoreticians and research workers consider larning manners as an of import factor in the acquisition procedure and agree that integrating them in instruction has possible to do acquisition easier for pupils. Furthermore, Felder, for illustration, argued that scholars with a strong penchant for a specific larning manner might hold troubles in larning if their acquisition manner is non supported by the instruction environment ( Felder and Silverman, 1988 ; Felder and Soloman, 1997 ) . Therefore, from a theoretical facet, it can be argued that integrating the acquisition manners of pupils makes larning easier for them and increases their learning efficiency. On the other manus, scholars who are non supported by the acquisition environment may see jobs in the acquisition procedure.
Learning manners can be considered in different ways in instruction. A first measure is to do scholars aware of their acquisition manners and demo them their single strengths and failings. The cognition about their acquisition manners helps pupils to understand why acquisition is sometimes hard for them and is the footing for developing their failings. Furthermore, pupils can be supported by fiting the learning manner with the acquisition manners of the pupils. Due to the nature of larning manners, supplying pupils with larning stuff and activities that fit their preferable ways of larning seems to hold high potency to do acquisition easier for them. However, the fiting attack purposes at a short-run end, viz. to do acquisition as easy as possible at the clip pupils are larning. Looking at long-run ends, educational theoreticians such as Messick ( 1976 ) , Kolb ( 1984 ) and Grasha ( 1984 ) suggested that scholars should besides develop their not-preferred accomplishments and penchants. Messick argued that when scholars get more educational experience, they are required to accommodate to a assortment of instructional methods and manners. The ability to accommodate to different instructional manners will fix them with of import life accomplishments. For illustration, supplying verbal scholars with merely ocular signifiers of direction forces them to develop and utilize ocular accomplishments. For Grasha, the mismatching attack is relevant in order to do larning interesting and disputing for pupils and Kolb argued that the educational aims for mismatching are personal growing and creativeness. However, in Gregorc ‘s theoretical account, larning manners are seen as stable, and hence he argued that a mismatched attack can harm pupils ( Gregorc, 2002 ) . Felder advises against the unwilled, lasting mismatch of learning manners and larning manners, where instructors are incognizant of their ain acquisition manners and may, as a consequence, Teach merely harmonizing to this manner, therefore prefering certain pupils and disadvantages others ( Felder, 1993 ) .
Sum uping these facets, decision can be drawn that the mismatching attack should be applied deliberately and depending on the applied learning manner theoretical account every bit good as on the scholar ‘s demands. In an environment, where pupils get their single acquisition stuff and activities, the matching and the mismatching attacks can be applied in a regulated method, depending on specific fortunes such as the current acquisition end, the experience of the scholar in a specific topic, their motive and so on. A less intensive attack for instructors is to back up their scholars by including larning stuff and activities in their classs that address different acquisition manners instead than learning in a manner that contain merely one acquisition manner. For illustration, if the larning stuff consists chiefly of abstract stuff, instructors can include some concrete illustrations to back up a sensing/concrete acquisition manner or if the instructor is chiefly talking in the class, he/she can see adding some group work activities in order to back up active scholar. By following different acquisition manners, some activities match with the pupil ‘s strength and some other with their failing. Consequently, the composing is non controlled since the class is the same for all pupils.
2.3 Learning Styles Critique
The field of larning manner is multifaceted and although batch of researches had been conducted, of import inquiries are still unreciprocated and problematic issues are under argument. The challenge is to clear up these problematic issues, reply the unfastened inquiries and supply a clear apprehension.
Presently, plentifulness of larning manner theoretical accounts exists, each incorporating some facets of acquisition, and some of them overlapping with each other. Such sum of larning manner theoretical accounts leads to unfavorable judgment and the inquiry on how to incorporate all different dimensions of larning manners in instruction, from a practical position, which larning manner theoretical account is most appropriate and shall be used with the plebes developing onboard the preparation vas. Furthermore, the similarities and relationship between these different acquisition manner theoretical accounts and dimensions are largely non elaborated.
Consequently, a challenge of the field of larning manners is to transport out research that involves all learning manner theoretical accounts and dimensions, fetch lucidity in its relationships to each other every bit good as to other relevant factors of acquisition ( e.g. , cognitive manners and cognitive abilities ) , measure them in order to detect major larning manner models/dimensions, and construct up a holistic theoretical account that integrates all relevant facets of larning manners.
Furthermore, problematic issues such as the inquiry whether acquisition manners are stable or non over clip, capable and environment should be clarified. Depending on the basic thoughts behind the learning manner theoretical accounts, theoreticians made different point of positions for the grade of stableness within their learning manner theoretical accounts. The utmost theoreticians in this aspect province that larning manners similar to larning schemes, therefore as flexible and mutable from context to context and even from undertaking to undertaking. Some theoreticians see larning manners as “ flexibly stable ” , reasoning that old larning experiences and other environmental factors form the acquisition manners of pupils. Others link larning manners strongly to cognitive manners and abilities and argue that they are stable over a long period of clip or even see them as God-given and non mutable.
However, based on the incorporation of peculiar dimensions in different theoretical accounts with different thoughts about the stableness, controversial issues occur. For illustration, the consecutive and holistic acquisition manner by Pask ( 1976b ) is related to the consecutive and random manner by Gregorc ( 1982a ) . However, Pask considers the dimension as comparatively flexible while Gregorc claims that the acquisition manners are non mutable. Therefore, future research is needed in order to cast visible radiation on the stableness of specific dimensions every bit good as larning manner theoretical accounts.
Another issue of unfavorable judgment trades with the deductions of larning manners in instruction. While the effectivity of the duplicate attack seems to be insightful and is one of the really popular recommendations supported by educational theories, inconsistent consequences are obtained by surveies covering with analyzing the contemplation on accomplishment when supplying matched and mismatched instructions for scholars with different larning manners.
Yet the overall feeling is that even if the construct of larning manner were acceptable, the chance of matching is unrealistic and mostly unsupported by research ( Doyle and Rutherford, 1984 ; see besides Candy, 1987 and Curry, 1983 ) . In a utile reappraisal of the assimilation of cognitive manner into grownup instruction, Joughin ( 1992 ) criticizes the premise that fiting will heighten acquisition as simplistic, disregarding “ both the possible value of creatively mismatching instructor and scholar and the ambiguous results of research on fiting itself ( p.7 ) , a position shared by Ruble and Stout ( 1993 ) in peculiar mention to LSI.
Presently, no undisputed and difficult grounds exist that larning manner fiting attack has a important positive consequence on the pupils ‘ accomplishment ( Coffield et al. , 2004b ) . As Jonassen and Grabowski ( 1993 ) summarized, several grounds for such inconsistent consequences are known in the field of aptitude-treatment interaction ( ATI ) research. Restrictions might include “ little samples size, abbreviated interventions, specialized aptitude concepts or standardised trials, and a deficiency of conceptual or theoretical linkage between aptitudes and the information-processing demands of the intervention ” ( Jonassen and Grabowski, 1993, p. 28 ) . This decision shows that more research is required to acquire a clear consequence about the consequence of specific larning manners and other factors on accomplishment.
However, the chief unfavorable judgment sing the matching attack is that it is merely “ unrealistic, given the demands of flexibleness it would do on instructors and trainers ” ( Reynolds, 1997, p. 121 ) . In traditional acquisition, instructors would hold to routinely alter their instruction manner to suit the different acquisition manners in a category. Therefore, the feasibleness of the duplicate attack is depending on the figure of pupils and on the adopted acquisition manner theoretical account. Pask ( 1976b ) , for illustration, distinguishes between three larning manners, Honey and Mumford ( 1982 ) suggest four types of scholars, the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator ( Briggs Myers, 1962 ) includes 16 different types and in the Felder- Silverman larning manner theoretical account ( Felder and Silverman, 1988 ) , scholars can hold up to 625 ( =54 ) different larning manners when set uping each of the four dimensions into five groups ( e.g. , strong active, moderate active, balanced, moderate reflective, strong reflective ) . Therefore, instructors might non hold the capacity to supply each scholar with an single combination of larning stuff and activities every bit shortly as the figure of pupils and the figure of different acquisition manners addition. However, in MET ISSP as engineering enhanced acquisition, altering the instruction manners for each pupil and hence orienting classs to the single demands of pupils is possible, even for a high figure of different acquisition manners and about independent on the figure of pupils. Lot of research is done in the country of adaptative educational systems, and late more and more research trades with personal features of scholars, such as acquisition manners ( Sabine, 2007 ) . In Chapter XXX, a description on adaptative educational systems integrating learning manners is provided and in Chapter XXX, an attack for the proposed Maritime Self Study Program associated with adaptative educational systems in order to supply adaptative maritime classs for the deck plebes with regard to the Felder-Silverman acquisition manner theoretical account is introduced.
Furthermore, more research is required on the topic of mismatching learning manners and larning manners, its consequence on acquisition, and the conditions when such a mismatch is good in footings of either to support scholars and do larning more interesting for them or to accomplish long-run ends by coercing them to develop their failings. Another point of unfavorable judgment is the method for mensurating acquisition manners. Most learning manner theoretical accounts provide a questionnaire, where pupils are asked about their penchants with regard to the acquisition manner theoretical account. These questionnaires raise several jobs ( Sabine, 2007 ) .
Questionnaires, in general, have to cover with the job that the given replies might non match to the existent behaviour the inquiries aim to look into ( Draper, 1996 ; Paredes and Rodriguez, 2004 ) . The usage of questionnaires in general and as an instrument for placing acquisition manners is based on several premises.
First, the premise is made that pupils are motivated to make full out the questionnaire decently and to the best of their cognition about their penchants.
Second, make fulling out a questionnaire about the preferable manner of larning requires that the pupils are cognizant of their preferable manner of acquisition. However, Stash, Cristea, and de Bra ( 2006 ) , for illustration, identified that the Masters pupils take parting in their survey about version to larning manners had merely small meta-knowledge on their acquisition penchants, and Merrill ( 2002 ) , for illustration, even argued that most pupils are incognizant of their acquisition manners. Third, societal and psychological facets such as the pupils ‘ beliefs about how people should act can act upon their replies on the questionnaire.
Furthermore, utilizing questionnaires for placing learning manners trigger the premise that the acquisition manners are stable for a long period of clip. However, as discussed before, the stableness of larning manners is still a problematic issue. Equally shortly as learning manners alteration, the consequences of the questionnaires will non be valid any longer and pupils would hold to make it once more to place their new acquisition manners. However, this argues will do new issues, refering with look intoing how to descry when a acquisition manner changed and how to actuate pupils to make full out the questionnaire a figure of times.
Another issue is the cogency and dependability of the questionnaires themselves. Harmonizing to Coffield et Al. ( 2004b ) , four standards have to be fulfilled as a minimal criterion for any instrument which is to be used to redesign teaching method: concept cogency, prognostic cogency, internal consistence dependability, and test-retest dependability. Construct cogency means that the instrument really measures the theoretical concept or trait that it purports to mensurate. Predictive cogency refers to whether the scope of behaviour can be seen to hold an impact on undertaking public presentation. The internal consistence dependability refers to the homogeneousness of the points intended to mensurate the same measure that is the extent to which responses to the points are correlated. The test-retest dependability measures the extent to which an person achieves the same consequence when executing the questionnaire twice within a specific period ( e.g. , one month ) . However, this trial is based on the premise that larning manners are stable, at least during the trial period. Most learning manner questionnaires are tested harmonizing to these standards. However, instruments frequently lack one or several of these standards, research workers achieve inconsistent consequences or even place latent dimensions. Coffield et Al. ( 2004b, p. 56 ) argued that from the 13 major larning manner theoretical accounts they have identified and studied, merely three of the theoretical accounts “ could be said to come near to run into such standards ” .
Another point that has to be highlighted, which is concentrating on tailoring classs through placing the acquisition manners without sing the complex sociopolitical forces in the larger society, ‘personal heat, trust and community ‘ ( Giroux, 1981:66 ) , or the different positions of feminist and anti racial behaviour, Laurillard ‘s decision is more convincing. She writes:
“ It would hence be risky for an probe of larning to continue on the premise that acquisition is a procedure that is independent of external factors, or those pupils ‘ posses ‘ inherent, invariant manners of larning ” . ( 1979:408 )
That supported by Curry ( 1983 ) who proposes that larning manner theories and their encouraging instruments can be thought of in three degrees, resembling beds of an onion. This theoretical account has “ cognitive personality manner ” as comparatively stable at the nucleus, an intermediate and less stable bed of “ information processing manner ” ( Kolb LSI, for illustration ) , and an outer bed called “ instructional format penchant index ” leting for the person ‘s pick of larning environment. However, in MET ISSP as engineering enhanced acquisition, puting and altering these three degrees stated by Curry ( 1983 ) is possible.
From all these debates, the decision can be drained that questionnaires have to cover with several jobs and limitations. Peoples who are utilizing such questionnaires for placing learning manners should hence be cognizant of these jobs and limitations every bit good as see the restrictions of the questionnaires when construing the consequences. Since the proper designation of larning manners is a important issue, challenge is to develop an attack that measures larning manners more accurately and faithfully, minimising the extent to be affected or restricted by other factors. In Chapter Thirty, the research worker will present an attack to carry on TEL based Maritime Education and Training onboard the preparation vas, which aims at get the better ofing the above mentioned jobs and limitations of questionnaires.
Sum uping this subdivision, it can be concluded that several arguments and unresolved jobs still exist in the field of larning manners. It seems that we are still far manner from a theoretical account of larning manners that integrates all relevant facets of acquisition manners and provides a clear apprehension.
However, the argument and unfavorable judgment of larning manners show challenges in the field, in add-on to the lake of any old surveies about using larning manners in the MET procedure. This thesis is an intercession that tackles some of the challenges and introduces new synergistic TEL attack which contributes to acquire closer to work out some of the mentioned jobs in the Maritime Education and Training and to be a mile rock in using the acquisition manners in a VLE for marine plebes.
One of the most popular acquisition manner stock lists and one that is frequently used in distance acquisition and for grownup research is the Kolb ‘s Learning Style Inventory ( Kolb, 1986 ; Dillie & A ; Mezack, 1991 ; Dowdall, 1991 ; Diaz & A ; Cartnal, 1999 ; Miller, 2005 ; Liegle & A ; Janicki, 2006 ) .