Search

This research compared the effects of a Programmed Learning Sequence (PLS) (Dunn & Dunn, 1993) versus Traditional Teaching (TT) on 100 sixth-grade Bermudian students' test scores on a Fractions Unit. Fifty-three males' and forty-seven females' learning styles were identified with the "Learning Style Inventory" (LSI) (Dunn, Dunn, & Price, 2000) to determine whether those with specific styles fared better or less well with either of the two approaches. Attitudes toward learning fractions traditionally versus with the PLS were assessed with the "Semantic Differential Scale" (SDS) (Pizzo, 1981). The control group's mean-posttest score (M = 5.98) was statistically lower (p less than 0.001) than the experimental group's mean-posttest scores (M = 7.86) (n = 100). In addition, the control group's mean-gain difference between the pre- and posttest (M = 2.28) was statistically lower (p less than 0.001) than the experimental group's (M = 4.27). Furthermore, the experimental group's mean attitude-test score toward learning with the PLS (M = 4.47) was significantly higher than the control group's M = (3.0) at the p less than 0.001 level for all responses. Both achievement- and attitude-test scores translated into large effect sizes. (Contains 3 figures and 2 tables.)

In this essay, the authors argue that understanding students' learning styles is likely to (a) help teachers recognize the causes of some academic problems, and (b) lead to better planned, differentiated instruction. Learning style, as defined by Dunn and Dunn, is highlighted, and research supporting its effectiveness is outlined. By citing numerous examples, the author proposes that identifying patterns of individual learning needs and responding to students' learning styles can result in improved academic achievement.

The authors of this article believe that the current structure of lesson plans impede differentiation, individualization, and innovation and offer little in assessing the quality of teaching and learning. Concrete steps will be offered for planning to better respond to student diversity in meeting lesson objectives. (Contains 1 figure.)

Educators from various institutions responded to key questions concerning learning style as it was implemented in their institutions and communities. Among those items explored were the impact of learning styles on teaching practices, syllabi, and values and whether the construct improved instruction or student outcomes, how it improved students' perceptions of their learning outcomes, and how it contributed to the profession of education. (Contains 1 figure.)

The authors recommend practical techniques and resources for teaching at-risk secondary students, who are often nontraditional learners. The article describes tactual and kinesthetic instructional resources that research has shown are effective for typically performing and at-risk students who do not learn conventionally. (Contains 2 figures.)

How does one know whether traditional or innovative staff development is working? This study compared the effects of professors' attitudes toward learning through traditional staff development versus alternative instructional strategies for teaching community college students. Eight-four professors participated in this study. The average participant was a White female between the ages of 40-49 who taught in the departments of Arts and Sciences. For this study the participants attended workshops focused on three different instructional strategies for teaching college students--Programmed Learning Sequences (PLS), Team Learning (TL), and Circle of Knowledge (COK). These three strategies were taught in a counter-balanced design. Thus, each group of faculty was taught with both a traditional and a learning-style approach, but in a different sequence so that each group served as its own control in a repeated measures design. The Productivity Environmental Preference Survey (PEPS) identified the participants' learning styles. The Semantic Differential Scale (SDS) (Pizzo, 1981) assessed their attitudes toward each of the two different instructional approaches. The community college faculty's attitudes significantly (p less than 0.05) favored the learning-styles responsive approach over the traditionally taught workshop regardless of the content. (Contains 6 tables.)

This research examined: a) the extent of diversity that exists among entering college freshmen's learning styles; b) whether, and the extent to which, learning style is influenced by gender; and c) whether high school grade point average (HS/GPA) is a determining factor in academic success. The "Productivity Environmental Preference Survey" (PEPS) (Dunn, Dunn, & Price, 2002) was administered to approximately 1500 entering college freshmen during orientation. PEPS data revealed statistical differences among students' styles for the elements of Sound, Light, Temperature, Motivation, and Responsibility. "Pearson Correlations" indicated that students with the highest HS/GPAs preferred either Learning Alone or with an Authoritative Figure and in the Late Morning or Afternoon, as opposed to the Evening while studying new and difficult academic material. Students with high, but not the highest HS/GPAs had strong preferences for Bright Light (p less than 0.049) and Formal Seating (p less than 0.001). Those same students simultaneously evidenced high Motivation (p less than 0.001), Persistence (p less than 0.001), and Responsibility (p less than 0.001) levels, and preferred Evening as their optimal time for learning challenging material. Students with the lowest HS/GPAs also preferred learning in the Evening, but with Sound (music or conversation in the environment), Bright Light and, although Motivated, required frequent opportunities for Mobility while learning. Concerning freshman gender differences, although male students indicated a stronger need for learning with an Authority Figure, they also were more Visual, needed more Structure and Mobility, and were strongly Afternoon learners in comparison with the females in this sample. Conversely, female students revealed higher means for Bright Light, warm Temperature, Formal Seating, Motivation, Learning Alone or with Peers, Intake while concentrating, and a Variety of instructional approaches (rather than routines or patterns). Consistent with female traits internationally, this sample of freshman women had multiple Perceptual Strengths. Thus, they were more Auditory, Tactual, and Kinesthetic, and consistently more Persistent and Responsible than their male counterparts. Another variable on which these males and females differed were females' preferences for learning in the Late Morning in contrast with males' preferences for Afternoon learning. Only the variable of Kinesthetic revealed pair-wise differences between students in the Colleges of Business and Professional Studies in contrast with students in the College of Pharmacy and Allied Health. This information should help administrators and professors to plan more appropriately when scheduling and teaching diverse students. It also should guide those students toward doing their homework with strategies responsive to their styles. (Contains 6 tables and 1 figure.)

When each new school year begins, young teachers arrive anxious they have not had adequate training to implement new instructional programs. Seasoned teachers are irritated they must adapt their teaching style yet again to meet administrators' expectations, and many administrators are daunted by the responsibility of motivating staff members, ensuring new programs are effective and ultimately improving student test scores. How have successful school leaders risen to these challenges? How have they selected the instructional programs they have implemented and how did they garner necessary faculty support for the adopted innovations? What instructional leadership styles lead to higher standardized achievement test scores for struggling students? The authors of this article reviewed current literature, which revealed many examples of school leaders who adopted new programs that actually improved low achieving students' standardized achievement test scores. Reaching that goal represented successful instructional leadership; however, after extensive interviews with those supervisors, the authors realized their leadership styles differed dramatically.

The purposes of this article are to discuss several approaches to reading instruction and to explore how students' learning-style preferences impact upon their achievement. The authors recommend learning-styles specific interventions to guide all students in their journey to literacy. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.)

This article discusses the evolution of teaching approaches in concert with the findings of over three decades of researches on student perceptual strengths. Confusing reports of successes and only limited successes for students with varied perceptual strengths suggest that combined auditory, visual, tactual, and/or kinesthetic instructional resources--a multi-sensory approach--is not necessarily beneficial for all students. Rather, students required to master new and difficult academic material should initially be exposed to it through their primary perceptual strength. If statistically higher achievement-test scores are to be realized, the resources most complementary to each individual should begin the concentration process. It may seem obvious, but thirty-five years of research suggest that teaching strategies and resources should complement individuals' perceptual strengths when introducing new and difficult academic content. When schools with underachieving minority, poor students in various sections of this nation introduced tactual and kinesthetic instruction, they evidenced statistically higher standardized achievement test scores in reading and mathematics within one year.

Compares the effects of three different teaching methods: (1) traditional instruction through listening to a lecture, reading, and participating in discussion; (2) instruction with teacher-constructed self-teaching resources; and (3) instruction with student-constructed self-teaching resources. Determines their effectiveness and the time required for student engagement. Reports a positive correlation between tactual and kinesthetic resource involvement and an increase in achievement. (Contains 29 references.) (YDS)

Investigated gender differences in the learning styles of high school boys and girls from Bermuda, Brunei, Hungary, Sweden, and New Zealand. Data from student surveys indicated that although boys' and girls' learning styles differed in numerous ways, individuals within each group were more unique then either group as a whole. Country-specific gender differences were evident. (SM)

Explains how teachers in the Freeport, Illinois School District began teaching to individual learning styles to ensure that all of their students performed well in school. Notes that the teachers insisted that students learn differently from one another. Concludes that once students understood what they were required to learn and could work together to master their objectives, students often appeared to be enjoying school. (PM)

Examines multiple intelligences and learning styles. Focuses on Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences; the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model that identifies individuals' preferences for specific instructional environments, strategies, and resources and the extent to which they affect academic achievement; and similarities and differences between the two. (LRW)

Introduced varied learning style (LS) strategies in five stages to special education and low-achieving general education students, removing them in the final phase. Pre- and posttests of reading achievement in each phase and assessment of students' LS preferences indicated that students with LS preferences benefited from LS accommodations, especially special education students. Attitudes toward reading improved, regardless of preference. (SM)

Eleven photographs confirm that permitting ergonomic options of foot placement and body posture pays off in improved student attention. (MLF)

When students are taught with approaches matching their preferences as identified in Rita Dunn's "Learning Style Inventory," they demonstrate statistically higher achievement and attitude test scores than when taught with approaches mismatching their preferences. Learning styles must be identified with a reliable instrument, because teachers often misinterpret behaviors. Includes 13 references. (MLH)

Findings from a study of more than 600 technical college students revealed significant differences when global and simultaneous students were matched and mismatched with their hemisphericity. Significant relationships emerged between students' diagnosed hemisphericity (successive/simultaneous) and their learning-style preferences. (Author/IAH)

Presents findings of a 1988 study of 104 middle school students, examining the relationship between learner style preference and instructional grouping. Identifies preference groups: learning alone, learning with peers, or no preference. Finds that students performed equally well on four social studies lessons when instructional strategy matched learner with preferred learning style. Suggests that grouping may influence no-preference students. (CH)