1 / 24

Learning Styles in Higher Education

Learning Styles in Higher Education. Presented By: Kim Barron Paul C. Lynch. Outline. Introduction to Learning Styles On Camera Interviews Interaction : Q & A Session with Hi Ed 546 Class Connections to Course Topics Results of Studies Wrap-Up. Introduction.

moses
Download Presentation

Learning Styles in Higher Education

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 in Higher Education Presented By: Kim Barron Paul C. Lynch

  2. Outline • Introduction to Learning Styles • On Camera Interviews • Interaction: Q & A Session with Hi Ed 546 Class • Connections to Course Topics • Results of Studies • Wrap-Up

  3. Introduction • What are Learning Styles? • “Characteristics strengths and preferences in the ways that students take in and process information.” – RMF • Four scales of the ILS • Active-Reflective (A-R) • Sensing-Intuitive (S-N) • Visual-Verbal (Vs-Vb) • Sequential-Global (Sq-G) Source: Felder & Solomon (http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSdir/styles.htm)

  4. Active vs. Reflective • 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. • "Let's try it out and see how it works" is an active learner's phrase; "Let's think it through first" is the reflective learner's response. • Active learners tend to like group work more than reflective learners, who prefer working alone.

  5. Sensing vs. Intuitive • Sensors: like solving problems by well-established methods and dislike complications and surprises. • Intuitors: like innovation and dislike repetition. • Sensors: details, memorizing facts, hands-on (laboratory) work. • Intuitors: grasp new concepts, more comfortable with abstractions, mathematical formulations, and discovering possibilities and relationships. • Sensors: more practical and careful. • Intuitors: work faster and tend to be more innovative than sensors.

  6. Visual vs. Verbal • 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. • Everyone learns more when information is presented both visually and verbally.

  7. Sequential vs. Global • 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." • Sequential learners tend to follow logical stepwise paths in finding solutions. Global learners may be able to solve complex problems quickly or put things together in novel ways once they have grasped the big picture, but they may have difficulty explaining how they did it.

  8. Interviews • Professors: • Dr. John Wise: Director, Engineering Instructional Services • Dr. Leah Newman: Industrial Engineering, Socio-Technical Systems (In the Graduate Panel) • Dr. Deborah Medeiros: Industrial Engineering, Manufacturing

  9. On Camera Interviews • Undergraduate Panel: • Aerospace Engineering Major • Math Major • English Major • Graduate Panel: • Graduate Students • Industrial Engineering Teaching Assistants

  10. It’s Time for the Show….

  11. Q & A Discussion/ Debate Session

  12. Connections to Course Topics • Dewey • Experience • Continuity • Generativity • Barab and Plucker • Situation Dependence • Environmental Effects • McKeachie • Ethics (Ch. 25) • Learning Styles (p. 167-168) (ex: audio vs. visual input)

  13. Results of Studies • Study # 1 By: • Tom Litzinger, Sang Ha Lee, & John Wise • Penn State University • Rich Felder • North Carolina State University

  14. Objectives of Study • Investigate the reliability & validity of the ILS • Determine the variation of learning styles among PSU students • College effects

  15. Sample Characteristics

  16. Factors in each scale • Sensing-Intuitive • One factor • Preference for the concrete (facts, data, the “real world”) or the abstract (interpretations, theories, models) • Visual-verbal • Two factors • Format preferred for input • Format preferred for memory or recall

  17. Factors in each scale • Active-Reflective • Three factors • Action-first or reflection-first • Outgoing or reserved • Attitude toward group work • Sequential-Global • Two factors • Linear/sequential or holistic thinking • Emphasize details or the big picture

  18. Validity • 90% or more of students indicate “like me” or “similar to me” for three of the scales: • Sensing-Intuitive • Visual-Verbal • Active-Reflective • Sequential-Global • 22% of those with strong preference indicate “unlike me.”

  19. Reflective-Active

  20. Intuitive-Sensing

  21. Verbal-Visual

  22. Global-Sequential

  23. Summary • Data indicate that inferences drawn using S-N, A-R, and Vs-Vb scales are likely to be valid. • Student characteristics • College • Trends largely as expected

  24. Questions?

More Related