1 / 34

Learning Styles

Learning Styles. Web Initiatives in Teaching Conference May 23, 2000 Presented by Robert P. Ouellette University of Maryland University College http://polaris.umuc.edu/~rouellet / rouellette@umuc.edu . Introduction. Study Design. 1023 students enrolled in TMAN program in Spring 2000

arnaud
Download Presentation

Learning Styles

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Learning Styles Web Initiatives in Teaching Conference May 23, 2000 Presented by Robert P. Ouellette University of Maryland University College http://polaris.umuc.edu/~rouellet / rouellette@umuc.edu

  2. Introduction

  3. Study Design • 1023 students enrolled in TMAN program in Spring 2000 • Distributed Questionnaire • Administered Three Tests • Gregorc Style Delineator • Long/Dziuban Learning Style Inventory • R. M. Felder Index of Learning Styles (ILS) • Made use of additional data from UMUC records

  4. Results – Learning Styles

  5. Learning Styles Theory • General • Gregorc Style Delineator (SD) • Long/Dziuban Learning Style Inventory (LSI) • R. M. Felder Index of Learning Styles (ILS)

  6. Gregorc Style Delineator Long/Dziuban Learning Style Inventory Dependent Independent Aggressive AD AI Passive PD PI R. M. Felder Index of Learning Styles (ILS) Learning Style Models

  7. Gregorc Categories Percentage Abstract Random 7.90% Abstract Sequential 16.80% Concrete Random 19.50% 48.90% Concrete Sequential 7.00% Unresolved Gregorc Summary

  8. Gregorc Style Delineator – Dominant Styles

  9. Long/Dziuban Learning Style Inventory

  10. Types & Traits Univ C. Fla UMUC Aggressive – Dependent 60 60.4 Passive - Independent 23 25.2 Aggressive - Independent 12 10.9 Passive – Dependent 5 3.6 Phobic 26 33.0 Compulsive 72 60.8 Impulsive 13 20.2 Hysteric 25 12.3 Long/Dziuban Comparison

  11. The R.M. Felder Index of Learning Styles (ILS)

  12. Results – Gender Effect

  13. Gender African American American Indian Asian Hispanic Caucasian Subcontinent Others Female 30.6 0.6 13.8 1.9 49.7 1.3 2.5 Male 19.7 0.5 11.8 3.0 55.2 2.5 7.4 Gender by Ethnic Origin

  14. Gender Gender AR Dominant CR Dominant CR Intermediate AR Intermediate CR Low AR Low AR Total CR Total Female Female 32.1 32.1 67.9 60.5 0 7.4 100 100 Male Male 36.0 13.5 73.0 64.0 13.5 0 100 100 CR Concrete Random (CR) AR Abstract Random (AS) Gregorc Style Delineator by Gender

  15. Gender CS Dominant CS Intermediate CS Low CS Total Gender AS Dominant AS Intermediate AS Low AS Total Female 59.3 34.6 6.2 100 Female 43.2 54.3 2.5 100 Male 60.9 35.1 0.0 100 Male 62.2 36.9 0.9 100 AS Abstract Random CS Concrete Sequential Gregorc Style Delineator by Gender (cont)

  16. Gender Information Processing Perception Input Understanding Active Reflective Sensing Intuitive Visual Verbal Sequential Global Female 50.3 49.7 60.4 39.6 61.7 38.3 51.0 49.0 Male 50.0 50.0 59.3 40.7 81.6 18.4 51.6 48.4 Gender and the R. M. Felder Index of Learning Styles

  17. Gender Aggressive – Independent Passive – Independent Aggressive – Dependent Passive – Dependent Female 18.5 10.6 64.2 6.6 Male 30.8 11.4 56.8 1.1 Traits Phobic Impulsive Obsessive Hysteric Female 47.5 48.6 43.4 48.9 Male 52.5 51.5 56.6 51.1 Person Chi Square Likelihood ratio Gender and the Long/Dziuban Learning Style Inventory

  18. Results – Ethnic Origin Effect

  19. Ethnic Origin

  20. Ethnic Origin CR-Level Dominant Intermediate Low Total African American 33.3 66.7 0.0 100.0 American Indian 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 Hispanic 40.0 60.0 0.0 100.0 Asian 37.1 62.9 0.0 100.0 Other 37.5 62.5 0.0 100.0 Subcontinent 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0 Caucasian 33.3 66.7 0.0 100.0 Total 100 Ethnic Origin and Gregorc Style Delineator by Gender

  21. Ethnic Origin AS-Level Dominant Intermediate Low Total African American 54.9 42.3 2.0 100.0 American Indian 100 0.0 0.0 100.0 Hispanic 100 0.0 0.0 100.0 Asian 48.6 51.4 0.0 100.0 Other 37.5 62.5 0.0 100.0 Subcontinent 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Caucasian 51.7 46.0 2.3 100.0 Total 100 Ethnic Origin and Gregorc Style Delineator by Gender

  22. Ethnic Origin CS-Level Dominant Intermediate Low Total African American 68.6 29.4 2.0 100.0 American Indian 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Hispanic 40.0 60.0 0.0 100.0 Asian 55.4 45.7 2.9 100.0 Other 62.5 37.5 0.0 100.0 Subcontinent 66.7 33.4 0.0 100.0 Caucasian 63.2 33.7 3.4 100.0 Total 100 Ethnic Origin and Gregorc Style Delineator by Gender

  23. Ethnic Origin AR-Level Dominant Intermediate Low Total African American 21.6 74.5 3.9 100.0 American Indian 50.0 50.0 0.0 100.0 Hispanic 40.0 60.0 0.0 100.0 Asian 37.1 57.14 5.7 100.0 Other 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0 Subcontinent 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0 Caucasian 11.5 71.3 17.2 100.0 Total 100 Ethnic Origin and Gregorc Style Delineator by Gender

  24. Long/Dziuban Learning Style Inventory by Ethnic Origin

  25. Long/Dziuban Learning Style Inventory by Ethnic Origin TRAITS

  26. Ethnic Origin Information Processing Perception Input Understanding Active Reflective Sensing Intuitive Visual Verbal Sequential Global African American 38.5 61.5 66.7 33.3 69.2 30.8 60.3 39.7 American Indian 50.0 50.0 100 100 100 Hispanic 33.3 66.7 44.4 55.6 72.8 22.2 44.4 55.6 Asian 46.7 53.3 66.7 33.3 82.2 17.8 44.4 55.6 Other 52.8 47.4 66.7 33.3 73.7 26.3 57.9 42.1 Subcontinent 66.7 33.3 83.3 16.7 66.7 33.3 66.7 33.3 Caucasian 56.2 43.8 53.4 46.6 71.3 28.7 51.0 49.0 Total Ethnic Origin and the R. M. Felder Index of Learning Styles

  27. Results – Attitudes

  28. Reasons for Securing M.S. in Technology Management

  29. Reasons for Selecting UMUC

  30. Hypotheses • Students cluster in definite learning style groups • Effect on learning styles in terms of: • Gender • Ethnic Origin • Same effects (gender & ethnic origin) can be found in how students answer questions: • reasons for securing MS degree • reasons for selecting UMUC

  31. The End Web Initiatives in Teaching Conference May 23, 2000 Presented by Robert P. Ouellette University of Maryland University College http://polaris.umuc.edu/~rouellet / rouellette@umuc.edu

More Related