VARIOUS LEARNING STYLES A KEY TO A BETTER EDUCATIONAL

APPROACH

CHAPTER I
Background of the study

According to an international study by Fleming (2001) learning style is

an individual’s preferred way of gathering, organizing, and thinking about
information. It is considered as the behaviours related to psychological,
cognitive, and effective domains of interactions with learning environments.
Learning style involves learners preferred ways to receive, process, and
recall information during instruction which is related to learner’s motivation
and information-processing habits (Aragon, Johnson, and Shaik, 2002).
Because some learners tend to focus on facts, data, or procedures, engaging
with theories and mathematical models is appropriate. Some learners use
visual information like pictures, diagrams and simulation to understand
better while others can get more from oral and written information.
Researches have argued that learning style also function as a useful
indicators for potential learning performance (Kolb and Kolb, 2005; Smith
and Ragan, 1999; sun et al., 2008).

In the Philippines, the learning styles should be a guide or diversified

teaching methods catering to the needs of the students. According to Hopper
2004 the primary mode of teaching is lecture. Most teachers use the lecture
method. Students go to class and sit down to take notes as the teachers
explains key points (Stefko, 2000). Filipinos were found to have preferences
for the 7 among the 22 elements of learning styles. Often students who
think better in quiet than with sound, they tend not to be persistent. Filipino
students are visual and kinesthetic learners. They prefer to process
information by seeing it. As kinesthetic learners they learn well through
whole body involvement, direct experience and they want to be active as
they can. Filipino students least prefer perceptual modality is auditory.
Overall their learning style preferences of the Filipino students would seem
to be with the result of pate et. al (1990) who found low to moderate
correlation between those 7 learning styles.

The Learning style refers to the organization and control of the

strategies for learning and knowledge acquisition and it’s configured by the
cognitive, affective and personality particularities, of the learner (Negovan,
2010) Learning style is appreciated as one of the most important resources
to cope academia (Glenn-Cowan, 1995) and refers to: how it is approached
the task of learning, the enabled learning strategies to fulfill the task, what
is stable in the approach to learning tasks, what is characteristic of the
individual when they learn (Negovan, 2010).

We conducted this research in order to give information to those

students who have curious minds and to give further clarifications and
explanations of what learning styles they prefer to use in schools. We
initiated to do this research to help the teachers in understanding their
students further, by giving them a result after our research to help them
improve their learning techniques in teaching their students and enables the
learners to recognize their strengths, weaknesses, and habits on their
educational approaches.

Theoretical Framework

The theory we used in this research is the Experiential Learning Theory

(ELT) by David A. Kolb (1984). The theory provides a holistic model of the
learning process and is a multi-linear model of adult development, both of
which are consistent with what we know about how we naturally learn, grow,
and develop. “Learning is the process whereby knowledge is created through
the transformation of experience” (Kolb, 1984). Kolb states that learning
involves the acquisition of abstract concepts that can be applied flexibly in a
range of situations. In Kolb’s theory, the impetus for the development of
new concepts is provided by new experiences. Effective learning is seen
when a person progresses through a cycle of four stages: of (1) having a
concrete experience followed by (2) observation of and reflection on that
experience which leads to (3) the formation of abstract concepts (analysis)
and generalizations (conclusions) which are then (4) used to test hypothesis
in future situations, resulting in new experiences.

Concrete Experience

(doing/ having an experience)

Active Experimentation Reflective Observation

(planning/ trying out (reviewing/ reflecting from

the

what you have learned) experience)

Abstract Conceptualisation

(concluding / learning from the

experiences)

The experiential theory proposed by Kolb takes a more holistic

approach and emphasizes how experiences, including cognition,
environmental factors, and emotions, influence the learning process. These
four modes of learning are often portrayed as a cycle. According to Kolb,
concrete experience provides information that serves as a basis for
reflection. From these reflections, we assimilate the information and form
abstract concepts. Through the testing of our ideas, we once again gather
information through experience, cycling back to the beginning of the
process. The process does not necessarily begin with experience, however.
Instead, each person must choose which learning mode will work best based
upon the specific situation.

The connection of the diagram on this research explains that when we

get information in our inner cognitive processes of one’s mind, we can
eventually know our learning processes by the cycling process of
experiencing, reflecting, thinking and acting. Learning is an integrated
procedure; each stage of this cycle is dependent on its predecessor and
follows a logical pattern. Also, individually, none of the stages are an
effective learning tool. According to Kolb “An individual favors a certain
learning style based on the inner cognitive make up, social influence, and
educational background. No matter what the choice is, the learning
preference is the product of two conflicting variables known as the
Processing Continuum and the Perception Continuum” (University of
Leicester, 2002). Meaning, it is up to our minds, social influence and
environment what our learning style is. Processing Continuum is the choice
of the way of approaching and tackling a task while Perception Continuum is
the range of what is the emotional response to the task, including the
thoughts and feelings. Knowing one’s learning style makes it easier for the
correct method to be applied. Although, as stated before that everyone has
their own learning preferences, everyone needs a stimulus or they respond
to all four learning styles on varying degrees. The major idea is to find the
method that fits best as per one’s preference. Teachers are recommended to
apply this theory to develop appropriate teaching material and to engage
students to systematically go through each stage.
 Conceptual Framework

Different Learning Styles Educational Approach

 Physical (Kinesthetic)  Academic Approach

 Logical (Mathematical)  Behavioural Approach

 Social (Interpersonal)  Critical Thinking Approach

 Solitary (Intrapersonal)  Self- Expression Approach

 Visual (Spatial)
 Aural (Auditory- musical)
 Verbal (Linguistic)

Respondent’s Profile

 Sex
 Age
 Educational Level
The various learning style represent as the the source of this research.
These seven components will help to categorize what are the learning styles
which is most preferred to use by the students. The result of their
educational approach could be based on the learning styles they are most
preferred to apply.

In order to classify the different learning styles, we will vary on the

students or respondent’s profile.

Statement of the Problem

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1 Age

Age of a person can affect their preferred learning style. For example,
most children prefer visual learning style because they tend to learn through
what they see just like how they applied to their lives what they have seen
in some videos or cartoons. Somehow in adolescence, they tend to explore
what learning style should they prefer because they can comprehend more
and decide what is the learning style that will suit them more.

1.2 Sex

The sexual identification of a students can affect on what learning

styles they preferred to use in addition males tend to be more achievement
oriented whereas females are more socially and performance oriented. The
genders also differ in their beliefs about what is more important to student
learning, with females rankings social interaction with other students and
self-confidence as higher than males (Wehrwein 2007).

1.3 Education level

 Education level also affects student’s learning style because in
elementary years students usually prefer listening to their teacher to learn.
While in high school, learners has developed their logical reasoning and be
likely to comprehend the lesson independently.

2. What is the extend of the various learning style affects the students in
terms of:

2.1 Academic Approach

It is easy for students to absorb, process, comprehend and retain their

daily lessons in school and help them get high grades. It is also important
for educators to recognize which learning styles they are suited so that they
can implement best practice strategies into their daily activities, curriculum
and assessments that will lead them through academic success.

2.2 Behavioral Approach

Most people have a preferred way to learn. Some learn best by

listening, some have to observe every step, while others have to do it to
learn it. The fact is that individuals need all three modalities to truly commit
information to memory: visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. Some of the
elements that could impact a child's ability to interact appropriately in an
educational setting include long-term influences such as a child's cognitive
functioning, and their developmental profile.

2.3 Critical Thinking Approach

Individuals will be more likely to be naturally structured and task

oriented. The learners are able to divide facts and figures into categories and
subcategories. They then focus their attention on understanding or solving
the issues or problems of each subcategory before moving on to the next.
2.4 Self-expression Approach

The student develops creativity using his/her imagination. Planning

and organizing his/her work in his/her own creative ways. They like to use
their imagination and do things in unique ways. Students will become
imaginative and have a variety of interests that highly motivate them if they
enjoy what they are doing.

Research Hypothesis

Our study speculates that there is no significant relationship

between the independent and dependent variable therefore, the learning
strategies that are used by different teachers does not affect the educational
approach of the senior high school students of Mati Doctors Academy. It is
because there are much major factors that could greatly affect the students
performance.

Scope and Delimitation

Our research focuses on importance of different learning styles that

are used in different educational institution. Our subject participants is
limited only to grade 11 senior high school student of Mati Doctors Academy
institution having 16 to 19 years of age. This endeavour also provides the
most recent study regarding with the students preferable learning style.
Through these, perceptions about strategies in teaching may change thus,
the ability of students to cope knowledge with somehow develop leading
them to grow and develop. Our research data would be based on the
number of participants that answers our prepared questionnaire
(Quantitative), leading us to a conclusion that is crucial in this study.
Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will let the learners or people to recognize
that each person prefers different learning styles and techniques. These
learning styles have more influence than you may realize. Your preferred
styles guide the way you learn. They also change the way you internally
represent experiences, the way you recall information, and even the words
you choose. Contrary to the traditional educational framework, there is
actually a diverse range of learning styles appropriate for every student.
Schools generally use linguistic or logical learning styles, but other styles
may be more effective for some learners.

The result of the study will be of great benefit to the Teachers and the
Students. In this research, it can help Teachers to evaluate the teaching
techniques of their students for them to teach them more efficiently and
most effectively. As educators learn more about effective ways to engage
learners of every style. However, there are also countless examples of
students being challenged and transformed by a teacher or professor
lecturing about a subject they have spent their entire life exploring.

Students will get from answering our survey and participating in our
research is that they will discover their own learning style as well as learn
new one. They also will gain from it in the end because when we finish our
research the teachers can change the way they teach, hence, it may
improve the way they learn. It creates more equanimity between the
teacher and student, with each playing a role in the learning process.

We researchers, conducted this study in order for the students and

teachers to understand each other by the means of their unique and
different learning styles. We acknowledge those teachers who have different
learning styles to their students that can teach them well. We also want to
share to those learners their weakness, strength and habits in their learning
styles.

To the future researchers,

Definition of Terms

Behaviour - the way in which one acts or conducts oneself, especially

toward others.

Diversified - make or become more diverse or varied.

Simulation - imitation of a situation or process.

Acquisition - the learning or developing of a skill, habit, or quality.

Acknowledge - recognize the fact or importance or quality of.

Equanimity - mental calmness, composure, and evenness of temper,

especially in a difficult situation.

Techniques - a skillful or efficient way of doing or achieving something.

speculates - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm

evidence.

Endeavour - an attempt to achieve a goal.

Perceptions - a way of regarding, understanding, or interpreting

something; a mental impression.

Cognitive - of, relating to, being, or involving conscious intellectual activity (such as
thinking, reasoning, or remembering)

Kinesthetic - connected with the ability to know where the parts of your body are

and how they are moving

Adolescence - the period following the onset of puberty during which a young
person develops from a child into an adult.
 Chapter 2

Review of Related Literature

Learning can be defined as permanent changes in behaviour induced

by life. According to experiential learning theory, learning is “the process
whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience”.
(İlçin, 2018)

Facilitating the learning process is the primary aim of teaching.

Understanding the learning behaviour of students is considered to be a part
of this process.(İlçin, 2018) Therefore, the concept of learning styles has
become a popular topic in recent literature, with many theories about
learning styles put forward to better understand the dynamic process of
learning.

Learning style refers to an individual’s preferred way of processing

new information for efficient learning. Rita Dunn described the concept of
learning style as “a unique way developed by students when he/she was
learning new and difficult knowledge”. Learning style is about how students
learn rather than what they learn. The learning process is different for each
individual; even in the same educational environment, learning does not
occur in all students at the same level and quality. Research has shown that
individuals exhibit different approaches in the learning process and a single
strategy or approach was unable to provide optimal learning conditions for
all individuals .This may be related to students’ different backgrounds,
strengths, weaknesses, interests, ambitions, levels of motivation, and
approaches to studying. To improve undergraduate education, educators
should become more aware of these diverse approaches. Learning styles
may be useful to help students and educators understand how to improve
the way they learn and teach, respectively. (Tomruk, 2018)
 Determining students’ learning styles provides information about their
specific preferences. Understanding learning styles can make it easier to
create, modify, and develop more efficient curriculum and educational
programs. It can also encourage students’ participation in these programs
and motivate them to gain professional knowledge. Therefore, determining
learning style is quite valuable in order to achieve more effective learning.
Researching learning styles provides data on how students learn and find
answers to questions.

Considering the potential problems encountered in the undergraduate

education of physiotherapists, determining the learning style of
physiotherapy students may enable the development of strategies to
improve the learning process. Studies on learning styles in the field of
physiotherapy have mostly been conducted in developed countries such as
Canada and Australia. A study conducted in Australia examined the learning
styles of physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and speech pathology
students. The results of this study suggest that optimal learning
environment should also be taken into consideration while researching how
students learn. The authors also stated that future research was needed to
investigate correlations between learning styles, instructional methods, and
the academic performance of students in the health professions.

To the best of our knowledge, there are no prior publications in the

literature that report Turkish physiotherapy students’ learning styles.
Furthermore, previous studies mostly used Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory
(LSI), Marshall & Merritts’ LSI, or Honey & Mumford’s Learning Style
Questionnaire (LSQ) to assess learning styles. Some of these studies also
suggested that learning behaviour and styles should be investigated using
different inventories [5]. Moreover, a scale that was indicated as valid and
reliable for Turkish population was needed to accurately determine the
learning styles of Turkish physiotherapy students. Therefore, we opted to
use the Grascha-Riechmann Learning Style Scales (GRLSS) to assess the
learning styles of physiotherapy students, which will be a first in the
literature. (İlçin, N., Tomruk, M., Yeşilyaprak, S., 2018)

Learning style preferences are influential in learning and academic

achievement, and may explain how students learn. Previous studies have
demonstrated a close association between learning style and academic
performance. Learning styles have been identified as predictors of academic
performance and guides for curriculum design. The aim of this study was to
determine whether learning style preferences of physiotherapy students
could affect academic performance by identifying the learning styles of
Turkish physiotherapy students and assessing the relationship between
these learning styles and the students’ academic performance. Since
physiotherapy education mainly consists of practice lessons and clinical
practice and mostly requires active student participation, we hypothesized
that physiotherapy students with a Collaborative learning style according to
the GRLSS would have higher academic performance. (Yeşilyaprak, S.,
2018)

When it comes to education, everyone learns exactly the same way,

right? Not quite. While the terms "auditory" and "visual" learners have
become somewhat more common, there are many other types of learners.
While most people cross the lines of learning styles and can benefit from
many types of learning, most people have a dominant learning style that
helps them grasp and remember concepts more easily. Understanding and
adapting to the different learning styles is crucial for anyone involved in any
form of instruction, whether that's teaching in a classroom, parenting,
leading a Boy Scout troop or teaching Sunday School. (İlçin, 2018)
 In this article, we will also cover logical, social, solitary and naturalistic
as they offer additional insight into the way that people learn. (Hansen,
2018)

Visual is the most common type of learning style. This type of learning
includes a predisposition toward images, colors, graphs, pictures, maps, etc.
In other words, they want something they can feast their eyes on. Visual
learners can also be very good with spatial thinking and recalling images or
places in their minds. Visual learners excel at being detail-oriented because
they notice very small changes in their surroundings. They also tend to do
well with balance and alignment. Typically, a classroom is already geared
toward visual learners. PowerPoints, writing on a whiteboard, maps, graphs,
posters, pictures and many other visual aids are typical in a learning
environment. This makes sense since visual learners account for up to 65%
of the population, according to Social Science Research Network. Visual
learners need text or long speeches mixed with something they can see. If
they are watching a presentation, a PowerPoint with graphs and images
would greatly help them receive the information and remember it later.
When it comes to listening or reading, visual learners do better if the
speaker or text includes imagery that they can imagine. If they can visualize
what a speaker is talking about, they can better retain that knowledge.
(Hansen, 2018)

Aural learners love music and sounds of all kinds. Auditory learners are
very good at repeating information back once they've heard it. They tend to
be good at noticing people's inflection and tone or subtle changes in their
language. Auditory learners are good at picking up language, verbal
communication and retaining long lectures. They can also be fantastic
storytellers. According to some studies, auditory learners make up for
about 30% of learners. While this isn't as many students as visual, it still
accounts for a large percentage of the population. In the classroom, auditory
learners benefit from things like lectures, music and speeches. They would
be the type of person who could learn from a podcast and put what they've
learned into action. When giving class assignments, auditory learners will
often do better hearing the assignment rather than seeing it on paper. They
will also benefit from having an oral exam as opposed to a written one.
Another strategy for auditory learners is to have them repeat back
information to the teacher as often as possible as opposed to always writing
information down. An auditory learner may not take as many notes as their
visual peers. Verbal learners are the people who excel at the verbal part of
learning differ from visual learners because they are not discouraged by long
texts. People who are verbal learners are very good at absorbing information
through the written word. They can take in vast amounts of complex written
words and condense it into more easily digestible information. It isn't as
clear how many students fall into the verbal learner category. Previously, the
VARK study only included three categories: Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic.
They later included reading and writing as a separate category. Verbal
learners do very well with a lecture and note-taking types of teaching and
they also excel at writing assignments and written tests. A good strategy for
verbal learners is to have them rewrite information into their own words.
They do very well at research writing projects or writing projects in general.
To help them with new concepts, it's a good idea to include a written
handout for them to review. People in this category can also greatly benefit
from the exuberant amount of information available on the internet. A verbal
learner can easily pick up a lot of information quickly. (Hansen, 2018)

A kinesthetic learner is a person who learns through physical action.

They learn through making something. They prefer tactile learning and
hands-on practical experience. Kinesthetic learners reportedly make up
about only 5% of the population. Therefore, many classroom environments
are not geared toward kinesthetic learning. A student who responds to this
type of learning style can come across as antsy and inattentive in the
classroom. They may struggle to sit during long lectures or engaging in too
much written or verbal learning. Kinesthetic learners do best when they can
physically get their hands on something or move in some way. Kinesthetic
learners can be given some leeway to doodle or move a little so long as it is
not disruptive to the class. It can be beneficial to have them be a helper in
class with things like handing out assignments. Mix up your class structure
by breaking up lectures and sitting periods with physical movement. For
younger learners, you can incorporate letters and numbers with movements
and songs to get them learning while moving. Another strategy is to use
hands-on experiences to teach them something. Science is a great field for
this because experiments and nature observation can be incorporated
comfortably into the learning schedule. (Hansen, 2018)

People in the logical category are problem solvers. They see things in
the realm of cause and effect. They like knowing that if A is true, B must
follow. People with this learning style enjoy mathematical equations because
math problems follow a logical flow. They also like patterns and logic
problems. Logical learners are excellent at seeing how things are
interconnected. They can understand complex patterns, math problems, and
excel at strategy games like chess. Logical learners tend to be attracted
to science fields like chemistry, and they're often very comfortable with
technology and computer science fields as well. Logical learners like to
understand the how and why something happened. They respond well
to statistics and data and other hard facts. Science and math are preferable
because they offer clear answers for how someone comes to a basic
conclusion about something. In other words, these fields often offer
definitive answers, or at least a course of action, to get to the answer.
Logical learners do best when the classroom is very structured. They tend to
struggle more with open-ended questions and assignments. To help them
connect to subjects that may not fit comfortably into the logical sphere, try
to incorporate things that they can connect with. For history and geography,
including statistics and graphs can be helpful. Explain how countries interact
with one another and the reasons there are conflicts. For fields like art,
music and literature, try to find a more logical angle. For instance, logical
learners might identify with the rules of poetry like the meter or rhyming
patterns. They might be able to analyze the motivation of characters in
books—if this character does this, this character will respond this way. It
may not be within their natural comfort zone, but over time, it may connect
to their logical style. (Hansen, 2018)

Social or interpersonal learner is the type of learner thrives in group

projects and shines in social settings. People in this category have strong
communication skills and can pick up on verbal and nonverbal
communication from the people around them. They can pick up on the
emotions of other individuals and groups. In other words, social learners
tend to have a high emotional IQ and may be the first to notice when
someone else's demeanor has changed. Social learners gravitate toward
extracurricular activities and team sports and are energized by social
interactions. People who are social learners do well when they can bounce
their ideas off of other people. To connect to social learners it's a good idea
to include class presentations, group discussion and group projects, as they
will feel most comfortable in this type of setting. Social learners may
struggle to sit quietly and absorb information during long lectures. To help
with this, it may be helpful to break it up with small group discussions or ask
them to repeat back information in their own words. (Hansen, 2018)

While the opposite of social, a solitary learner is similar in that it can

include all the other learning styles, but people in this category learn better
alone. Solitary learners are often self-directed, quiet and independent. These
people tend to be very good at identifying and understanding their own
emotions and feelings. They value learning independently and quietly.
Solitary learners benefit from time alone to work through problems and new
ideas. They do well when they're given time they can spend being
introspective and working through issues. Some strategies that work well for
solitary learners is encouraging them to keep a journal, giving them projects
that they can work on alone and allowing them to work independently when
possible. They are likely to respond better to writing assignments and
projects as opposed to public speaking or in group projects. If group projects
are necessary, they would do well to be given a section of the project that
they can contribute on their own time. (Hansen, 2018)

A naturalistic learner is similar to a kinesthetic learner in the sense

that they like hands-on experience and do better with physical involvement
as opposed to learning from a textbook. The key distinction between the two
is that the naturalistic learner prefers to do their hands-on learning primarily
outdoors. Naturalistic learners are curious and investigative. They can take
hands-on experience from nature to understand the world around them and
draw conclusions about plants, animals and the environment. They tend to
be very good observers and are naturally comfortable with animals.
Naturalistic learners will do very well if they can have some time outside
actually exploring nature. Gardening, nature walks, field trips and park trips
are all ways to get naturalistic learners outside. Like kinesthetic learners,
naturalistic learners may enjoy science as it lends itself well to outdoor
exploration. How do you engage a naturalistic learner when they can't leave
the classroom? Consider bringing nature indoors. Grow plants, have a class
pet or create a tiny ecosystem. If you're studying the various forms of rocks,
bring in samples that they can touch. Students who have a naturalistic
learning style enjoy reporting back the information they've learned from the
world. You can take this natural desire and apply it to other fields of study
like writing. Have your nature-friendly student write reports about things
that they are interested in like animals and the outdoors. They can also
develop their reading skills by reading books related to nature. (Hansen,
2018)

Think owner’s manual versus IKEA instructions. This preference

for one approach over another when learning new information is not
uncommon. Indeed the notion that people learn in different ways is such a
pervasive belief in American culture that there is a thriving industry
dedicated to identifying learning styles and training teachers to meet the
needs of different learners. (May, 2018)

Just because a notion is popular, however, doesn’t make it true.

A recent review of the scientific literature on learning styles found scant
evidence to clearly support the idea that outcomes are best when
instructional techniques align with individuals’ learning styles. In fact, there
are several studies that contradict this belief. It is clear that people have a
strong sense of their own learning preferences (e.g., visual, kinesthetic,
intuitive), but it is less clear that these preferences matter.

Research by Polly Hussman and Valerie Dean O’Loughlin at Indiana

University takes a new look at this important question. Most previous
investigations on learning styles focused on classroom learning, and
assessed whether instructional style impacted outcomes for different types
of learners. But is the classroom really where most of the serious learning
occurs? Some might argue that, in this era of flipped classrooms and online
course materials, students master more of the information on their own.
That might explain why instructional style in the classroom matters little. It
also raises the possibility that learning styles do matter—perhaps a match
between students’ individual learning styles and their study strategies is the
key to optimal outcomes. (May, 2018)
 To explore this possibility, Hussman and O’Loughlin asked students
enrolled in an anatomy class to complete an online learning styles
assessment and answer questions about their study strategies. More than
400 students completed the VARK (visual, auditory, reading/writing,
kinesthetic) learning styles evaluation and reported details about the
techniques they used for mastering material outside of class (e.g., flash
cards, review of lecture notes, anatomy coloring books). Researchers also
tracked their performance in both the lecture and lab components of the
course.

Scores on the VARK suggested that most students used multiple

learning styles (e.g., visual + kinesthetic or reading/writing + visual +
auditory), but that no particular style (or combination of styles) resulted in
better outcomes than another. The focus in this study, however, was not on
whether a particular learning style was more advantageous. Instead, the
research addressed two primary questions: First, do students who take the
VARK questionnaire to identify their personal learning style adopt study
strategies that align with that style? Second, are the learning outcomes
better for students whose strategies match their VARK profile than for
students whose strategies do not? (May, 2018)

Despite knowing their own, self-reported learning preferences, nearly

70% of students failed to employ study techniques that supported those
preferences. Most visual learners did not rely heavily on visual strategies
(e.g., diagrams, graphics), nor did most reading/writing learners rely
predominantly on reading strategies (e.g., review of notes or textbook), and
so on. Given the prevailing belief that learning styles matter, and the fact
many students blame poor academic performance on the lack of a match
between their learning style and teachers’ instructional methods, one might
expect students to rely on techniques that support their personal learning
preferences when working on their own.
 Perhaps the best students do. Nearly a third of the students in the
study did choose strategies that were consistent with their reported learning
style. Did that pay off? In a word, no. Students whose study strategies
aligned with their VARK scores performed no better in either the lecture or
lab component of the course. (May, 2018)

So most students are not employing study strategies that mesh with
self-reported learning preferences, and the minority who do show no
academic benefit. Although students believe that learning preferences
influence performance, this research affirms the mounting evidence that
they do not, even when students are mastering information on their own.
These findings suggest a general lack of student awareness about the
processes and behaviors that support effective learning. Consistent with this
notion, Hussman and O’Loughlin also found negative correlations between
many of the common study strategies reported by students (e.g., making
flashcards, use of outside websites) and course performance. Thus
regardless of individual learning style or the alignment of the style with
study techniques, many students are adopting strategies that simply do not
support comprehension and retention of information. (May, 2018)

Fortunately, cognitive science has identified a number of methods to

enhance knowledge acquisition, and these techniques have fairly universal
benefit. Students are more successful when they space out their study
sessions over time, experience the material in multiple modalities, test
themselves on the material as part of their study practices, and elaborate on
material to make meaningful connections rather than engaging in activities
that involve simple repetition of information (e.g., making flashcards or
recopying notes). These effective strategies were identified decades ago and
have convincing and significant empirical support. Why then, do we persist
in our belief that learning styles matter, and ignore these tried and true
techniques?
 The popularity of the learning styles mythology may stem in part from
the appeal of finding out what “type of person” you are, along with the
desire to be treated as an individual within the education system. In
contrast, the notion that universal strategies may enhance learning for all
belies the idea that we are unique, individual learners. In addition, most
empirically-supported techniques involve planning (e.g., scheduling study
sessions over a series of days) and significant effort (e.g., taking practice
tests in advance of a classroom assessment), and let’s face it, we don’t want
to work that hard. (May, 2018)

The common myth for learning styles as an effective teaching and

learning approach is that students will improve their learning if they are
taught in their particular learning style (Evidence for Learning, 2017a).
There is a range of different types of learning styles, for example auditory,
visual, tactile or kinaesthetic styles (Hattie, 2009). There is very limited
evidence for any consistent set of learning ‘styles’ that can be used reliably
to identify genuine differences in the learning needs of young people, and
evidence suggests that it is unhelpful to assign learners to groups or
categories on the basis of a supposed learning style (Evidence for Learning,
2017).

Learning styles has existed since the 1970s with over 70 models
(Dinham, 2016). There are three main reasons why the idea of teaching by
learning styles has caught on to such a great extent:

 due to it being related to certain areas of the brain being mapped to

specific activities;

 the commercialisation of industries around learning styles to sell pro-

fessional learning to schools; and,
  the publication of studies that show a large impact of learning styles
on students’ outcomes.

The idea surrounding learning styles seems to make sense, as there

are different regions of the brain that are involved to a greater extent in
certain functions. For example, language development and musical training
(Caldwell and Vaughan, 2011). So it is assumed that ‘learners should receive
information in visual, auditory or kinaesthetic forms according to which part
of their brain works better’ (Howard-Jones, 2014). This is not the case, as
the brain is interconnected through the corpus callosum – what connects the
left and right cerebral hemispheres – and the study of rare neurobiological
conditions shows that the brain is able to use neuronal matter available.
That is, if the function of half the brain is removed, the brain will still use
what neurons are available to perform the required learning (Sacks, 2009).

The commercialisation of an industry around learning styles has helped

to spread the use and belief of the effectiveness of teachers changing their
teaching style to meet the preferred learning style of the student to improve
academic outcomes (Guterl, 2013).

Another reason for the proliferation of the myth on learning styles is

the publication of meta-analysis which showed a large impact on students’
learning from teachers using specific learning styles. These studies have
subsequently been shown to be based on flawed methodology (for example,
low number of subjects and accidental use of a correlational score as an
effect size – e.g. using R instead of Cohen’s D) (Hattie, 2009).

When I facilitate workshops on the Teaching & Learning Toolkit (a free

online summary of educational research), I commence with a true or false
quiz asking the audience if they think that individuals learn better when they
receive information in their preferred learning style (e.g. auditory, visual,
kinaesthetic). I have the audience raise their hands and, every time, I have
had a varying amount of teachers raise their hand in agreement that yes,
individuals do learn better when they receive information in their preferred
learning style. (Vaughan, 2018)

In the article by Paul Howard-Jones published in 2014, 95 percent of

teachers in the UK thought that students learn better when taught in their
preferred learning style (Howard-Jones, 2014). I would think that the work
of the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), one of Evidence for
Learning’s founding partners in the UK would have decreased the prevalence
of this myth over time. The EEF’s Teaching & Learning Toolkit – which is
used by half of all senior leaders in schools to make decisions – clearly
presents that different learning styles have ‘no evidential basis whatsoever’
(Education Endowment Foundation, 2016).

The danger of teaching to this myth is that by labelling students as a

certain type of learner and changing the teaching style to match this type of
learning, we encourage students to develop a fixed mindset. A fixed mindset
can be thought of as one in which a student’s belief of what they can achieve
is controlled by their inherited characteristics (for example, predispositions
and intelligence) rather than the belief that effort can and does make a
difference (Dweck, 2009).

Learners are very unlikely to have a single learning style, so restricting

students to activities matched to their reported preferences may damage
their progress. This is especially true for younger learners in primary schools
whose preferences and approaches to learning are still very flexible.

Studies where teaching activities are targeted towards particular

learners based on an identified learning ‘style’ have not convincingly shown
any major benefit, particularly for low attaining students. Impacts recorded
are generally low or negative (Evidence for Learning, 2017a).
 If teachers believe this myth to be true, they will provide feedback to
their students that may inhibit their learning – for example, ‘you have not
achieved on this because you are a kinaesthetic learner’. Thus, the student
is limited by their self-belief as to what they can achieve.

Feedback has a significant impact on learning, contributing a gain of

eight months’ worth of learning progress when implemented well (Evidence
for Learning, 2017b). So, if a teacher believes that learning styles exist and
they should teach according to them this could inhibit the teacher’s ability to
provide feedback that will encourage a growth mindset and thus inhibit
student learning. The impact of feedback to encourage a growth mindset is
shown to be especially important for students from disadvantaged settings
(Claro, Paunesku & Dweck, 2016).

One of the key tenets in the attractiveness of teaching to learning

styles is to make the learning easy. There are major flaws in this belief that
making learning easy will increase learning. Confusion and having ‘desirable
difficulties’ is important for helping students move their learning from short-
to long-term memory (Wiliam, 2016). While it is known that ‘intense focus is
generally required to alter the circuits and make new connections’ (Doidge,
2016).

Professor Stephen Dinham, from the Melbourne Graduate School of

Education summarises the danger of teaching to this myth in his recent
book Leading Teaching and Learning:

“However, it does matter, because of the problems and harm that can
be caused by the categorisation, labelling and limiting of learning
experiences of students through the continued belief in and application of
so-called learning styles. Would we tolerate doctors continuing to use a
disproved, harmful treatment?” (Dinham, 2016)
 The reality is that the evidence on learning styles as an effective
teaching and learning approach is limited – this means that there is at least
one meta-analysis with quantitative evidence of impact on achievement or
cognitive or curriculum outcome measures (Evidence for Learning, 2017b).
Noting the low level of evidence security, it is calculated that using learning
styles within the classroom (for example, to match teaching style to learning
style) has a low impact with an effect size of 0.13 or two months’ worth of
learning progress.

Teachers’ time and resources would be better spent on focusing on

providing timely and specific feedback to students as there is strong
evidence which shows this has an impact of eight months’ worth of learning
progress (Evidence for Learning, 2017b).

Dr Catherine Scott summarises the inherent danger of the use of

learning styles within the classroom:

“Rather than being of no particular consequence, the continuing

endorsement of ‘learning styles’ wastes teaching and learning time,
promotes damaging stereotypes about individuals and interferes with the
development of evidence-based best practice. It has no place in education
theory and practice that claim to be scientifically based.” (Scott, 2010)

Davies (2010) called for an ‘evidence-based’ approach to education,

arguing that the design of new interventions in education was not sufficiently
informed by rigorous evidence and that new interventions are then poorly
evaluated. Although this was one in a series of such calls, the very idea of
evidence-based education continues to be criticized (e.g., see Biesta, 2010),
often on the basis that education is complex (allegedly more so than
medicine, to which it is often compared). For example, what does it mean to
say that something has ‘worked’, and for whom has it ‘worked’ and in what
context?
 Despite this complexity, there are some concepts in education for
which there is abundant clear evidence to show that they are not effective.
One of these is Learning Styles, such as the ‘VAK’ classification, which
classifies individuals as one or more of ‘Visual, Auditory, or Kinesthetic’
learners (Geake, 2009). Other classifications include those by (separately)
Kolb, Felder and Honey and Mumford; in total there are over 70 different
classification systems (Coffield et al., 2010). The concept of ‘Learning Styles’
as an educational tool is fairly straightforward, and follows three steps: (1)
individuals will express a preference regarding their ‘style’ of learning, (2)
individuals show differences in their ability to learn about certain types of
information (e.g., some may be better at learning to discriminate between
sounds while others may be better at discriminating between pictures), and
(3) the ‘matching’ of instructional design to an individual’s Learning Style, as
designated by one of the aforementioned classifications, will result in better
educational outcomes (e.g., visual learners should have information
presented visually, while auditory learners would do better with an emphasis
on audio).

The utility of step 2 for education is debatable, as most learning is

constructed from multiple types of information, and to acquire ‘meaning’ and
‘understanding’ arguably goes beyond a specific sensory domain. However, it
is the last step, the ‘matching hypothesis’, where the concept of Learning
Styles completely falls down. A comprehensive review by Pashler et al.
(2008) determined that there was no evidence to support the use of
Learning Styles in education, based upon a lack of evidence to support
‘matching’. Coffield et al. (2010) reviewed the literature pertaining to 71
different Learning Styles classifications, with the aim of answering the
question “should we be using them in post-16 education.” The answer was a
resounding ‘no’.
 The use of an ineffective educational technique is potentially
associated with harm – students who are labeled as having a dominant
Learning Style (e.g., ‘visual learners’) may then choose not to pursue
subjects which they perceive as being dominated by a different learning
style (e.g., music), or may develop a false sense of confidence in their
abilities to master subjects which they perceive as matching their style.
Perhaps most importantly, the use of ineffective techniques such as Learning
Styles can detract from the use of techniques which are demonstrably
effective (Riener and Willingham, 2010; Willingham et al., 2015).

Despite this, amongst educators, there appears to be widespread

belief in the use of Learning Styles. A survey by Dekker et al. (2012) showed
that 93% of UK schoolteachers believed the (unsupported) statement that
“individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred
Learning Style”. Follow-up studies have shown similar results in other
countries (Howard-Jones, 2014). A study conducted using faculty in Higher
Education in the USA found similar results, with 64% rating ‘yes’ to the
statement “does teaching to a student’s learning style enhance learning”
(Dandy and Bendersky, 2014). This is reflected at the institutional level – a
survey of 39 Higher Education institutions in the US found that 29 of them
(72%) taught ‘learning style theory’ as part of faculty development for
online teachers (Meyer and Murrell, 2014).

Learning Styles have been designated a ‘neuromyth’ (Lilienfeld et al.,

2011, p. 92; Dekker et al., 2012; Howard-Jones, 2014) and the lack of
evidence to support them has been the subject of reviews and commentaries
(Riener and Willingham, 2010; Rohrer and Pashler, 2012; Willingham et al.,
2015). Alongside this formal literature are blogs and online videos debunking
the ‘myth.’ I wrote one myself, motivated, as I am sure others have been,
by my personal experience of meeting numerous students and educators
who accepted the concept of Learning Styles as an established, textbook
principle. However, with the wealth of strong research studies and social
media, it seemed reasonable to hypothesize that the use of Learning Styles
may now be in decline, and that this would be seen most keenly in the
current research literature.

Alternately, Learning Styles may represent the educational equivalent

of homeopathy: a medical concept for which no evidence exists, yet in which
belief and use persists. There has been a significant body of research aimed
at understanding why such beliefs persist, a simple summary of which is that
people often seek out information which aligns with their existing worldview,
akin to a prospective confirmation bias (Colombo et al., 2015). Confirmation
bias has been suggested as one reason why Learning Styles and other myths
appear to persist (Riener and Willingham, 2010; Pasquinelli, 2012).

Intuitively, there is much that is attractive about the concept of

Learning Styles. People are obviously different and Learning Styles appear to
offer educators a way to accommodate individual learner differences. They
also allow individuals to self-test and determine what ‘type’ of learner they
are. These intuitive attractions may ‘set up’ an educator to fall into the trap
of confirmation bias – approaching the research literature having already
formed a view that Learning Styles are ‘a good thing’. Therefore, I also set
out to characterize the picture an educator would encounter were they to
search the education research literature for evidence to support, or not, the
use of Learning Styles.

It is widely believed that understanding students’ learning style and

preferences can benefit both students and teachers. As students learn in

various ways, it appears impossible to change the learning style of
each student in the classroom. Instead, teachers might modify their
teaching style so as to be more consistent with their students learning style.
The purpose of this paper is three-fold.: first, to define and classify
the concept of learning styles; second, to give an account of the
significance of identifying and understanding learners’ learning styles; third,
to argue that students will have better achievements, if their teachers’ styles
or the way they receive instruction matches their learning style. Moreover, it
is suggested that teachers should take a balanced approach to teaching
styles so that they can cope with various learning styles. The study takes a
theoretical approach to review relevant literature on the topic and
present various view points on matching and/or mismatching leaning
styles with teaching styles.

It is widely believed that understanding students’ learning style and

preferences can benefit both students and teachers. As students learn in
various ways, it appears impossible to change the learning style of
each student in the classroom. Instead, teachers might modify their
teaching style so as to be more consistent with their students learning style.

The purpose of this paper is three-fold.: first, to define and

classify the concept of learning styles; second, to give an account of the
significance of identifying and understanding learners’ learning styles; third,
to argue that students will have better achievements, if their teachers’ styles
or the way they receive instruction matches their learning style. Moreover, it
is suggested that teachers should take a balanced approach to teaching
styles so that they can cope with various learning styles.

The study takes a theoretical approach to review relevant

literature on the topic and present various view points on matching
and/or mismatching leaning styles with teaching styles.

Despite the lack of evidence in support of the concept, LS remain ever

popular with a great majority of educators. A study looking at teachers from
the UK and the Netherlands showed that more than 90% of teachers believe
there is an optimal delivery style for each learner (Dekker et al., 2012).
Similar studies have found equally high numbers in Spain (Ferrero et al.,
2016) and Portugal (Rato et al., 2013). In Greece, the setting for this
current study, 97% of practicing teachers believe that students' performance
can be enhanced when material is delivered in an individual's preferred LS
(Deligiannidi and Howard-Jones, 2015) and 94% of student teachers agree
(Papadatou-Pastou et al., 2017).

Only a few empirical studies have sought to shed light on the rather
obscure picture (Rogowsky et al., 2015). For example, Rogowsky et al.
(2015) investigated the effect of LS preference in text comprehension in an
adult sample. According to the findings, no statistical significance was to be
found in the relationship between LS preference, mode of delivery, and
learning aptitude.

Building upon this evidence, the current study was designed. Its main
aim was to assess whether the LS of primary school aged pupils as assessed
by the students and their teachers, would agree. These are important
questions, as teachers typically adopt LS within a classroom context by
relying on their own assessment of students LS (Graf and Liu, 2009).
Moreover, there has been limited research done on primary-aged pupils
(e.g., Sun et al., 2009), with research mainly available on older students or
adult samples (Husmann and O'Loughlin, 2018). There is also very limited
literature relating LS to IQ and no studies investigating the hypothesis of
whether teachers confuse their students' intellectual ability with a specific
LS. However, there is previous research to suggest that teachers can
erroneously associate IQ with other characteristics, such as being left-or
right-handed (Papadatou-Pastou et al., 2017), or socio-economic status and
gender (Auwarter and Aruguete, 2009).
 The term “learning styles” speaks to the understanding that every
student learns differently. Technically, an individual’s learning style refers to
the preferential way in which the student absorbs, processes, comprehends
and retains information. For example, when learning how to build a clock,
some students understand the process by following verbal instructions, while
others have to physically manipulate the clock themselves. This notion of
individualized learning styles has gained widespread recognition in education
theory and classroom management strategy. Individual learning styles
depend on cognitive, emotional and environmental factors, as well as one’s
prior experience. In other words: everyone’s different. It is important for
educators to understand the differences in their students’ learning styles, so
that they can implement best practice strategies into their daily activities,
curriculum and assessments. Many degree programs, specifically higher level
ones like a doctorate of education, integrate different learning styles and
educational obstacles directly into program curriculum.

One of the most accepted understandings of learning styles is that

student learning styles fall into three categories: Visual Learners, Auditory
Learners and Kinesthetic Learners. These learning styles are found within
educational theorist Neil Fleming’s VARK model of Student Learning. VARK is
an acronym that refers to the four types of learning styles: Visual, Auditory,
Reading/Writing Preference, and Kinesthetic. (The VARK model is also
referred to as the VAK model, eliminating Reading/Writing as a category of
preferential learning.) The VARK model acknowledges that students have
different approaches to how they process information, referred to as
“preferred learning modes.” The main ideas of VARK are outlined in Learning
Styles Again: VARKing up the right tree!

C. Students’ preferred learning modes have significant influence on their

behavior and learning.
 CI.Students’ preferred learning modes should be matched with appropri-
ate learning strategies.

CII. Information that is accessed through students’ use of their

modality preferences shows an increase in their levels of comprehen-
sion, motivation, and metacognition.

Identifying your students as visual, auditory, reading/writing or

kinesthetic learners, and aligning your overall curriculum with these learning
styles, will prove to be beneficial for your entire classroom. Allowing
students to access information in terms they are comfortable with will
increase their academic confidence.

All teachers reported that they believed that teaching tailored to the
students' LS enhances the intake of new information. However, only four
teachers referred to the VAK explicitly, that is by using the words visual,
auditory, and/or kinaesthetic. For example, one female teacher reported,
“Yes, of course I try to support the students whom I have found out to be
visual, auditory, or kinaesthetic types with material that I design myself or
that I find online.” Most teachers, however, referred to “learning styles” in a
more general fashion or did not make it clear in their responses they
referred to the VAK model. For example a male teacher reported “Students'
performance is enhanced when using material that I create personally
through handicrafts or through a computer.” and a female teacher reported
“Yes, teaching is tailored to the learning styles of the students sometimes
and there is a great enhancement in their performance.”

The words that were more prominent, as indicated by the size of the
words in the word cloud were “students,” “performance,” “learning,”
“teaching,” and “material.”
 Learning styles (LSs) have been defined as the composite cognitive,
affective, and physiological characteristics that are relatively stable
indicators of how a learner perceives, interacts with and responds to the
learning environment. Bruner have described how humans assimilate
knowledge about the environment through four sensory modalities: Visual
(observing pictures, symbols or diagrams), auditory (listening, discussing),
visual/iconic (reading and writing), and kinesthetic (using tactile sensory
abilities such as smell and touch). Many tools have been developed over
time to understand how individuals learn such as the Vermunt's inventory,
Kolbe learning style indicator, Meyer Brigg Indicator, Flemming's Visual,
Aural, Read/Write, and Kinesthetic (VARK) questionnaire, etc.VARK is an
acronym for Visual, Aural, Read/Write, and Kinesthetic. Some examples of
the VARK learning style preferences (LSPs) are: Visual (looking at and
making pictures, animations, graphs, tables, etc.); aural (listening to and
participating in speeches, discussions, and question answer sessions);
read/write (reading and writing text associated with the textbook, class
notes, laboratory reports, etc.) and kinesthetic (engaging in physical
experiences, manipulating objects, etc., e.g. laboratories).

Learning strategies are specific combinations or patterns of learning

activities used during the learning process. The quality of learning outcomes
achieved is dependent to a considerable extent on the learning activities
used by learners. These learning strategies can be broadly divided into self-
regulated strategy in which the students perform most regulation activities
themselves, externally regulated strategy in which the students let their
learning process to be regulated by teachers/books or lack of regulation
when students are unable to regulate their learning process by themselves
and also experience insufficient support from external regulation as provided
by teachers and learning environment.
 Recent research has made it fairly clear that different students have
different LSs. LSPs are significantly different in males and females. Read-
write and kinesthetic learners who adopt a deep approach learning strategy
perform better academically than do the auditory, visual learners who
employ superficial study strategies. Much work has been done on studying
the individual learning preferences and how instructional methods can be
tailored to cater to the different styles. However, individualization of
instructional methods has not been shown to contribute significantly to learn
outcomes. Studies have also shown that the most effective learners are able
to adapt to the style which the learning situation requires. The teachers can
help students to develop strategies for adapting to differing situations,
especially when LSs do not fit to a task. Awareness of LSs can create a
better learning environment by enabling students to use appropriate
strategies.

The best learning “style” for benefitting from instruction is to avoid

depending upon any single style, or any style-like consistency in approach.
It has been advocated that learners take a very flexible approach to
instruction, so to optimize what they get out of each formal instructional
situation that is useful in the long term, not just useful for coping with the
instructional situation in the short-term. Developing the flexibility to respond
productively to all sorts of instructional situations would be a laudable goal
for medical students. How best to encourage this flexibility is yet to be
determined.

Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the impact of

awareness of LSs and motivating students by externally regulated strategies
to use mixed methods of learning.

Awareness of individual LSs among students and the use of an

externally regulated strategy for enhancing learning helped students adapt
to other LSs. This enhanced the use of better learning practices and,
therefore, better learning outcomes. Thus, knowledge of VARK LSP of the
student should not be considered as a restriction to use that particular style
only. Rather, teachers should make a conscious effort to let the students
explore other LSs as well.

Learning styles refer to the concept that we, as individuals, process

and perceive information in different ways. There are many different factors
that can lead to the differences that arise within learning styles. These
factors include, but are not limited to, personality, ability to process
information, self-efficacy, sensory intake processes or some complex
combination of these and other differences (Institute for Learning Styles
Research, n.d.). Using a variety of assessment tools, individuals can gauge
their own interest levels for a set of criteria to help establish the methods in
which they obtain much of their information about the world around them.
One assessment tool that can be used in establishing a person’s learning
style is the Perceptual Modality Preference Survey (PMPS). This survey
focuses on seven perceptual sensory intake methods that help shape how,
we as individuals, view the world around us. There are seven perceptual
styles: print, aural, visual, interactive, haptic, kinesthetic, and olfactory.
(Institute for Learning Styles Research, 2010)

The phrase learning styles refers to the concept that different people
prefer to process information in different ways and therefore learn more
effectively when they receive instruction in a way that conforms to their
preferences (Pashler et al., 2009). The inventories created to measure
learning style preferences generally classify learners into different style
categories. Since at least the 1960s researchers have hypothesized about
aptitude–treatment interactions (ATIs), the idea that a student’s aptitude, in
some cases characterized by a student’s preference such as learning style,
can interact with a corresponding treatment (instructional approach) to
produce an enhanced effect, most commonly purported to be increased
learning (Scott, 2010). By the 1970s, the bulk of the empirical research had
refuted the most common hypotheses associated with ATIs, yet the idea
remerged a decade later to find unprecedented acceptance and widespread
use in the form of learning styles-based instruction. These practices are so
widely accepted that they go largely unquestioned (Bishka, 2010). The vast
amount of educational time, resources, and funds spent on learning styles
would suggest that it is warranted to closely examine the claims behind the
practice and the research that supports it. (Theory and Research in
Education, 2015)

Pashler et al. (2009) trace the history of learning styles to the Myers–
Briggs assessment that became popular in the 1940s and continues to find
extensive use today. The Myers–Briggs is commonly used by businesses to
make occupational decisions about the suitability of potential employees.
The idea that people cluster into categories as conceived by the Myers–
Briggs is not strongly supported by research, yet that has not limited its
popularity. In essence, there seems to be an appeal for industries and the
general public to find out what ‘type of person’ someone is by slotting them
into predetermined categories, and this concept has found its way into a
wide variety of educational settings. (Theory and Research in Education,
2015)

Other researchers trace the learning styles phenomenon to the much

more recent development of Gardner’s concept of multiple intelligences.
Gardner initially proposed that there are eight forms of intelligence that all
people possess: visual-spatial, verballinguistic, logical-mathematical, bodily-
kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, musical, and naturalistic. Allcock
and Hulme (2010) argue that Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory
(Gardner, 1991, 1993) has influenced the learning styles approach by
advocating matching instruction to students’ preferred learning style. They
point out that many teachers are expected to consider all intelligences when
lesson planning in order to appeal to students’ learning styles. Fridley and
Fridley (2010) also link the expansion of learning styles to Gardner’s
hypothesis and emphasize inherent weaknesses in Gardner’s model. While
Gardner’s propositions have encountered substantial criticism in the field of
psychology due to a lack of empirical support, this analysis will focus only on
learning styles, as it has become an extensive field in its own right. (Theory
and Research in Education, 2015)

The Kolb inventory classifies learners along two dimensions: a

preferred mode of perception (concrete or abstract) and a preferred mode of
310 Theory and Research in Education 13(3) processing (active
experimentation or reflective observation) (Gogus and Gunes, 2011; Pashler
et al., 2009; Zacharis, 2011). Based on these categories, it classifies
learners into one of the four categories: divergers who favor feeling and
watching (concrete, reflective), assimilators who favor thinking and watching
(abstract, reflective), convergers who favor thinking and doing (abstract,
active), and accommodators who favor feeling and doing (concrete, active).
As with other learning styles frameworks, there have been concerns about
the validity of the constructs measured in the Kolb inventories as well
(Kappe et al., 2009; Martin, 2010). But while Kolb’s inventories are
commonly used in research, the visual/auditory/ kinesthetic (VAK) or
visual/auditory/read–write/kinesthetic (VARK) is the most common learning
styles taxonomy in practice (Bishka, 2010; Fridley and Fridley, 2010; Riener
and Willingham, 2010) and has become commonplace at all levels of
education and through a wide range of commercial products. VAK/VARK
instruments can be found in a wide variety of different forms and can be
traced to numerous theorists, but are most commonly associated with
Fleming (2001). Scott (2010) suggests that the VAK/VARK model may have
taken hold to the extent that it did in educational settings because the
categories relate to specific senses and are concrete in comparison to other
learning styles models which can appear abstract to the point of ambiguity.
But this grounding in our natural senses should also make this model more
straightforward to study. For instance, since the premise of the learning
styles hypothesis is that matching learning style to instructional mode
produces increased learning, for the VAK/VARK models, this would mean
matching instruction to students’ sensory functions – a visual learner would
be provided visually oriented instruction, an auditory learner would be
provided with verbal instruction, and so on. This would seem to be more
readily measurable than the more fluid constructs of the Kolb inventory.
(Theory and Research in Education, 2015)

Some researchers, however, have questioned the validity and

reliability of various learning styles inventories. Fridley and Fridley (2010)
argue that VAK instruments have little or no predictive value. They note that
according to the learning styles hypothesis, if instruction is matched to
students’ learning preferences, then we should see an increase in learning,
yet research does not yet support this claim. Scott (2010) points out that
factor analyses have shown Kolb’s learning styles inventories to be
unreliable, bringing into question the validity of the constructs they purport
to measure. Another popular model, Honey and Mumford’s (1986) Learning
Style Questionnaire (LSQ) was developed precisely because of concerns
about the validity of the Kolb assessments (Kappe et al., 2009). The LSQ
identified four types of learners: activists, theorists, pragmatists, and
reflectors. But factor analyses have shown the LSQ to have reliability issues
as well. (Scott, 2010)

However, despite concerns about the validity and the reliability of the
measures, the commercial component of the field is so vast that there is
little incentive for critical reflection based on objective empirical findings
(Bishka, 2010). These commercial entities have been a powerful force
behind the propagation of learning styles instruction, a curious dynamic at
odds with the reality that educational psychologists, those who are best
equipped to study the concept, generally regard it with great skepticism
(Scott, 2010). But lay people in the business world, administrators in
education, and teachers in the classroom tend to be unfamiliar with
psychometric evidence and remain unconvinced with it when it is presented
to them, instead allowing the marketing of the product to influence their
decision-making. Fridley and Fridley (2010) speculate that the expansion of
learning styles is mainly due to flourishing professional development
programs where educational and commercial goals overlap despite the fact
that support for learning styles is sparse in peer-reviewed literature. A
number of other researchers have noted the seemingly incongruous dynamic
of a highly profitable and thriving learning styles industry on one hand and a
lack of empirical support for the method on the other. (Kappe al., 2009;
Pashler et al., 2009; Rohrer and Pashler, 2012)

Smith and Throne (2009) provide the reader with a reference to an

assessment designed to measure multiple intelligences, which is
simultaneously listed as a learning styles assessment. The implication is that
teachers should test students for learning style preferences so that they can
modify instruction to conform to those preferences. Likewise, Powell (2012)
suggests that teachers incorporate multiple intelligences and learning styles
information into their instructional plans. Carjuzaa and Kellough (2013) also
recommend that teachers should take learning styles into account and plan
instruction based on them. Hipsky (2011) provides suggestions for different
ways for teachers to modify their instruction to conform to students’ learning
styles. Learning styles seems to be a foundational aspect of this text, as it is
mentioned early and much of the advice that follows throughout the book
branches from the idea that instruction should be differentiated according to
students’ learning styles. (Theory and Research in Education, 2015)
 As the premise of the present study, Threeton and Walter (2009)
affirm that there is a dearth of learning style studies of students within the
trade, technology and industry sector of career and technical education. Kolb
and Kolb (2009) confirm that learning styles differ significantly to different
professional and technical fields of specialization. An individual tends to
choose degree courses where the learning environment nurtures their
learning styles. This present study focused on the assessment of the
learning style preferences of students enrolled in applied science courses
with the end goal of contributing to the existing body of knowledge about
the distinct learning styles of students in these disciplines. (Theory and
Research in Education, 2015)

Awareness of the different learning style preferences of students

enrolled in applied sciences courses will eventually lead to more effective
learning experiences. In fact, Alavi and Toozandehjani (2017) concluded that
having a background of the learning styles of students can enhance their
learning and at the same time help students strengthen self-actualization.
Teevan, Michael and Schlesselman (2011) also emphasize that knowledge of
the learning styles can help facilitate teachers to employ suitable teaching
strategies and methods to nurture students' academic performance. This will
also provide both teachers and students positive feedback on their strengths
and weaknesses in the teaching and learning scenario. Likewise, knowledge
of the learning styles can provide implications to curriculum design allowing
teachers to implement a learner-centered curriculum model in the
classroom. Dalmolin, Mackeivicz, Pochapski, Pilatti and Santos (2018)
suggest that determining the learning styles of students will ultimately
improve their educational experience. Previous exiting literature confirms
that learning styles predict students’ academic performance.
Jiraporncharoen, Angkurawaranon, Chockjamsai, Deesomchok and
Euathrongchit (2015) studied learning styles and academic achievement of
undergraduate students in Thailand found out a positive association between
the two. Barman, Aziz and Yusoff (2014) also studied the learning style
awareness and academic performance of students concluded that students
‘awareness of their strengths such as learning style and how to utilize their
strengths may improve their academic performance. (Theory and Research
in Education, 2015)

Another variable being investigated is the study habits and skills of

students enrolled in applied science courses. The literature further suggests
that study habits are a predictive factor of academic performance. Ebele and
Olofu (2017) found out that there is a significant relationship between study
habits and students' academic performance. Looyeh, Fazelpour, Masoule,
Chehrzad and Leili (2017) investigated the relationship between the Study
habits and the Academic performance of Medical Sciences Students found
out the significant relationship between the study habits of students and
their academic performance. Similarly, Siahi and Maiyo (2015) studied study
habits and academic achievement of students also found out that a positive
relationship of 0.66 between study habits and academic achievement. The
results implied that the study habits need a significant attention if we are to
improve performance. Furthermore, Chilca (2017) studied on the study
habits and academic performance among university students in Peru
concluded that study habits do influence academic performance. (Theory and
Research in Education, 2015)

Hence, in every school setting particularly in higher education

institutions, the academic performance of students is an indicator of a
quality learning experience. Academic achievement is measured in the form
of students' remarkable scores across their subject courses and the display
of learning outcomes which can be assessed through performance,
classroom tests, assignments, outputs, and major examinations. Previous
studies present that there are intellective and non-intellective factors
affecting the academic achievement of students across levels. (Theory and
Research in Education, 2015)

There were several attempts to enhance the level of academic

achievement by students and there are plenty of literature whose subject
matter focuses on the academic performance of students and the different
factors affecting it. Yet, there remains a research gap in the literature when
it concerns learning styles, and how this affects or even translates to
academic success. Previous researches on learning styles have found varying
environments and individual cognitive processing as significant determinants
to academic performance. Nuzhat et al (2011) argued that learning
processes are affected by the environment and cognition (Abidin et. al,
2011). The study of learning styles has undergone several examinations
(Samarakoon et al, 2013). Analyzing the learning process of students, and
understanding the cycle of knowledge from classroom to student and back,
will go far in helping student be more aware and consequently improve their
23 academic performance. (Theory and Research in Education, 2015)

According to Gurpinar (2010) instructors should be aware of learning

styles to enable them to use appropriate educational materials. Moreover,
when learning and teaching styles are compatible, this can result to
improved understanding of course content (Mlambo, 2011). The reality
however is that educators are not really conscious of their learner’s learning
styles. Educators generally impart knowledge and skills based on
conventions and individual teaching styles, without necessarily considering
the different learning styles of students. However, to be more effective in
the learning cycle, educators should also consider differences in learning
styles among students. While substantive literature exists detailing effects of
learning styles on performance in other countries, the impact of learning
styles on Filipino nursing students has not been as thoroughly investigated in
the Philippines. (Theory and Research in Education, 2015)
 Afful-Broni and Mawusi (2010) stated in their study that “students
perceive and learn in different ways likewise they study in different ways”
and they “may have different learning styles. Thus, the process of learning
involves many factors, such as self-confidence, intelligence, aptitude,
motivation and learning styles. Furthermore, another significant factor is
learners‟ study habits. Congos (2011) presented six dimensions of study
skills, i.e. textbook reading, memory, time management, note-taking, test
preparation and concentration. Proper time management is an important
component of study habits that can enhance one’s performance. Effective
time management skills include studying on daily basis, forming timetables,
study plans and utilizing time properly. Spending extra hours for studying
with lack of concentration does not define the appropriate utilization of time.
Concentration is also a significant dimension of study habits. It is the ability
to give attention and avoid distractions while studying. Note-taking is not
just writing the lecture in fact it also needs attention and listening ability to
properly note taking the lecture. Strategies used to memorize the learned
material are also attributes of study habits. Effective textbook reading is not
only reading the material but also comprehending the reading material by
constructing themes and main ideas (Ayesha & Khurshid, 2013; Congo,
2011; Osa-Edoh, & Alutu, 2012). Study habit, therefore, refers to learning
which leads to the achievement of a learner’s goal, through a prescribed
pattern of a study behavior. Study habit plays a major role to the learning
style of an individual. (Theory and Research in Education, 2015)

Learners cannot acquire effective study habits by themselves; they

actually require assistance from teachers, psychologists or counselors in
order to improve their study habits (Udeani, 2012). It has been considered
imperative to introduce organized study skills training programmes for the
students. It has also been suggested in literature that effective study habits
can be developed with the passage of time and experience (Sandhu,
2014).The term learning style refers to “the way in which an individual
concentrates on, processes, internalizes, and retains new and difficult
information” (Dunn et al., 2009). When students are aware of their own
styles, they are more likely to take initiatives in their own learning process
and make adjustments to learn in ways better suited to their preferences.
(Journal Of Humanities And Social Science, 2019)

Learning styles are an important factor that affects study habits. But
there are scenarios that learners realize on the latter that their study habit
do not match with the style they need to learn that made them identify
particular study habit according to their learning style and possibly improve
academically. Hoeffner (2010) sought to determine whether there was an
improvement in grades after the adjustment of their study habits once their
learning styles were identified. This study was inconclusive since not all of
the students modified their study habits. However, those who did modify
their study habits in relation with their learning styles agreed that the
change was quite beneficial. (Journal Of Humanities And Social Science,
2019)

Learning styles have been construed in different ways but traditionally

have been regarded as relatively stable. In contrast, the “student
approaches to learning” perspective tends to assume that approaches to
studying are contextually driven. This article argues for a rapprochement
between these two traditions. First, the evidence that students' perceptions
of their context determine their approaches to studying is open to other
interpretations. Second, students' approaches to studying depend as much
on their conceptions of learning as on contextual factors. Third, students'
conceptions of learning seem to be relatively stable, even across an entire
degree programme. This suggests that conceptions of learning fit the
traditional notion of learning styles. Future research should explore the
conceptual and empirical relationships between students' learning styles and
their conceptions of learning. (Learning and Individual Differences, 2010)

Although there are those who comment negatively on learning styles

research, in practical contexts it has been claimed to be a useful measure.
For example, in special education, the winner of the 2011 Pearson Teaching
Award for special needs teachers, is a music teacher in a special school who
used his talent in lights, music and sound effects to assist many SEN (special
educational needs) students to make progress in their learning. (Journal of
Education and Training Studies, 2016)

Learning style could also be used as a component of, or in conjunction

with, other teaching or learning theories. Mr Richard Rodd is the winner of
the 2011 Pearson Teaching Award for History teachers. In his class, he
immerses students in models of historical events. For example, when he
teaches WWII, he uses artificial smoke, a darkened classroom and sounds of
horses galloping. He even has students prepare soldiers' costumes to create
a stimulating environment. When teaching a notorious murder, he would
model the crime scene and encourage students to investigate in a hands-on
way (BBC2, 2011). As a result, 96% of the learners in his GCSE classes in
2011 achieved grades from A+ to C (Pearson website, 2012). This could be
seen as an example of using VAK in class in such a way that it implicitly
becomes a natural form of scaffolding for students. Thus VAK could be used
as a component of cognitive apprenticeship. (Journal of Education and
Training Studies, 2016)

Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 2018 Students prefer to

study subjects in different ways. Every student chooses the manner which
appears to be the easiest. In order to be effective, students ought to apply
the learning style with which they are most compatible. A fitting style is
beneficial because it will help them achieve higher results. Simultaneously,
acquainting themselves with their students’ learning styles, will help
professors to apply the most suitable instruction method. The hybrid
learning is the most compatible method for all student types, as it combines
the traditional and online learning (Collopy & Arnold, 2009). Moreover, this
instruction method is viewed as the teaching method of the future by many.
(Collopy & Arnold, 2009; Dziuban, Graham, & Picciano, 2014; Gómez &
Duart, 2012; Güzera & Canera, 2014)

It is essential to return the focus to teaching students and helping

them become successful learners. Teachers must be empowered to refine
the art of instruction, trusted to develop and use their skill and intuition,
and encouraged to implement strategies that meet the children's needs
(Martin, 2010). It is essential to return the spotlight to the students
rather than content standards and proficiency scores. Obviously, it is
necessary to maintain measures of accountability and uphold high
standards, but the education system must not do this at the expense of
teaching for student learning. An awareness of learning style preferences
and the ability and willingness to differentiate instruction by incorporating
a variety of teaching style approaches suited to such preferences can help
teachers make great strides in reaching and meeting the educational
needs of all their students. (Hsieh et al., 2011; Lauria, 2010)

The concept of learning styles still holds appeal for educators

(Bishka; Martin, 2010; Scott, 2010). A potential benefit of incorporating
learning styles research in the classroom is helping teachers and students
alike develop greater awareness and understanding of characteristics
unique to each individual in any given classroom (Alaka; Kogakoglu,
2010; Lauria, 2010). Learning style assessments can help identify
personal preferences as well as potential strengths and weaknesses in
how learners deal with content and approach learning tasks. However,
students may be inaccurate in their responses to assessment items
(Bishka), and teachers must be careful to avoid labeling students based
on assessment results, as this would be counterproductive to a theory
designed to encourage and support diversity (Scott, 2010). Instead,
teachers should utilize assessment findings to assist them in broadening
their methods to incorporate the variety of styles expressed by the
students under their charge. (Wilson M, 2012)

Even if teachers or schools choose not to administer assessments,

teachers can still use an understanding of learning style characteristics to
inform their instruction. Although research studies have been unable to
consistently provide evidence that matching styles is beneficial to students'
academic achievement, there are indications that this may be the case
(Hsieh, Jang, Hwang, & Chen, 2011 ; Lauria, 2010). Further, the literature
also supports the notion that teaching to a variety of learning styles may be
even more beneficial than tailoring instruction to exactly match student
preferences (Alaka, 2011 ; Martin, 2010). However, the overwhelming
number of learning style theories, and the plethora of physiological
preferences, psychological tendencies, and personality traits can leave
teachers bewildered (Alaka). The CAPSOL@ styles of learning inventory
includes a manageable number of important components from various
learning style theories, making it a worthwhile tool to help teachers develop
an awareness of learmng styles concepts and assessment information.
Teachers can then use such information to monitor their instruction and
ensure they are utilizing a variety of strategies and selecting those most
appropriately suited to particular lesson content. (Kogakoglu, 2010)

Pashler and his colleagues point to some reasons to explain why

learning styles have gained—and kept—such traction, aside from the
enormous industry that supports the concept. First, people like to identify
themselves and others by “type.” Such categories help order the social
environment and offer quick ways of understanding each other. Also, this
approach appeals to the idea that learners should be recognized as “unique
individuals”—or, more precisely, that differences among students should be
acknowledged—rather than treated as a number in a crowd or a faceless
class of students (p. 107). Carried further, teaching to different learning
styles suggests that “all people have the potential to learn effectively and
easily if only instruction is tailored to their individual learning styles” (p.
107). There may be another reason why this approach to learning styles is
so widely accepted. They very loosely resemble the concept of
metacognition, or the process of thinking about one’s thinking. For instance,
having your students describe which study strategies and conditions for their
last exam worked for them and which didn’t is likely to improve their
studying on the next exam. (Tanner, 2012)

Learning Styles have been designated a ‘neuromyth’ (Lilienfeld et al.,

2011, p. 92; Dekker et al., 2012; Howard-Jones, 2014) and the lack of
evidence to support them has been the subject of reviews and commentaries
(Riener and Willingham, 2010; Rohrer and Pashler, 2012; Willingham et al.,
2015). Alongside this formal literature are blogs and online videos debunking
the ‘myth.’ I wrote one myself, motivated, as I am sure others have been,
by my personal experience of meeting numerous students and educators
who accepted the concept of Learning Styles as an established, textbook
principle. However, with the wealth of strong research studies and social
media, it seemed reasonable to hypothesize that the use of Learning Styles
may now be in decline, and that this would be seen most keenly in the
current research literature. (Newton, P. M., 2015)

Alternately, Learning Styles may represent the educational equivalent

of homeopathy: a medical concept for which no evidence exists, yet in which
belief and use persists. There has been a significant body of research aimed
at understanding why such beliefs persist, a simple summary of which is that
people often seek out information which aligns with their existing worldview,
akin to a prospective confirmation bias (Colombo et al., 2015). Confirmation
bias has been suggested as one reason why Learning Styles and other myths
appear to persist (Riener and Willingham, 2010; Pasquinelli, 2012).
(Newton, P. M., 2015)

Intuitively, there is much that is attractive about the concept of

Learning Styles. People are obviously different and Learning Styles appear to
offer educators a way to accommodate individual learner differences. They
also allow individuals to self-test and determine what ‘type’ of learner they
are. These intuitive attractions may ‘set up’ an educator to fall into the trap
of confirmation bias – approaching the research literature having already
formed a view that Learning Styles are ‘a good thing’. Therefore, I also set
out to characterize the picture an educator would encounter were they to
search the education research literature for evidence to support, or not, the
use of Learning Styles . (Newton, P. M. 2015)

The central assertion of learning styles theory, that students learn

better when they receive instruction in the format that accommodates their
preferred learning style is, after a generation of implementation, still an
unproven assertion: “Although the literature on learning styles is enormous,
very few studies have even used an experimental methodology capable of
testing the validity of learning styles applied to education. Moreover, of
those that did use an appropriate method, several found results that flatly
contradict the popular meshing hypothesis” (Pashler et al., 105). (Bramble,
2015)

A key learning styles assumption is that if students learn using

methods that complement their preferred learning style, processing the
concepts takes less cognitive capacity (which is limited in working memory)
and more attention can be given the actual concepts, resulting in improved
performance. (Bramble, 2015)
 A learning style is the way students begin to concentrate on, process,
internalize and remember new and difficult academic information” (Dunn, 8).
It is “a biologically and developmentally determined set of personal
characteristics” grounded in cognitive style theory and brain lateralization
theory (Dunn, 9). So, learning styles are not made up pseudo-science, but
rather a highly developed characterization of how students learn that has not
yet been validated by conventional scientific research methods. “Given
responsive environments, resources, and approaches, students achieve
statistically higher achievement and attitude test scores in congruent, rather
than incongruent treatments” (Dunn, 10). Learning styles can change as one
ages, but the degree and nature of change is highly individual. (Bramble,
2015)

Despite mixed evidence on the effectiveness of the implementation of

learning styles theory, as general descriptors of how students learn (Visual—
having concepts represented with pictures, graphs, flow diagrams, etc.; Au-
ral—hearing concepts explained/talking them through; Read-Write—reading
about the concepts before using them; Kinesthetic—starting by using the
concepts and learning them through trial and error), learning styles theory is
useful to remind us to use variety in presentation, engagement and assess-
ment methods, which is something that does improve student performance
(Cuthbert, 246). Student learning styles may be as individually unique as a
fingerprint but significant value can still accrue from using variety with dif-
ferent styles of learning in mind, and having students think about their
learning processes in these terms as well. (Yenice, 2012)

Perhaps the strongest and most interesting research on learning styles

was published recently by Mahdjoubi and Akplotsyi (2012). This was one of
the few studies that used the VAK model, the most widely used assessment
in schools. The researchers used a 39-item assessment that was made up of
13 items for each of the three learning modalities. The participants were 151
elementary school students from four schools in the United Kingdom. The
purpose of the study was to test students’ sensitivity to sensory cues, not
academic learning. All students were assessed on their learning style and
then all of them were given the same three tasks to complete, which were
designed to address the three different learning styles. For the visual condi-
tion, students completed a photo-safari. For the auditory condition, students
took part in small discussion groups of 10–15 students lasting about 45min-
utes. For the kinesthetic condition, studentswore global positioning system
(GPS) loggers for 2 days and were allowed to freelyexplore the outdoor envi-
ronment around the school. All the students were exposed to all three condi-
tions. (Cuevas, 2015)

Mahdjoubi and Akplotsyi (2012) found a significant interaction effect

that appeared for all three conditions. Visual learners chose to take more
photographs and tended to gravitate toward more picturesque locations.
Auditory learners spoke the most frequently in discussion groups.
Kinesthetic learners were the most active during the free outdoor exploration
time. The research used an adequate sample size, was conducted over the
course of multiple school days, and appeared to show clear results
suggesting that VAK learning styles may have some influence on learning
behaviors. This study does not provide support for the matching hypothesis
because academic learning was not measured, but it does offer some
interesting findings that suggest that there may be some validity to the
hypothesis that the VAK learning styles are related to learning choices and
may have some real-world implications. The implications do not lend
themselves to the traditional learning styles approach in which a classroom
teacher would attempt to present the same subject matter in a variety of
modes based on students’ learning styles in an attempt to have them all
learn the same material at an optimum level. Rather these results might
have some value in assisting students with choosing academic courses or
occupational tracks they would find interest in and for which they might
have increased chances of success. (Theory and Research in Education,
2015 ).

Prajapati et al (2011) did a research to investigate the influence of

learning styles, enrolment status and gender on academic performance of
optometry undergraduates in UK. Damavandi (2011) did a research in Iran
to investigate academic achievement of students with different learning
styles. Mohamad (2012) did a research in Saudi to investigate the
relationships between learning styles, strategies and the academic
performance of Saudi English. Rahmani & Jahanbaksh (2012) did a research
to find out the relationship between learning styles and academic
achievement of high school girls’ student in Iran. Chermahini, et.al (2013)
did a research in Iran regarding learning styles and academic performance of
students in English as a second language class. Gokalp (2013) did a research
in Turkey on the effect of learning styles to their academic success. Vaishnav
(2013) did a research in Maharashtra State, India to investigate the
relationship between learning style and academic achievement of secondary
school students. Garpi (2013) did a research in India to investigate the
relationship between learning styles preferences and academic performance
of students. Yousef (2014) did a research in UAE regarding learning styles
preferences of statistics students of business and economics students.
Almigbai (2015) performs a research in Saudi to identify relationship
between the learning style preferences of medical students and academic
achievement. Most of the research done in Iran (e.g. Damavandi, 2011;
Rahmani & Azali, 2012; Chermahini, 2013) followed by Saudi Arabia (e.g.
Mohamad, 2012; Almigbai, 2015) and India (Vaishnay, 2013; Garpi 2013).
Among all the researches done, the common variables used by the
researchers were learning style active, reflective, visual, verbal, sensing,
intuitive, sequential and global. (Yeung et.al, 2005; Prajapati et.al, 2011;
Rahmani & Azali, 2012; Garpi 2013; Yousef, 2014) and follow by learning
style visual, auditory and kinaesthetic (Mohamod, 2012; Almigbai, 2015).
(International Journal of Education, Learning and Training, 2017)

The development of a country is dependent on the capability of its

human resources. The knowledge and technological advancement of society
depend on the quality and preparation of manpower who have sound
technical understanding, personal and interpersonal skills as scientists and
technologist. As such, it is of utmost importance that the highest standards
are set in defining the objectives, components, and processes for
Information technology and industrial technology programs of higher
education institutions. Knowledge and education are common goods. The
acquisition and application of knowledge is a part of collective societal
endeavor (UNESCO, 2015). The need to produce competent graduates in
their specific discipline who possessed the skills and attributes to deal with
the ever-changing work environment in the 21st century is a herculean task
assigned to HEIs in the Philippines (Magulod, 2017a, 2017b). One of the
important steps to undertake to ensure quality and optimal learning
experience among university students is to consider their different learning
styles and preferences. Learning style refers to how students learn and
process information in their own ways (Magulod, G. C., 2018).

A number of previous studies have investigated the relationship

between college students’ learning styles and academic performance, In
fact, Moeinikia and Zahed-Babelan (2010) and Williams, Brown and
Etherington (2013) confirm that there is a positive link between learning
styles and academic performance in the university settings. Learning style is
defined as the characteristics, strengths, and preferences in the way how
people receive and process information (Hsieh, Jang, Hwang & Chen, 2011).
It also refers to the fact that every person has his or her own method or set
of strategies when learning (Gokalp, 2013). (Magulod, G. C., 2018)
 As the premise of the present study, Threeton and Walter (2009)
affirm that there is a dearth of learning style studies of students within the
trade, technology and industry sector of career and technical education. Kolb
and Kolb (2009) confirm that learning styles differ significantly to different
professional and technical fields of specialization. An individual tends to
choose degree courses where the learning environment nurtures their
learning styles. This present study focused on the assessment of the
learning style preferences of students enrolled in applied science courses
with the end goal of contributing to the existing body of knowledge about
the distinct learning styles of students in these disciplines. Awareness of the
different learning style preferences of students enrolled in applied sciences
courses will eventually lead to more effective learning experiences. In fact,
Alavi and Toozandehjani (2017) concluded that having a background of the
learning styles of students can enhance their learning and at the same time
help students strengthen self-actualization. Teevan, Michael and
Schlesselman (2011) also emphasize that knowledge of the learning styles
can help facilitate teachers to employ suitable teaching strategies and
methods to nurture students' academic performance. This will also provide
both teachers and students positive feedback on their strengths and
weaknesses in the teaching and learning scenario. Likewise, knowledge of
the learning styles can provide implications to curriculum design allowing
teachers to implement a learner-centered curriculum model in the
classroom. (Magulod, G. C., 2018)

Dalmolin, Mackeivicz, Pochapski, Pilatti and Santos (2018) suggest

that determining the learning styles of students will ultimately improve their
educational experience. Previous exiting literature confirms that learning
styles predict students’ academic performance. Jiraporncharoen,
Angkurawaranon, Chockjamsai, Deesomchok and Euathrongchit (2015)
studied learning styles and academic achievement of undergraduate
students in Thailand found out a positive association between the two.
Barman, Aziz and Yusoff (2014) also studied the learning style awareness
and academic performance of students concluded that students ‘awareness
of their strengths such as learning style and how to utilize their strengths
may improve their academic performance. Another variable being
investigated is the study habits and skills of students enrolled in applied
science courses. The literature further suggests that study habits are a
predictive factor of academic performance. Ebele and Olofu (2017) found out
that there is a significant relationship between study habits and students'
academic performance. Looyeh, Fazelpour, Masoule, Chehrzad and Leili
(2017) investigated the relationship between the Study habits and the
Academic performance of Medical Sciences Students found out the
significant relationship between the study habits of students and their
academic performance. (Magulod, G. C., 2018)

Similarly, Siahi and Maiyo (2015) studied study habits and academic
achievement of students also found out that a positive relationship of 0.66
between study habits and academic achievement. The results implied that
the study habits need a significant attention if we are to improve
performance. Furthermore, Chilca (2017) studied on the study habits and
academic performance among university students in Peru concluded that
study habits do influence academic performance. Hence, in every school
setting particularly in higher education institutions, the academic
performance of students is an indicator of a quality learning experience.
Academic achievement is measured in the form of students' remarkable
scores across their subject courses and the display of learning outcomes
which can be assessed through performance, classroom tests, assignments,
outputs, and major examinations. Previous studies present that there are
intellective and non-intellective factors affecting the academic achievement
of students across levels. (Magulod, G. C., 2018)
 Students' learning style preference and study habits should be
understood. The interplay of learning style preferences, study habits and
academic achievement of students enrolled in applied science courses at
Cagayan State University prompted the researcher to investigate the
relationship existing among these variables. Likewise, identifying the
significant differences of these variables when grouped according to their
socio-economic profile will provide a better picture of as to what specific
personal learning interventions may be implemented. Moreover, to face the
challenges of advancement, the development of proficient IT Professionals
and highly skilled industrial technologists will eventually spur the
advancement of the Philippine society. (Magulod, G. C., 2018)

Hence, recognizing their innate learning dispositions and their attitude

towards their studies will be a basis for the university to design and
implement educational interventions with the goal of enhancing their
academic performance and the quality of their learning experiences.
(Magulod, G. C., 2018)

According to Chen (2009), the tools available in Learning Management

System offer several features that help students build their knowledge
according to their preferences. To the author, learning based on traditional
models usually guides students to a rigid learning process, while learning in
virtual environments offers personalized and adaptive mechanisms to meet
students’ preferences. In this context, from the moment that students know
their preferences, they have the ability to guide their own learning, which
justifies knowing the learning styles, which is an important step to promote
individuality and to take advantage of skills (Barros, 2010). To identify and
understand the different learning styles of students, on the other hand, also
helps teachers in planning activities and in the availability of resources that
meet a multitude of students, contributing to their motivation. (Silva &
Oliveira Neto, 2010)
 As such, several studies have been carried out to identify and use
learning styles as an alternative to the improvement and use of teaching
strategies and appropriate instructional methods, by professors and
professionals involved, in order to help them achieve their goals. For
students, we highlight the importance of adopting learning strategies to
improve learning and performance, whatever the teaching style that is used.
In the virtual learning environment, knowing what are the learning styles of
students allows for adequate planning in the use of computing resources, so
that they meet the individualities of students in the methodological approach
applied to knowledge construction. However, these mentioned studies didn’t
assess students’ performance as to the types of assessment (online and
face-to-face), and focused exclusively on the virtual environment and on
online activities. Silva and Oliveira Neto (2010) analyzed only the impact of
learning styles in an undergraduate course in Accounting in the classroom.
Considering that the courses often use a mix of online and face-to-face
assessments, it is necessary to understand what impact the learning styles
may have on academic performance considering the types of assessments to
which students are subjected and what consequences this may bring to
students themselves, for professors and educational managers. It is in order
to fill this gap that this work was carried out. (São, 2015)

Effective learning has always been a major concern for many

educational associations. It is considered one of the more important learning
processes that occur in classroom. Teachers who are interested in
understanding the process of effective learning look hard for the appropriate
pedagogical methods that enable them improve classroom instruction and
cover all types of students in the same classroom. When the effective
learning is applied in classroom, students will benefit from what they learn
not only inside classroom but also outside classrooms. To achieve effective
learning as well as effective teaching, it will be necessary for teachers to 12
become familiar with students’ methods of learning and their theories.
(Hunt, 2011; Kumar, & Chacko, 2010)

Nowadays, the learning style concept is widely used in many

educational associations worldwide. After an extensive review of learning
style literature to give a clear and vivid knowledge about learning style
concept, it was difficult to locate the roots of learning styles and articles of
the one who created the concept of learning style is vague. However, the
concept of learning style is used to describe the idea of individuals having
different learning preferences that aid them with the preferred methods
needed to achieve effective and meaningful learning. (Yassin, 2012)

The knowledge of these different learning styles aims to contribute to

a better allocation of resources and achievement of objectives to which
Distance Education is oriented. In Distance Education, where the professor-
student contact is restricted and often, the professor doesn’t even know the
student, it is essential to define more appropriate strategies for teaching and
learning. The point of view of the students in Distance Education, the
knowledge of learning styles can lead to changes in individual perspectives,
such as motivation, attitude and behavior. Obviously, all styles need to be
encouraged, not only those that can appear mostly. Thus, the ability to
quantitate the different learning styles can help distance education in many
ways. Looking for ways to improve the teaching and learning process and
consequently the academic performance and general education of students,
is very important in a continuous growth scenario of courses in distance,
especially with the emergence and dissemination of online courses and of
the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC). It is a path of no return and
increased attention to the quality of courses and students’ performance is
essential. And learning styles can contribute to accomplish this. (São, 2015)
 It’s important to keep in mind that learning styles reflect common
patterns of behavior, but they are not the only factor that can influence
academic performance, nor prevent evasion in the courses. As mentioned
earlier, several other factors that were not the subject of study in this work
can impact academic performance, such as age, students’ background, the
necessity of the diploma, the search for professional development among
others. In addition, the students themselves, knowing their learning style,
can develop strategies to adapt to tasks that are not their favorite,
improving their performance and becoming more motivated to conclude the
course. The solution is not only with the professor, especially in Distance
Education, that is, it’s not just from professors’ point of view that there are
different learning styles in a certain class, because they will have to
understand all of them. The change is in students, in a more personalized
education. From the moment students know their styles and their support
field, strategies can be planned to help them. (São, 2015)

Knowledge about learning styles can help professors to choose and

shape teaching strategies, i.e., to adopt appropriate teaching techniques to
the students’ characteristics. For students, knowing their learning style is
important to understand and develop new learning strategies when the
professor teaches in a non-preferential style. The research will also be able
to contribute to educational managers who are interested in implementing
the Distance Education and will employ knowledge about the learning styles
to structure the learning management system with a better use of resources
and to encourage the students through all learning styles. (Da Silva et al.,
2015)

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

A. Research Design
 Descriptive research is used in this study. This is a method to
established norms and standards based on a wide class of survey data. This
study is descriptive since it assessed the Various Learning styles affecting
the student's Educational approach.

B. Research Locale

This study was conducted inside the Mati Doctors Academy building.

C. Research Participants

The intended participants of this research are the Senior High School
students of Mati Doctors Academy.

D. Research Tools

In this chapter Methodology and research procedure used is present.

Before conducting the research, the Researcher must know what type of
data to collect, what steps we must take to collect data, and how to used
them. (Hitchcock and Hughes,1995)

Research can be classified as Qualitative and Quantitative. Researchers had

been successful using

those methods. Qualitative research is defined as a market research method

that focuses on obtaining data through open-ended and conversational
communication. This method is not only about "what" people think but also
"why" they think so. Qualitative research methods are designed in a manner
that they help reveal the behaviour and perception of audience with
reference to a particular topic. The results of qualitative methods are more
descriptive, and the inferences can be drawn quite easily from results of
qualitative methods are more descriptive and the inferences can be drawn
quite easily from the data that is obtained. (LAdi,,ghat , 2019) As for
Quantitative research, It is defined as a systematic investigation of
phenomena by gathering quantifiable data and performing statistical,
Mathematical, or computational techniques. Quantitative research collects
information from existing and potential customers using sampling methods
and sending out online surveys, online polls, questionnaires, etc., the result
of which can be depicted in the form of numerical. After careful
understanding of these numbers to predict the future of a product or service
and make changes accordingly. (Adi 091_, 2019) And as for this research
Quantitative method is used. We gathered information through

asking questions about the certain topic and collect data.

F. Data Analysis

This research is represented on quantitative manner. Quantitative

analysis is used to show the relationship between the objective and actual
research findings among students learning styles. It has been mentioned
earlier that the data will be gathered directly from the respondents through
a questionnaire interview.

C. Research Instruments

The Instrument used in the gathering of data is Questionnaires. A

questionnaire is a sequential set of questions and it is designed to talk over
a specific object.

Name (Optional): ________________________ Sex: _______

Grade & Section: ___________________ Age: _____
 Various Learning Style of Students Key to a Better Educational
Approach
1-Strongly Disagree
2-Disagree
3-Agree
4-Strongly Agree

Table I.
VISUAL (Spatial) 1 2 3 4
I prefer to see information written on
the board and supplemented by visual
aids and assigned readings
I think the best way to remember
something is to picture it in my mind
I prefer obtaining information about an
interesting subject by reading about it
If I am taking a test, I can “see” the
textbook page and where the answer is
located

Table II.
AURAL (Auditory-Musical) 1 2 3 4
I can tell if sounds match when
presented with pairs of sound
I listen to music while I study to
connect its pattern and sounds with the
subject I was studying
I use rhymes or jingles to help
remember important points
I record some of the key points then
play it as a memory rehearsal strategy

Table III.
VERBAL (Linguistic) 1 2 3 4
I have a fascination with words and
tend to learn new words easily
I tend to enjoy games that involve word
play such as scrabble, boggle and
crossword puzzles
I tend to ask questions frequently and
have excellent verbal expression
I enjoy talking about what they read,
and easily remembers quotes, puns and
rhymes

Table IV.
PHYSICAL (Kinesthetic) 1 2 3 4
I don’t like to read directions; I’d rather
just start doing
I learn best when I am shown how to do
something
I think better when I have the freedom
to move around
I tend to solve problems through a
more trial-and-error approach, rather
than from a step-by-step method

Table V.
LOGICAL (Mathematical) 1 2 3 4
I’m fond solving mathematical task
I enjoy playing strategy-based games
I use reasoning and logical sequencing
to absorb information
I struggle writing creatively

Table VI.
SOCIAL (Interpersonal) 1 2 3 4
I learn more if I socialize with a person
or a group of people
I learn by bouncing my ideas and
thoughts off other people and listen to
how they respond
I listen well and understand other’s
views
I like to spend one-on-one time with a
teacher

Table VII.
SOLITARY (Intrapersonal) 1 2 3 4
I learn more if I am alone
I dislike class discussion and group
projects
I can study more when I am in a
secluded area
I prefer to work on problems by
retreating to somewhere quiet and
working through possible solutions