Learning Styles: Do They Really Matter-- Implications for Multimedia Design

Learning Styles: Learning Styles: Do They Really Matter-- Do They Really Matter--

Implications forImplications for Multimedia DesignMultimedia Design

Jolly Holden, Ed.D. (USAF, Ret.) Associate Professor, School of

Education

American InterContinental

Nextslide

Why Are You Here?Opinion: The concept of learning styles is probably the most misunderstood and misapplied instructional concept in use today. Fact: Research has revealed that learning styles have little, if any, effect on learning outcomes.Result: So why is there so much discussion on them and why are they still widely perceived as having an affect?

Goals of This Presentation

Inform--What are learning styles, cognitive styles, and learning modalities

Educate--What does the research indicate?

Enlighten—So what? Why so much confusion? What can instructors/trainers/instructional designers do to facilitate the transfer of learning?

Prior Next slide slide

Caution: You are Entering the

“No Spin Zone”

Presentation Menu(Click any of the hyperlinks to go directly to that

topic)

The “So What” The Debate What are Learning/Cognitive Styles?• What are Learning Modalities?

• What’s the Difference?

• Review of the Research

• What Does it All Mean & What Can I Do? Learning /Cognitive Style Resources

Prior Return Next slide to Menu slide

• An article (Dec, 2009) in the Chronicle of Higher Education entitled Matching Teaching Style to Learning Style May Not Help Students, challenged the prevailing concept of learning styles and their affect on student performance.

• The investigators found “no evidence…for validating the educational applications of learning styles into general educational practice.” and concluded “the instructional method that proves most effective for students with one learning style is not the most effective method for students with a different learning style.”

• This is not surprising…these results and conclusions have been supported repeatedly in the research for the past 30 years.

Insight [and research] into Learning Styles

• This is not a new debate but a continuing investigation into the efficacy of learning styles that has spanned 60 years.

• To that end, there is a strong intuitive appeal to the notion there are individual preferences and styles of learning.

• That said, we’re not going to solve the problem today, but… at the end of this presentation, you will better understand:

So What?

The concept of learning/cognitive styles; their variability; and impact [or lack

thereof]on learning and instructional design

The Essence of the Debate [and the Disagreement] Learning styles theorists look at how students learn, not

what they learned. By emphasizing the how of instruction, learning styles

practitioners lose sight of the what of instruction and tend to “profile” learners based upon perception.

Research does not support designing instruction to match learning styles.

No current holistic [overall] theory of learning preferences. The point being that what is commonly referred to as

learning styles, others have labeled as cognitive styles, learning preferences, learning capabilities, cognitive control, multiple intelligences, etc.

How the Misperception Keeps on Being Perpetuated…At a recent national training conference, some of the

preconference workshops and sessions stated you will…

•Identify learning styles•Accommodate different learning styles•Discover your learning style

However, there is no discussion concerning what are, their effects, how many there are, and do they really affect learning?

And the Misperception Keeps on Being Perpetuated…July 2011 issue of Training & Development Magazine

“Instructional design has always had a very important place in the workplace but its importance has increased recently due to a change in workforce expectations, the differing learning styles…” and “How are you blending your content delivery channels to your employees’ learning styles?”

AF Manual 36-2234: Instructional Systems Development (p. 17)

“Instructional developers look to learning theory to explain how individuals differ in the ways they learn. Understanding different learning styles, in order to target methods and materials to individual students, may become the most important theoretical area for enhancing learning”

Learning Styles: A Perpetuated Myth?• Over time, learning styles have been perceived to account

for the variability in learning, much the same way that Edgar Dale’s Cone of Experience has been erroneously used to predict retention. • The commonality is that both have been used to make a

prediction not based upon evidence…in essence, instructional malpractice.Dale’s Cone of Experience is essentially a

“visual metaphor” depicting types of learning, from the concrete to the abstract. Dale did not intend to place value on one modality over another:“The shape of the cone is not related to retention, but rather to the degree of abstraction.”

So it went from this metaphor, to this perceived fact (perpetual myth)

Cone of Learning

• Over time, learning styles have been perceived to account for the variability in learning, much the same way that Edgar Dale’s Cone of Experience has been erroneously used to predict retention. • The commonality is that both have been used to make a

prediction not based upon evidence, but instead perception.Dale’s Cone of Experience is essentially a “visual metaphor” depicting types of learning, from the concrete to the abstract. Dale did not intend to place value on one modality over another. “The shape of the cone is not related to retention, but rather to the degree of abstraction.”

So it went from this metaphor, to this perceived fact (perpetual myth)

The Essence of the Debate:

What Do the Experts Say?

• Foremost ISD text: The Systematic Design of Instruction (Walter Dick, Lou Carey, & James Carey, 2009)• Learning styles are personal “preferences” rather than

“psychological traits” and cannot predict “how a student will learn best.”

• Popular ISD text: Instructional Design (Smith & Ragan, 2005)• “View learning styles with extreme caution…not sufficiently

prescriptive to aid instructional designers in making design decisions.”

• Foremost e-Learning text: e-Learning and the Science of Instruction (Ruth Clark & Richard Mayer, 2008)• Major criticism is that learning styles “makes unwarranted

assumptions about how people learn.”

The Essence of the Debate:

What Do the Experts Say?

• Leading learning theory text: Psychology of Learning for Instruction (Marcy Driscoll, 2005)• Doesn’t even address learning styles

• Popular learning theory text: Cognitive Psychology and Instruction (Bruning, Shaw, Norby, Ronning, 2004)• Des not mention learning styles

• Leading text on cognitive science: Learning Theories (Dale Schunk, 2004)• Differentiates between learning styles and learning modalities,

where [VAK] learning styles are essentially “modalities”

Let’s explore some Google results. First, it is important to distinguish between learning styles and cognitive styles…they are not the same (we’ll discuss the “what” later).

Search terms Results

“learning styles” 2,570,000

“cognitive styles” 186,000

“learning styles” AND “cognitive styles” 33,800

“learning styles” NOT “cognitive styles” 38,800

“learning styles” NOT “cognitive styles” site:edu

4,240

“learning styles” AND “cognitive styles” site:edu

5,090

The Pervasiveness of Learning Styles

“learning styles”

“cognitive styles”

AND “learning styles”

“cognitive styles”

NOT

Question: How can you sift thru tens of thousands of hits and find the most useful information?

Answer: You can, but you have a life, so it was done for you (View the Resources section in the Menu)

What are Learning Styles? Basically, learning styles refers to the concept that

individuals differ in regard as to what specific mode in acquiring information is most effective for them.

However, learning style definitions are characterized by considerable conceptual confusion and the lack of any generally accepted definition.

That said, many educational/cognitive psychologists believe learning styles are a myth…that while individual differences in learning exists, they are a result of acquired/innate preferences but do not affect learning anymore than the truck delivering groceries to your local store affects your dietary habits.

What are Cognitive Styles? Cognitive styles are viewed as a bipolar dimension

representing a person's typical or habitual mode of problem solving, thinking, perceiving and remembering; are considered stable over time, and related to theoretical or academic research.

Cognitive styles primarily focus on cognition and how information is processed in the brain.

What are Learning Modalities? Learning, or perceptual modalities, are sensory based

and refer to the primary way our bodies take in information though our senses: visual (seeing), auditory (hearing), kinesthetic (moving), and tactile (touching).

Humans are multi-sensory in that the brain performs several activities at once when processing information (e.g., tasting and smelling, hearing and seeing), but are processed through different channels in our brain.

While the brain processes wholes and part simultaneously, learning engages the whole body.

Note: Multi-sensory processing is not the same as multi-tasking (partial tasking) in that the brain is not very good at multi-tasking, per se, attempting to perform multiple tasks simultaneously.

What’s the Difference?• Not surprisingly, there is substantial confusion between

learning styles and learning modalities where the terms are often used interchangeably.

• One of the reasons is the complexity of how the human brain functions as it relates to one’s modalities in receiving information (visual, aural, kinesthetic) and how the brain processes that information (cognition).

• Continued research into neuroscience is discovering how the brain processes information acquired through our primary learning modalities: visual, aural, and tactile.

Note: Neuroscience has estimated 85% of the human brain is wired to process visual information, and that 90% of what the brain processes is visual information, so one’s primary learning modality is visual.

What’s the Difference?• An important finding from that research is that retention is

generally independent of the modality used to acquire whatever is learned.

• You typically store memories in terms of meaning-- not in terms of whether you saw (visual), heard (aural), or physically (tactile/kinesthetic) interacted with the information.

• To that end, our brain is constantly searching its memory for context based on prior knowledge/experience.

• Note: In the absence of visual cues, our brains create “mental pictures” based upon our schema to add context to what is printed/spoken. Click here for an example, click here for another example.

What Does the Research Reveal About Learning

Styles?• Simply stated, the research has not revealed a compelling argument as to the impact of learning styles and their effect on predicting learning outcomes.

• Postulates learning/cognitive styles have <5% effect on the variability in learning.

• The majority of research does not support a significant statistical relationship between learning/cognitive styles and learning outcomes.

Based on several decades of empirical evidence, matching learning activities/ strategies with specific learning styles does not often result in improved learning.Dr. Allan Jeong, Associate Professor, Dept. of Educational Psychology and Learning Systems, Florida State University


Styles?• Small sample sizes, flawed sampling methodology, and non-experimental research designs casts doubt on the results of VAK learning style research.

• Low validity and reliability scores of the VAK instruments used to identify specific learning styles raise serious doubts about their psychometric properties.

• In other words, if the tests used to identify learning styles are not reliable or valid, then any conclusions or results based upon them are suspect.

Note: While the most common learning style test is the 16 question VARK questionnaire, it states “no reliability studies have been conducted” and that “the VARK questionnaire is difficult to use with current statistical methods of validation because of its structure”. The results of the VARK questionnaire indicate 2/3 of the respondents have “multimodal” preferences (www.vark-learn.com).


Styles?• These tests are not controlled in their distribution and/or reproduction, or administered under controlled conditions.

• Scores on the VAK learning style tests vary greatly among same individual.

• VAK test questions focus on out-of-context preferences which allows for wide range of interpretations.

• Intervening variables confound the results.

Research reveals that most learning style instruments have such serious weaknesses (e.g. low reliability & poor validity) it is recommend their use in research and practice should be discontinued. Investigations of the properties of a variety of scales have revealed that even the most widely used are inadequate in this regard. Australian Journal of Education, Vol. 54, No. I, 2010, 5-17

What Does the Research Reveal About Cognitive

Styles?• The research pertaining to cognitive styles is quite different than learning styles in that the reliability and the validity of the instruments used to identify them are much more robust.

• The most researched cognitive style is Herman Witkin’s Field Dependence/Field Independence.

• The test used to identify Field Dependence (FD) and Field Independence (FI) is the Embedded Figures Test

• Highly reliable and valid (Cronbach Alpha >80% )

Characteristics of Field Dependent and Field Independent Learns• Field dependent learner…

• Processes information globally• Holistic approach to problem solving• Views the perceptual field as a whole• Socially oriented• Uses spectator approach for concept attainment• Relies on external cues to guide their behavior• Field independent learner…• Highly analytical• Relies on internal cues (gravity and vestibular) to guide their

behavior• Breaks the field down into its component parts• Not influenced by the existing structure• Impersonal orientation• Uses hypothesis-testing approach to attain concepts

What Does the Research Reveal About Cognitive

Styles?• Results of Field Independent (FI) and Field Dependent (FD) cognitive styles reveal:

• FI attracted to engineering, hard sciences, mathematics, computer sciences/engineering

• FI able to extrapolate detailed information from complex figures

• FI correlated in predicting success in engineering courses

• FI less influenced by visual effects in media

• No difference in learning outcomes based on instructional media

Given the Research, Why all the Confusion?

• It’ s not surprising the reference to learning styles is one of the most misunderstood and overused issues confronting educational and training communities.• Part of the reason is the wide disparity in the definition of

learning styles and their relationship to cognitive styles.

• Furthermore, there is continued debate as to whether learning styles even exist, with the only current evidence of their existence being the tests used to identify them.

• Confusion is further exacerbated in that research has identified over 71 different types of learning styles (Table 1), summarized into the 13 most influential models (Table 2), and families (Table 3).

Do learning styles exist…are they a myth? Read the research and decide for yourself.

Do learning styles affect performance and/or learning outcomes? Overwhelming body of research does not support this premise. Numerous uncontrolled variables affect performance. Intervening /confounding variables that cannot be identified Attempting to isolate variables requires a robust multivariate

experimental design.

So What Does it all Mean?

Blaming learning styles as to why some students do not learn is a convenient scapegoat for poor instruction Dr. David Merrill, esteemed educational psychologist

Cognitive science has revealed learners differ in their abilities with different modalities, but teaching to a learner’s best modality doesn't affect learning outcomes.

What does matter is whether the learner is taught in the content's best modality…people learn more when content drives the choice of modality.

Consider adapting learning environments and/or designing instruction to accommodate a diverse learning population by integrating cognitive learning strategies.

Cut to the Chase—What Can I Do?

Note: Retention is improved through words and pictures (visual media) rather than through words alone. Clark & Mayer, 2008. e-Learning and the Science of Instruction

Since neuroscience has revealed 90% of what the brain processes is visual information, one’s primary learning modality is visual. Therefore, compliment text-based. presentations and lectures with visual components/aids.

Employ dual-coding theory: when content is presented through two different channels (visual and auditory),working memory can be increased•Adds context to the written/spoken word.

•Integrate sound multimedia design principles

Cut to the Chase—What Can I Do?

Research has indicated prior knowledge and intrinsic motivation account for ~70% of the variability in learning.

• Modality Principle – People learn more deeply from multimedia lessons when graphics are explained by audio narration than onscreen text.

• Spatial Contiguity Principle - People learn better when corresponding words and pictures are presented near rather than far from each other on the page or screen (click here for an example)

• Temporal Contiguity Principle - People learn better when corresponding words and pictures are presented simultaneously rather than successively (click here for an example)

For more on cognitive learning strategies and knowledge construction, click here

Dual Encoding Theory Applied to Multimedia

Design

Conclusion

• Learning styles provide no indication of what the students are capable of, nor are they legitimate excuses for poor academic performance.

• Assume all students have an intrinsic motivation to learn.

• Don’t constrain learning by “profiling” (aka categorizing/ labeling) students based on learning styles.

• Integrate cognitive and instructional learning strategies into the curriculum/course.

“learning styles‘ theory appeals to the underlying culture's model of the person ensures the theory's continued survival, despite the evidence against its utility. Rather than being a harmless fad, learning styles theory perpetuates the very stereotyping and harmful teaching practices it is said to combat.” Australian Journal of Education, Vol. 54, No. I, 2010, 5-17

Final NoteThe research on how we learn has generally ignored

the agility of humans in being able to adapt to different learning environments.

The research has grossly understated the internal fortitude of humans to employ multiple learning “preferences” in their endeavor to learn.

As educators and trainers, we must never underestimate the ultimate trump card that represents the single most important variability in learning…the will to learn.

The End

Prior Return slide to Menu

Intentionally Left BlankClick this button to return to the prior

slide

Describing and “Seeing” the Constellation Orion

Return to main presentation

• The constellations are totally imaginary things that have been made up over the past 6,000 years . So how would you describe something imaginary to your students? • You may begin by describing the three bright stars in a row

that form Orion’s belt and the other stars that form his sword.• But your students have trouble “visualizing” how the stars

shape the figure of Orion. To assist them in creating a mental picture, you show them a star chart of Orion to help them “visualize” this imaginary figure. • But they still can’t quite get it, so to further enhance their

mental image, you show them another detailed chart depicting Orion.• The aha moment…they got it because they now can “see”

Orion, so they conclude they must be visual learners.But…are they really visual learners or did you create the visual image for them by adding context to the description?

Orion Star Chart

Return to prior slide

Orion Figure Outlined in a Star

Chart


The Constellation Orion



slide

Example 2


Given the depiction of a power line in the map to the left, identify the power line in the right hand image.


If you cannot find the power line, it may be due to your prior knowledge (schema) of what power lines should look like, such as the ones depicted below. Since there are no other visual cues to add context to your prior “visual images”, and due to lack of past experiences, you cannot locate the power line.

Example 2


So lets add some context (meaning).

Don’t look for the actual power line structure…instead look where the power line might be.

It’s not a matter of “seeing” the actual power lines or visual acuity…it’s a matter of context.

Example 2


Example 2Still can’t locate it? Here’s another image – look for the path of the power line instead of the actual structures.

Result: Given a different context, you identify the power line path not from your prior knowledge but instead based upon an entirely different context.You have now added a new concept to your schema, which could also be applied to similar situations.Click for final image/click

again to turn off


slide

Table 1: Types of Learning/Cognitive Styles*

convergers vs. divergers

verbalisers vs. imagers holists vs. serialists deep vs. surface

learning activists vs. reflectors pragmatists vs.

theorists adaptors vs.

innovators assimilators vs.

explorers field dependent vs.

field independent globalists vs. analysts assimilators vs.

accommodators imaginative vs.

analytic learners

intuitionists vs. analysts

extroverts vs. introverts

seeing vs. hearing sensing vs. intuition thinking vs. feeling non-committers vs.

plungers common-sense vs.

dynamic learners concrete vs. abstract

learners random vs.

sequential learners initiators vs.

reasoners judging vs.

perceiving

left brainers vs. right brainers

meaning-directed vs. undirected

theorists vs. humanitarians

activists vs. theorists pragmatists vs.

reflectors organizers vs.

innovators analytics/inductives/

successive processors vs. globals/deductivess/simultaneous processors

executive, hierarchic, conservative vs. legislative, anarchic, liberal


* Adapted from: Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles: What research has to say to practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/attachments/c455e462-95c4-4b0d-8308-bbc5ed1053a7.pdf


slide

Table 2: Most Influential Models of Learning/Cognitive

Styles*

Allinson and Hayes’ Cognitive Styles Index (CSI) Apter’s Motivational Style Profile (MSP) Dunn and Dunn model and instruments of learning

styles Entwistle’s Approaches and Study Skills Inventory

for Students (ASSIST) Gregorc’s Mind Styles Model and Style Delineator

(GSD) Herrmann’s Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI) Honey and Mumford’s Learning Styles Questionnaire

(LSQ) Jackson’s Learning Styles Profiler (LSP) Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory (LSI) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Riding’s Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA) Sternberg’s Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI) Vermunt’s Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS)


* Adapted from: Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles: What research has to say to practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/attachments/c455e462-95c4-4b0d-8308-bbc5ed1053a7.pdf


slide

Table 3: Families of Learning/Cognitive Styles*

Learning styles are largely sensory based

Betts (1909) Betts InventoryBartlett (1932) Gordon (1949) Scale of Imagery ControlScheehan (1967) Shortened Betts InventoryPaivio (1971) Individual Difference Questionnaire (IDQ)Marks (1973) Marks Vividness of Visual Imagery QuestionnaireDunn and Dunn (1975, 1979, 1992, 2003) VAK Learning Style Theory; Learning Style Inventory(LSI); Building Excellence Survey (BES)Torrance (1990) Style of Learning and ThinkingRiding (1991) Cognitive Style Analysis (CSA)

Learning styles reflect deep-seated cognitive structure

Guilford (1950) Convergent/divergent thinkingPrettigrew (1958) Scale of Cognitive StyleGardner et al. (1959) Tolerant/ intolerantBroverman (1960)Kagen (1967) Matching Familiar Figures TestMessick (1976) Analytic / non-analytic conceptualizingHunt (1978) Paragraph Completion MethodCooper (1997) Learning Styles IDWeinstein, Zimmerman, Palmer (1988) Learning and Study Strategies Inventory

Learning styles reflect relatively stable personality type

Witkin (1962) Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT)Myers – Briggs (1962) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)Apter (1998) Motivation Style Profile (MSP)Epstein-Meier (1989) Constructive Thinking Inventory (CTI)Miller (1991) Personality typology: cognitive, affective, conativeHarrison- Branson (1998) revised Inquiry Mode QuestionnaireJackson (2002) Learning Style Profiles (LSP)

Learning styles are flexibly stable learning preferences

Kolb (1976, 1985, 1999) Learning Style Inventory (LSI); Revised Learning Style Inventory (R-LSI); LSI Version 3Schmeck (1977) Inventory of Learning ProcessesHoney and Mumford (1982) Learning Style Questionnaire (LSQ)Felder and Silverman (1989) Index of Learning Styles (ILS)Kaufmann (1989) The A-E InventoryAllinson and Hayes (1996) Cognitive Style Index (CSI)Herrmann (1995) Brain Dominance Instrument (BDI)


* Adapted from: Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles: What research has to say to practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London


slide

Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles: What research has to say to practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/attachments/c455e462-95c4-4b0d-8308-bbc5ed1053a7.pdf

Clemons, Stephanie (2005). Brain-Based Learning: Possible Implications for Online Instruction. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, September 2005, Vol. 2. No. 9. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Sep_05/article03.htm

Cognitive/Learning Styles (n.d.). Theory Into Practice, Retrieved from http://tip.psychology.org/styles.html

Curry, L. (1990). A critique of research on learning styles. Educational Leadership, 56(2), 50-56. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_199010_curry.pdf

DeTure, M. (2004). Cognitive Style and Self-Efficacy: Predicting Success in Online Education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 21-38. Retrieved from http://test.scripts.psu.edu/users/k/h/khk122/woty/AJDE/DeTure%202004.pdf

Resources

Return Next to Menu slide

Dumbo, Myron H., & Howard, K. (2007). Advice about the Use of Learning Styles: A Major Myth in Education. Journal of College Reading and Learning, v37 n2 p101-109 Spr 2007. Retrieved from: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ767768&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ767768

Howles, S. (n.d.). Learning styles: What the Research Says and How to Apply it to Designing E-Learning. Session TH101, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Retrieved from http://isg.urv.es/library/papers/learning%20styles_overview.pdf

Learning Orientation Research: Individual Differences in Learning (2004). Retrieved from http://www.trainingplace.com/source/research/cronbach.htm

Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. (2008). Learning and Skills Research Centre, Department for Education and Skills, UK (2004). Retrieved from http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/edskas/learning%20styles.pdf

Liu, Y.& Ginther, & Ginther, D. (1999). Cognitive Styles and Distance Education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Volume II, Number III, Fall 1999. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/liu23.html

Resources


Matching Teaching Style to Learning Style May Not Help Student. (Dec 15, 2009). Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Matching-Teaching-Style-to/49497/

Merrill, David M. (2000). Instructional Strategies and Learning Styles: Which takes Precedence? Retrieved from http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.22.3996%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&rct=j&q=Instructional%20Strategies%20and%20Learning%20Styles%3A%20Which%20takes%20Precedence&ei=czy4TaTaOsmDtgfHnczeBA&usg=AFQjCNFRR9qlyzSSM3L_YzhcksffPlkmGg

Multimodal Learning Through Media:What the Research Says. (2008). Metiri Group--Commissioned by Cisco. Retrieved from http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/docs/education/Multimodal-Learning-Through-Media.pdf

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Retrieved from http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf

Resources


Reeves, T. (2006), Do Generational Differences Matter in Instructional Design? Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper104/ReevesITForumJan08.pdf

Sharp, J. G., Byrne, J., & Bowker, R. (2008). The Trouble with VAK. Educational Futures Vol.1(1) August 2008. Retrieved from http://www.educationstudies.org.uk/materials/sharp_et_al_2.pdf

Stahl, Steven A. (1999). Different Strokes for Different Folks: A Critique of Learning Styles. The American Educator, Fall, 1999. Retrieved from http://home.centurytel.net/msv/Documents/Learning-Styles-Different%20Strokes.pdf

Willingham, D. (2005). Do Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learners Need Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Instruction? American Educator, Summer 2005. Retrieved from http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/summer2005/willingham.cfm

Resources

Prior Return slide to Menu


slide

Cognitive learning strategies are methods used to help learners link new information to prior knowledge in facilitating the transfer of learning through the systematic design of instruction

• Focuses on how the learner processes the knowledge

• Provides a structure for learning when a task cannot be completed through a series of steps (scaffolding)

• Supports the learner as s/he develops internal procedures that enable him/her to perform tasks that are complex, and can increase the efficiency with which the learner approaches a learning task.

• Tailoring instruction for different levels of prior knowledge

What are Cognitive Learning Strategies?

• Learning these strategies are aided by their incorporation into instruction.

• The utility of cognitive learning strategies can be employed by faculty to facilitate the activation and retention of prior knowledge by focusing on knowledge construction.

• Knowledge construction is a methodological approach that assumes knowledge needs to be constructed

– Involves the opportunity to critically analyze information, dialogue with others about its meaning, reflect how the information fits within one’s belief and value systems (schema), and arrive at a meaningful understanding of that information

– In this process, information becomes transformed into knowledge

What are Cognitive Learning Strategies?

What is Schema?

• The contents of long term memory are sophisticated structures that permit us to perceive, think, and solve problems, rather than a group of rote learned facts.

• These structures are known as schemas (a mental framework for understanding and remembering information) and permit us to treat multiple elements as a single element.

• Schemas are the cognitive structures that make up our knowledge base and assist us in knowledge construction.

• Schemas can be “activated” through the use of cognitive learning strategies

Note: Typically, memories are stored in terms of meaning. That said, retention can be improved through a combination of words and pictures rather than through words alone, and by adding visuals to verbal (text and/or auditory) learning can result in significant gains in basic and higher-order learning (Multimodal Learning Through Media…, 2008).

Click action button for more on retention

What is Schema Activation?

• Schema activation refers to an array of activities designed to activate relevant knowledge in students’ memory prior to encountering new, to be learned information.

• Schema activation is the process of engaging prior knowledge, which is organized in the brain in schemata .

• Schema activation is an important scaffolding tool where learning depends upon the activation of old knowledge to provide an appropriate schema into which new knowledge can be incorporated .

Schema Activation

Prior knowledge: Schema activation engages prior knowledge

New knowledge: Schema activation links prior knowledge to new knowledge

Comprehension: Schema activation creates connections which increase comprehension


slide

Group Embedded Figures Test Example

(GEFT)


slide

Spatial Contiguity Principle

Spatial Contiguity Principle

Complexity

Instructional Strategies

Instructional Objectives

Content

Rapidity of Change

Multimedia (aural/visual)

Interactivity

Didactic Collaboration (P2P)

Asynchronous

Dialectic Collaboration (P2P)

Synchronous

Collaborative Tools

Synchronicity

Asynchronous Instructional

Media

Synchronous Instructional

Media

Symmetry

Asymmetrical Media

Symmetrical Media

Distance Learning

AsynchronousSynchronous

Traditional

Classroom

Learning Environment Component

Media Component

Instructional Component

Depicted in this concept map is the blended learning model three main components and subcomponents. The degree of integration of each of the subcomponents is based upon evaluating specific attributes of each component, resulting in the most appropriate blend to ensure attainment of the instructional goal.


slide

Temporal Contiguity Principle