THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLES AND STUDENT’S …

THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLES AND STUDENT’S ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

FATIN NAJWA BINTI JAAFAR

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

DECLARATION OF THESIS / UNDERGRADUATE PROJECT REPORT

Author’s full name : FATIN NAJWA BINTI JAAFAR

Date of Birth : 31ST JANUARY 1995

Title : THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLE AND STUDENT’S ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Academic Session : 2017/2018

I declare that this thesis is classified as:

CONFIDENTIAL (Contains confidential information under the Official Secret Act

1972)*

RESTRICTED (Contains restricted information as specified by the

organization where research was done)*

OPEN ACCESS I agree that my thesis to be published as online open access

(full text)

I acknowledged that Universiti Teknologi Malaysia reserves the right as follows:

i. The thesis is the property of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

ii. The Library of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia has the right to make copies for the

purpose of research only.

iii. The Library has the right to make copies of the thesis for academic exchange.

Certified by:

SIGNATURE SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR

950131-11-5756

TANTISH BINTI KAMARUDDIN

(NEW IC NO/PASSPORT) NAME OF SUPERVISOR

Date: 10 JUNE 2018 Date: 10 JUNE 2018

PSZ 19:16 (Pind. 1/07)

NOTES: * If the thesis is CONFIDENTAL or RESTRICTED, please attach with the letter from

the organization with period and reasons for confidentiality or restriction.

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

SUPERVISOR’S DECLARATION

“I/We hereby declare that I/We have read this thesis and in my/our opinion this

thesis is sufficient in term of scope and quality for the award of the degree of

Bachelor of Science (Construction)”

Signature : ………………………….........

Name of Supervisor : Tantish Binti Kamaruddin

Date : ………………………………..

Signature : ………………………….........

Name of Second

Reader : Sr. Dr Muzani Bin Mustapa

Date : ………………………………..

THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLES AND STUDENT’S ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

FATIN NAJWA BINTI JAAFAR

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the

Requirement for the awards of the degree of

Bachelor of Science (Construction)

Fakulti Alam Bina

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

JUNE 2018

ii

I declare that this thesis entitle “The Relationship of Learning Styles and Student’s

Academic Achievements” is the result of my own research except cited in the

references. The thesis has not been accepted for any degree and is not concurrently

submitted in candidature of any other degree.

Signature : ....................................................

Author name : FATIN NAJWA BINTI JAAFAR

Date : 10 JUNE 2018

iii

To my beloved family members, friends, and le’ classmates

Thanks for their encouragement and never ended support.

To my supervisors, lecturers and staffs of Faculty of Built Environment,

Thanks for their guidance and knowledge sharing.

And to Nur Azela Abdullah

Thanks for helping me throughout this hectic years

Thanks for Everything.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The success of this research would be credit to those who had given their

lending hand throughout the course of this research. I would like to send my sincere

appreciation to their great supports, guidance, sacrifice and generous contributions.

Without these aids, this research would not have been successful.

First of all, I am very grateful as I am able to complete this research. Not to

forget, I would like to thank Puan Tantish binti Kamaruddin, who is my research

supervisor, for guiding me along the research study. She gives me a lot of ideas,

knowledge, patience and understanding which lead to the completion of my research.

Besides, I would also like to thank the respondents who are willing to trust me.

Last but not least, I would like to express my thankfulness to my family and

friends for their support and dedication in helping me to complete this research. Their

supports are really heart-warming. Thank you very much.

v

ABSTRAK

Institusi pengajian tinggi di Malaysia telah menekankan bahawa untuk

mencapai pencapaian tertinggi di peringkat global, adalah amat penting untuk

memberi tumpuan terhadap asas-asas kualiti pendidikan. Selain itu, pencapaian

akademik adalah penting kerana ia dianggap sebagai tiket untuk mendapat tempat di

dalam alam pekerjaan pada masa kini. Oleh yang demikian, kajian ini dilakukan untuk

meningkatkan pencapaian akademik pelajar dan kemahiran mengajar dikalangan

pensyarah dan tenaga pengajar yang terlibat dengan mengenal pasti gaya pembelajaran

dikalangan pelajar Jabatan Ukur Bahan sekaligus mengkaji hubungannya terhadap

pencapaian akademik pelajar. Dengan menggunakan Model Pembelajaran VARK

yang direka oleh Neil Fleming pada 1987, pemilihan gaya pembelajaran pelajar dapat

dikenalpasti melalui 4 jenis mod yang terdapat di dalam model pembelajaran ini iaitu

Visual, Pendengaran, Pembacaan dan Kinestetik. Tujuan objektif ini adalah bagi

membantu pelajar dalam menentukan gaya pembelajaran dan juga untuk pengajar

mengenalpasti pendekatan pengajaran terbaik dalam proses pembelajaran. Instrumen

yang digunakan untuk memenuhi kedua-dua objektif kajian ini adalah soal selidik

yang diguna pakai daripada Soal Selidik VARK Versi 7.0 yang mengandungi 16

soalan. Soal selidik ini telah diedarkan kepada 342 responden dari tahun satu hingga

tahun 4 pelajar dari Jabatan Ukur Bahan, UTM. Data – data telah dianalisis

menggunakan Pakej Statistik untuk Sains Sosial (SPSS). Analisis Korelasi Pearson

digunakan dalam kajian terhadap hubungan diantara gaya pembelajaran dan pecapaian

akademik pelajar. Kajian ini telah mendapati bahawa gaya pembelajaran yang paling

dominan dikalangan responden adalah mod Kinestetik berdasarkan jantina, program

pengajian dan latar belakang pengajian serta tidak terdapat perbezaan yang ketara

dalam gaya pembelajaran dengan pencapaian akademik pelajar.

vi

ABSTRACT

Higher education institution in Malaysia has highlighted that to reach the

greater heights of the global level, it is important to focus on the fundamentals of

quality education. Apart from that, academic achievement is important as it will be a

ticket to get employed nowadays. Therefore, this study was conducted to improve the

academic achievement of the students and the teaching skills of the teachers or

lecturers involved by identifying the learning styles among the students of Department

of Quantity Surveying and its relationship with student’s academic achievements. By

using the VARK Learning Model invented by Neil Fleming in 1987, the students

learning preference can be identified by using 4 different modes in this model which

are Visual, Auditory, Reading, and Kinaesthetic. The aim of this objectives is to assist

students in determining the learning style and also for the teachers to identify the best

teaching approach in the learning process. The instrument used to fulfil both objectives

was the questionnaire that adapted from VARK Questionnaire Version 7.0 that consist

of 16 questions. The questionnaire has been distributed to 342 respondents from first-

year students to fourth-year students of Department of Quantity Surveying in UTM.

The data will be analysed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). Pearson

Correlation analysis has been used in the study of the relationship between learning

styles and academic achievement. This study has concluded that the most dominant

learning styles among respondents are kinaesthetic mode base on gender, programs

and background study also there is no significance difference between the learning

styles and student’s academic achievement.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv

ABSTRAK v

ABSTRACT vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF TABLES x

LIST OF FIGURES xii

LIST OF TERMS xiii

LIST OF APPENDIXES xiv

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Problem Statement 3

1.3 Research Question 6

1.4 Research Objectives 6

1.5 Scopes and Limitation of Study 7

1.6 Significance of the Study 7

1.6.1 Students 8

1.6.2 Lecturers/Instructors 8

1.6.3 Educational Institution 8

1.7 Research Methodology 9

1.8 Proposed Organization of Chapter 10

1.9 Summary of Chapter 11

viii

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 12

2.1 Introduction 12

2.2 Definition of Terms 12

2.2.1 Department of Quantity Surveying in

UTM 12

2.2.2 Students 13

2.2.3 Learning 13

2.2.4 Learning Style 14

2.2.5 Academic Achievement 14

2.3 Learning Style Models 15

2.3.1 Felder and Silverman Model 16

2.3.2 VARK Model 17

2.3.3 Dunn & Dunn Model 18

2.3.4 Honey & Mumford Model 19

2.4 VARK Learning Styles 19

2.4.1 Visual Learner 21

2.4.2 Auditory Learner 23

2.4.3 Read / Write Learner 24

2.4.4 Kinaesthetic learner 25

2.5 Previous Study/ Research 26

2.5.1 Learning styles 26

2.5.2 Relationship between Learning Styles and

Academic Achievement 30


3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 35

3.1 Introduction 35

3.2 Research Design 35

3.3 Research Population and Sampling 36

3.4 Instrumentation 37

3.5 Data Collection 39

3.6 Data Analysis 39

3.6.1 Descriptive Analysis 39

3.6.2 Inferential analysis. 40

ix


4 DATA ANALYSIS 42

4.1 Introduction 42

4.2 Questionnaire Form 42

4.2.1 Section A - Demographic Information 43

4.2.2 Section B – Learning Style Preferred Among

Students in Department of Quantity

Surveying (VARK Questionnaire) 43

4.2.3 Section C – The VARK Questionnaire

Scoring Chart 43

4.3 Data Analysis and Findings 44

4.3.1 Analysis of Gender Contribution on

Learning Style Preference 44

4.3.2 Analysis of Differentiation of Learning Style

between Programs 47

4.3.3 Analysis of Background Study contribution

to Learning Style 50

4.3.4 Analysis of Relationship of Learning Style

and Student’s Academic Achievement. 55


5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 59

5.1 Introduction 59

5.2 General Conclusion 59

5.3 Problems and Difficulties 60

5.4 The implication of the Study 61

5.5 Suggestion for Future Study 62


REFERENCES 64

Appendix A 71 – 78

x

LIST OF TABLES

NO. TABLES TITLE PAGE

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

3.1

3.2

4.1

4.2

Rating Status by CGPA

Learning Styles Group in Felder & Silverman

Model

Categories of Learning Styles in Dunn &

Dunn Model

VARK Learning Style Characteristics

Research Gap

Sample of Population

The Option of CGPA Achieve for Previous

Semester

Gender Contribution to Learning Styles

Preference (n=342)

Gender Contribution to Learning Style (T-

Test)

6

7

9

11

17

27

29

36

38

xi

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

4.10

4.11

4.12

4.13

Learning Style Preference between Programs

(n-342)

Differentiation of Learning Style among

programs in Department of Quantity

Surveying

Learning Style Preference of Diploma Entry

(n=10)

Learning Style Preference of STPM Entry

(n=85)

Learning Style Preference of Matriculation

Entry (n=158)

Learning Style Preference of Foundation

Entry (n=10)

Learning Style Preference of Direct Entry

UTM (n=79)

One-way ANOVA of Background Study on

Learning Style Preference

Guideline of Interpretation of Correlation

Coefficient

Distribution of Learning Styles on CGPA’s

Rate

Correlation between Learning Style and

Academic Achievement

39

40

41

41

42

43

44

45

45

46

47

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

NO. FIGURES TITLE PAGE

1.1

2.1

2.2

Research Methodology

VARK Learning Model Categories

The Learning Cycle Group of Honey &

Mumford Model

9

56

57

xiii

LIST OF TERMS

VARK - Visual, Auditory, Reading and Kinaesthetic

CGPA - Cumulative Grade Points Average

UTM - Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

SBEC - Bachelor of Science Construction

SBEQ - Bachelor of Quantity Surveyor

xiv

LIST OF APPENDIXES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A VARK Questionnaire Form 71

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Malaysian government spends a large amount of money on improving the

quality of education every year (Ramli, 2013). Education is an expensive investment

in the future of students, and much emphasis is placed on the curriculum and values of

education to ensure students can meet the needs of the industry (RMK11, 2015).

Teaching and learning is the root of all advances at all levels of education, namely

primary, secondary, university and university( Mohamad, 2012). A student has a

different motivation, different attitudes towards instruction and learning, respond

differently to the classroom surround and teaching practices (Felder and Brent, 2005).

Students learn in different ways - to look and listen, reflect and do, think

logically and intuitively, and memorize, remember and reflect. Learning is not only

related to the expansion of knowledge and recall information learned but is dominated

activity and understand the concept of knowledge and further information can apply it

to life (Entwistle and Ramsden, 2015). Psychologist distinguishes this distinction as

individual learning styles. Method of isolated individuals find, store and reproduce

information known as learning styles (Kolb, 2015).

2

Different student has different learning styles that they preferred in the learning

process and understanding the information delivered (Rezaeinejad e.t al, 2015). As

stated in the dictionary, learning style can be defined as an individual's unique manner

to learning based on strengths, frailty, and priority. In order to achieve successful

learners, they normally use a multiple of techniques that fit their learning styles and

the nature of the task, learning conditions and their aims in certain subjects or topics.

It is noticeable that students have different interests, needs and different

approaches to learning (Educational UN, 2004). Therefore, it is important to find more

efficient ways of teaching and accommodate different styles of students through a

learning environment that they prefer (Klašnja-Milićević et.al, 2017). Although there

are many wide issues related to learning styles, learning styles model consent that

students have dissimilar ways in which they favour to learn.

However, there is a likelihood that students will face learning conflict when

they do not have the appropriate learning style. Problems occur when student learning

styles cannot be adapted to the lecturers' teaching activities and styles (Entwistle,

2013). As a result, students become bored and not concentrating; causing them to fail

to score high in the exam, are less interested in certain subjects and turn to give up

(Baharin et.al, 2007).

Therefore, to succeed or excel in academic’s achievement, students need to

have the nature of learning and master the learning method to gain knowledge and

skills (Fry et.al, 2009). The study by Kurgun & Işildar (2016) concluded that one way

of determining the efficiency or performance of an individual learn and acquire

knowledge is to realize its learning style.

3

1.2 Problem Statement

Students are among those who became the country's hopes to pursue excellence

in the future. Excellence can only be achieved by students if they are practising the

appropriate learning styles (Zubaidah, 2007). On the other hand, unsuitable and

ineffective learning styles during learning session will undoubtedly lead to lower

academic achievement (Hernandez & Garibay, 2012). Differences in the individual

can be detected in relation to development aspects of the physical, mental, emotional

and social.

Consequently, each individual student has the diversity and tendency of

different learning styles, different learning strategies and different levels of learning

(Shah et.al, 2013). Some of these individuals have a dominant learning style, and some

are using different learning styles to adapt to the environment (Brophy, 2010). If we

go through the previous study conducted in our country, studies in the areas of learning

style are at low and do not focus on learning styles although it is the main factor that

determines the success or failure of a student.

Felder & Brent (2005), stated that the failure was not affected by the curriculum

students instead they can learn any subject if it emphasizes learning style that they

prefer. Felder & Brent (2005), said that the learning style of each student is different

as well as different ways of teaching. When the difference between learning styles and

teaching styles occur, this will cause students quickly feel tired and not paying

attention in class, do not perform well in the examination, and sometimes there are

students who fall behind in their studies. As we know, the learning process is

considered as an interaction between students, teachers, and teaching materials.

According to Ng (2005), a study on students learning styles is necessary and

this kind of research will discredit teachers in recognizing the most widely used of

learning styles among students. It also can further enhance the interest of the students

in the subjects and assist them in learning. Learning styles that being practised by each

4

individual are different (Shah et al., 2013). Students started forming their learning style

since early of childhood and will practice it in her/his learning session afterwards

(Fawcett and Watson, 2016).

Meor & Assaadah (2011), stated that when a student starts university or high

school life, they begin their learning with an empty start-up regardless of what they

have accomplished before. This is due to the learning world that they will confront is

totally different and a neat preparation is needed. The wisdom and self-reliance are

also important to ensure the excellence performance then be established in excellence

group of students in the institution (Fry et.al, 2009). To be a higher level student,

preferred and appropriate learning styles are needed to be practised.

The achievement of the individual is not only affected by their learning style.

The success or failure of the person is also affected by other factors including their

ingenuity and the quality of instructor’s teaching approach (Magdalena, 2015).

Therefore, this study will be conducted to identify the preferred learning style among

the student in Department of Quantity Surveying Programs. Learning styles are

significant for every student because it has a great influence towards their academic

achievement. The learning style has provided a learning mechanism that can give

students real challenge and provide accurate feedback on their academic achievement.

The results of the study by Sanjaya (2016) show that learning styles will have an

impact on academic achievement then he suggests it is appropriate if the learning style

for each student is examined.

However, the main issues are in achieving the higher rating among top world

universities of QS. Professor IR. Dr Wahid Omar, the Vice Chancellor of UTM, has

highlighted in Newshub (2017), that to reach the greater heights of the global level, it

is important to focus on the fundamentals of quality education, enhancing academic

and research capacity and instilling a strong mindset. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

(UTM) continues to improve its position in QS World University Rankings 2017/2018

by jumping 35 stairs to 253 positions. Still, achievements must be upgraded from time

5

to time to improve the ranking of UTM parallel to UTM's Global UTM 2012-2020 to

put it into a group of 50 world's best universities for science, technology and

engineering by 2020 (Newshub, 2017).

In addition, academic achievement is important to get employed nowadays.

The competitiveness among graduates is at a higher level if their academic

achievement is dissatisfying (Yusof and Jamaluddin, 2015). Even though

employability are most likely look for skills, academic achievement or CGPA still the

first thing to be looking up and as a ticket to get employed (Sarwar, 2016). This is

because, academic excellence is often treated as a measure of the student’s quality and

potential, on grounds that discipline, diligence, inherent intelligence, and the student’s

ability to recall and apply their current body of knowledge is reflected in exam grades

(Office Parrots, 2016).

Based on the issues, the study on the relationship of preference learning styles

and academic achievement by the Department of Quantity Surveying’s students should

be done. This study is conducted because the understanding of student learning style

is important to assist students in their learning process also to gain a better life ahead

with a better academic performance.

6

1.3 Research Question

From the aforementioned issues, this research seeks to answer the following

questions:

i) What are the learning styles among Undergraduate students of Department

of Quantity Surveying?

ii) Is there any relationship between learning styles and academic achievement

among respondents?

iii) Does gender contribute to learning style preference?

iv) What is the difference in learning styles among respondents based on

background study?

v) Is there any difference of learning styles between Science Construction and

Quantity Surveyor students?

1.4 Research Objectives

The research objectives are as below:

i. To identify the learning style among Undergraduate students of

Department of Quantity Surveying.

ii. To identify the relationship between learning style and student’s academic

achievement.

7

1.5 Scopes and Limitation of Study

This study is conducted to determine learning style preferences of students in

Department of Quantity Surveying that currently pursuing their degree program in

Bachelor of Quantity Surveying and Bachelor of Science Construction in University

Technology Malaysia.

Demographics of the students were not used thoroughly in this research. That

is, this study did not analyse data based on ethnicity, age, course repeaters or any other

measure. The only measure used in the study is the measure of gender, educational

background, the programs and current year of study and also their academic

achievement. However, the distribution was not done evenly between the male and the

female students since the number of female students are greater than the male students

(Male: Female, 1:4) which become the next limitation of the study.

This study is also limited to the learning style factor that influenced the

student’s academic achievement. There may be influences on other factors that can

affect the academic achievement such as peers, family background, family

socioeconomic status, self-motivation, aspiration, self-reliance and so on that are not

included in this study.

1.6 Significance of the Study

The outcome of this study will hopefully be a guide to students, lecturers, and

educational institutions to assist them in learning and teaching style for better academic

performance.

8

1.6.1 Students

Through this study, it aims to help students in identifying their preferred

learning style to improve their weaknesses in order to develop their potential in the

learning process. This can be a guide to the students in improving their learning

process as well as their academic performance.

1.6.2 Lecturers/Instructors

Lecturers or instructor might as well get the advantages of this study which it

will assist them in practising or used the appropriate teaching style to cooperate with

the student learning style. Appropriate teaching styles that match student’s level of

thinking will improve their understanding towards the subjects.

1.6.3 Educational Institution

Can be used as a drive and useful benchmark after the student learning style is

identified, then, a further action can be carried out more effectively. Apart from that,

the institution can plan or introduce a variety of appropriate methods in delivering the

contents of the lesson during the teaching and learning process.

9

1.7 Research Methodology

The participants of this research includes are 342 students who are taking

Quantity Survey and Science Construction program in University Technology of

Malaysia. The questionnaires were distributed to seek an answer to the research

question and fulfilling the aim of the study. Figure 1.1 below indicates the research

method design.

Figure 1.1 Research Methodology

1.8 Proposed Organization of Chapter

CHAPTER 1:

This chapter is introducing the study, the problem statement and described the specific

objectives of this study and the scope and limitation of it.

CHAPTER 2:

In chapter 2, the scientific research and literature review of related to the study will be

done through the reading of materials, further elaboration on important terms and

definition involved with the purposed issues. Some explanation of learning styles and

its relationship with the academic achievement also will be discussed. The VAK

learning style will be a focus on the learning style preference.

CHAPTER 3:

The methodology of the research will be exposed in this chapter which will include

the introduction of the methods that shall be used to commence the research by

explaining the significance and relevance of the instrument used and how the data will

be interpreted.

CHAPTER 4:

The data will be analysed in this chapter that has been gain from the instrument that is

used in the research shall be expressed and interpreted in the form of percentages and

tables.

11

CHAPTER 5:

Chapter 5 will be the final chapter of this research and will be provided with a final

conclusion on the gained results as well as future recommendations and suggestion for

further research.

1.9 Summary of Chapter

This chapter has contributed to the introduction, the problem statement,

research objective, research question, significance of the study, the limitations of the

study and the research method. This study is going to recognize the learning styles

among final year students in Department of Quantity Surveying Programs at UTM,

Skudai.

Other than that, the study is going to measure the relationship between learning

style and the academic achievement of the students. it is hoped that the result of this

study will help the students in recognizing their preferred learning styles that suit them

to ensure the improvement of the academic performance. It also hopes to be a guide to

assist the lecturers or instructors in improving their teaching styles that will match with

the student learning styles.

12

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This section provides a description of the literature on this study. The

description is made up of two things: learning styles and academic achievement. The

discussion of this section refers to a recent study on learning styles and its relationship

with the students' academic achievement. This section also discusses the Programs in

Department of Quantity surveying; Bachelor of Science (Construction) and Bachelor

of Quantity Surveying.

2.2 Definition of Terms

2.2.1 Department of Quantity Surveying in UTM

The Department of Quantity Surveying was established in 1970. It offered the

Degree Program in Quantity surveying as Bach of Quantity Surveying and Bach of

13

Science (Construction) that proposed four years of study session for both programs in

Faculty of Built Environment.

2.2.2 Students

According to Wikipedia, the student is defined as a person who is currently in

a learning process and attends the educational institutions. It is referring to the pupil

or student in schools or universities that they attend. In this study, students are referring

to the student who is currently pursuing Bachelor of Quantity Surveying and Bachelor

of Science (Construction), UTM, Skudai, Johor for the 2017/2018 session selected

from the Department of Quantity Surveying.

2.2.3 Learning

Learning is a subjective matter where we could not determine how or when the

learning can happen or may occur. Meor & Assaadah (2011) has made a conclusion

on the opinions of the learning by the psychologists in her study with the title “The

Study on Learning Styles among UTM students”. He concludes all the opinions

outlined it as below:

1. Learning is a process that related to the cognitive, affective and

psychomotor.

2. The learning process can enhance the changes in attitudes, skills and

ability also stabilized the situation or condition.

3. Changes process occurs when an individual went through the practice,

interaction and experience the environment.

14

The concept of learning should be viewed as a process consisting of several

steps that allow a person from an unknown state to being a knowledgeable person,

from a person who is incapable of being an efficient person and from a person who

does not care about an event or condition that occurs to a person who are interested

and responsible (Akande et.al , 2017).

2.2.4 Learning Style

Style means attitudes, interest, and behaviours that characterize a person. While

learning means an effort being made either by practice or others in order to gain

knowledge and understanding of the subjects (Kamus Dewan, 2005). Each individual's

learning style has a very important role to develop skills in the field of education, work

and certain situations that occur between individuals (Cassidy, 2004). According to

Zubaidah (2007), learning styles refer to the way of an individual in receiving,

collecting, processing, memorizing and explaining information and associates it with

the environment.

2.2.5 Academic Achievement

Proper or preferred learning styles are significant to be known by the students

to ensure their achievement in examinations is excellence. According to Luqman

(2014), academic achievement is focusing on the grades that were obtained by a

student in the examination. If a student gains good grades he or she consider excel in

his academic performance and vice versa.

15

In addition, Academic achievement is defined as the ability of the students to

receive and master the lessons learned in institutions (Omar et.al, 2015). In other

words, achievement can also be defined as the success achieved by students in the

exams held at the university either excellent, medium or weak (Arba’eni, 2006). In this

study, students' academic achievement is based on the CGPA (cumulative grade

points) results obtained by students for all previous semester that they attend.

Table 2.1: Rating Status by CGPA

Rating Status CGPA

Good Pass CGPA ≥ 2.00

Conditional Pass 1.70 ≤ CGPA ˂2.00

Fail CGPA ˂1.70

Source 1: UTM Academic Guideline Books 14th Edition (2015)

In UTM Academic Guideline Book (2015), Section IX mention on the Dean

List specifications. In order to certify as Dean List student, they need to gain a CGPA

up to 3.67 in the current semester with minimum 12 credit of subjects taken.

2.3 Learning Style Models

There are many Learning Style Model being introduced by different investors

such as Felder & Silverman, Dunn & Dunn, Honey & Mumford, Kolbs, and others.

However, this research will be using the VARK model by Fleming (2006). This section

will discuss roughly the other model of Learning Style.

16

2.3.1 Felder and Silverman Model

Felder and Silverman's models show four zones of identity involved in

learning. This model makes four aspects of learning style. These aspects can be seen

as a continuum with one learning tendency on the left and the other on the right. They

are Active or Reflective, Sensing or Intuitive, Visual or Verbal, Inductive-Deductive,

and Sequential or Global. This style mix creates a person's learning tendency.

Table 2.2: Learning Styles Group in Felder & Silverman Model

SENSORY

Sensory learners prefer concrete,

practical, and procedural information.

They look for the facts.

INTUITIVE

Intuitive learners prefer conceptual

and theoretical information. They

look for the meaning.

VISUAL

Visual learners prefer graphs, pictures,

and diagrams. They look for visual

representation of information.

VERBAL

Verbal learners prefer to hear or

read information. They look for an

explanation with words.

ACTIVE

Active learners enjoy working in groups

to figure out problems. They like to try

things out see how it works and enjoys

physical experiments.

REFLECTIVE

They enjoy individual learning.

They like to think things through

first before they do something with

them.

SEQUENTIAL

Sequential learners prefer to have

information presented in an orderly

manner. They put together in an order to

understand the big picture emerges.

GLOBAL

Global learners prefer a systematic

approach. They see the big picture

first and then fill in the details.

Source 2: Explaining Learning Style Theories (Jane T, 2013)

17

2.3.2 VARK Model

This model being invented by Neil Fleming in 1986. The aim of this model is

used to gain an understanding of different learning styles of an individual and to study

the techniques based on the learning preference. VARK model has been categorized

into 4 modes and has different techniques of studies on each mode to the individual.

Figure 2.1 shows the 4 different modes of the models.

Source 3: Learning Styles Tips and Strategies by Neil Fleming, (2006)

VARK Learning Model

Categories

Visual

Auditory

Reading

Kinesthetic

Figure 2.1 VARK Learning Model Categories

18

2.3.3 Dunn & Dunn Model

Dunn & Dunn Learning Style Model (2009) state that learning styles are the

method by someone to focusing, processing, storing and memorizing the information

or new and difficult skills. This model is based on a few principles, which are; a) most

individuals are capable and can learn, b) each individual has specific learning styles

preference, c) and individual’s learning style will react with climate, resources, and

teaching and learning approach and d) climate, resources, learning and teaching

approaches that can fit one's learning style can optimize the learning process. Dunn &

Dunn states that students can improve their performance if the teaching and learning

process is in line with their learning style.

There are 5 categories of learning styles in this model as shown in Table below.

This 5 categories will influence the ability of a student in adapting to the learning

environment.

Table 2.3: Categories of Learning Styles in Dunn & Dunn Model

Environment Sound Light Temperature Design

Emotional Motivation Persistence Responsible Structure

Sociological Peer Self/individual Group Adult

Physical Sense Eat/ Drink Times Mobility

Psychological Analytic Global Left/right brain Self-Reflection

Source 4: Dunn & Dunn 1990

19

2.3.4 Honey & Mumford Model

Honey & Mumford Model (1992) define learning styles as an explanation of

the attitudes and behaviour of the individual that practising it. Honey and Mumford

(Al-eraky, 2010) divide the learning styles into 4 Group as stated in Figure 2.

Figure 2.2 The Learning Cycle Group of Honey & Mumford Model

Source 5: Learning Styles of Trainees/ Learners (Dr.Sraban, 2014)

2.4 VARK Learning Styles

Researcher of learning styles have presents four mod sense perception

(remembering) used to identify student learning styles as shown in table 2. This is

called modalities. The most recognizable modalities are visual, auditory, reading and

kinaesthetic (VARK). This model is used as a research model. The key to this model

is to understand how students learn and how they should study ( Syarifuddin, 2016).

Honey & Mumford

Model

Activists

Reflectors

Theories

Pragmatists

20

VARK learning styles are the perceptual, instructional partiality model which

classifies learners by sensory inclination as shown in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4: VARK Learning Style Characteristics

Type of

Learning Style

Characteristics

Visual

Uses visual objects such as graphs, mind map, charts,

pictures

Learn better in the lesson by watching them

Mentally pictures situations and problems

Easy to remember things that being jotted/write down

Auditory

Retains information through hearing and speaking

Prefers to be ordered

Summarizes out loud to remember/memorizing

Often has musical talents

Reading

Prefer information displayed as words.

Reads and writes of all forms consider as their academic

skills.

21

Learn best with use of power point, internet, dictionaries

and theories, quotations and a lot of words

Kinaesthetic

Prefer “hands-on” approach to the learning process

Would rather a demonstration rather than listen to the

verbal explanation.

Prefers work in a group

Source 6: Learning Styles Tips and Strategies (N. D. Fleming, 2006)

2.4.1 Visual Learner

This type of learner tends to study in a way of seeing and observing. They have

a preference in viewing the information in graphic images to understand it. Students

may often try to visualize what they think which he was studying. Generally, visual

learners are divided into two types of visual-verbal and verbal expression (Yahaya, A.

& Abd Majid, 2005). Visual learners can be classified as below (Fleming, 2001):

1. Students learn better by looking at a word-shaped text/paragraphs in books,

blackboard or computer displays.

2. They are more memorable and understand the instructions and explanations

through reading sentences or texts.

22

3. "Visual" learners do not need oral explanations like "Auditory" learners but

they can often learn through reading.

4. They usually write oral lectures/instructions if they wish to remember

something.

Their sensory pathways are stated in “Differentiation Through Learning Styles

and Memory” (Sprenger 2008) by observing this type of learner. Visual learners are

responding by rolling their eyes, follows the teachers or lecturers around the room with

her/his eyes, distracted by movement, often speak rapidly and they love hand-outs,

work on the board and any visual presentations to understand the subjects.

Visual learners like to volunteer for the positions at the front of the class, must

have front-line theatre seats and love to be front and centre for wearing occasions

keeping in mind the end goal to acquire the best view (Entwistle and Ramsden, 2015).

Furthermore, visual learning style characteristic shows that student has creative

imagination abilities and make mental pictures of study material to recollect its

substance. Besides that, exercises of this approach incorporate broad reading, written

outline, utilizing plots, streak card, TV, video and the internet (Loyens et al., 2013).

According to De Boer, (2012) visual learner like the task which urges to find,

decide, conceptualize and blend information. The visual learner needs to see material

with a specific end goal to comprehend it as they incline toward expositions, maps,

diagram or graph and charting. Such visual guide can make students to recollect

content later than if they had recently heard the information (Entwistle and Ramsden,

2015).

23

2.4.2 Auditory Learner

Auditory learner basically learns by listening to verbal instruction; remember

by forming the voices of the words. Miller (2001) auditory learners need to hear

themselves to ensure the information is effectively remembered in their memory.

Auditory learning style normally referred to as aural, musical and rhythmic learning

style includes movement, sound, and music. Students that depict this learning style are

constantly beating on the desks, tapping their feet, humming or singing to themselves

(Damon, 2007).

They learn best with help of lectures, group discussion, radio, using mobile

phones, speaking, web-chat and talking things through. The auditory learner can be

classified as below (Fleming, 2001):

1. An auditory learner learns by listening to spoken words/sentences as well as

verbal instructions.

2. They can remember the illustrations through strong reading or moving lips

when reading especially when learning something new.

3. They can reinforce the memory by listening to audio tape recordings,

teaching other students and discussing with the teacher.

Their sensory pathways are referred as stated by Sprenger (2008), they tend to

answer rhetorical questions, talkative, distracted by sound, enjoy audio recording and

listen to the speakers. They also like to have material that being read out loud and are

usually speaks distinctly.

Auditory learner prefers an enjoyable class and learning with friends in a group

manner as can involve in the discussion. They capable of recalling instructions and

assigning them verbally as they also can make calculation orally. A student taking

auditory will present data or information so everyone can hear when considering

because they have a sharp memory of what they hear and of what they have been told

(Cassidy, 2004). According to Fry, Ketteridge, & Marshall (2009), auditory strategy

24

Lecturer ought to consider an appropriate dialect to deliver the information and fuse

assemble exchanges and gathering work into their syllabus.

2.4.3 Read / Write Learner

This preference is for information presented as words. It indicates text-based

input and output, the internet, PowerPoint, dictionaries, quotations, reading, writing in

all its forms including lists and etc. (Fleming, 2006). Read/write learners prefer to jot

down the information and read the printed words (Awang, Abd Samad and Mohd Faiz,

2017).

N. Fleming & Vark (2006) conclude that Reading/Writing learners are at home

with written material. When they write and read, they could remember and understand

better. College classes have traditionally been prepared for the reading/writing

learning style; teachers or lecturers may recommend students to take notes in most

classes and will benefit from reading them as a method for study. According to Cuevas

and Dawson (2017), this learner learns best through literacy activities in class.

Although read/write learner is quite similar to auditory and visual learner but somehow

it is separating the two types of learners. This learner is classified as below (West,

2014):

1. Read/ write learner absorb information by readings the materials and taking

lots of notes.

2. Read/ write learner prefers to learn by lectures, diagrams, chart and

scientific concepts that explain with written language.

25

This learner is quite similar to visual learners as they are easily distracted by

noise and may struggle with verbal instructions. They also struggle with detecting the

body language and some social cues (West, 2014).

2.4.4 Kinaesthetic learner

Students learn by physically involved and do things with what they are

learning. Kinaesthetic learner learns better through experience and physically

participate in classroom activities. They classified as below (Fleming, 2001):

1. "Kinaesthetic" students learn well and effectively through experience and

will physically engage in classroom activities.

2. They usually get things done well and effectively when doing a "hands-on"

activity.

Kinaesthetic learner sensory pathways are described well by Sprenger (2008).

This learner sits very comfortably, usually slouched or lots of movement, leans back

in the chair and taps a pencil. Differ from the visual learner, this type of learner is

distracted too by movement but by his or her own movement. Other than that, they

also are distracted by comfort variations such as temperature and light.

According to Ismail, Hussain, & Jamaluddin (2010), the lecturer should

consider a strategy to overcome student weakness. For kinaesthetic learning style, the

lecturer can fuse exercises like little gathering dialogue, group project team, and

physical exercises. In addition, hands-on exercises and tangible based trial in which

students can attempt, fall flat and retry with an open door for verbal input and support.

Besides, teachers can use human interest stories or histories to express their

information.

26

Kinaesthetic learners will often speak of their learning in terms of feelings,

prefacing statements with ‘I feel.’ People with this learning style will have a tendency

to move around while trying to focus on solving a problem. Students with physical,

verbal, social and visual style learning can obtain an eighty percent success rate in this

type of classroom (Marcy, 2001).

2.5 Previous Study/ Research

There are a few studies have been made on learning styles and its relationship

with academic achievement of the students. In this section, the previous studies are

being discussed.

2.5.1 Learning styles

Table 2.5 shows the research that has been done by the researcher. The most

dominant learning styles used in conducting such research can be seen as stated in the

table. VARK/VAK Learning style Model was the common learning styles used to

evaluate the preference styles among the students (Peyman et al., 2014). One of the

research is Baharin (2007) which study on types of learning styles and learning skills

of the students in University Technology Malaysia. His results show that the level of

learning skills of the students in Faculty of Education are moderate. This study

involved 310 respondent consist of 82 male and 228 female of second-year till final

year students in Faculty of Education, UTM. It is in descriptive and the instrument tool

used is questionnaire with the four-point scale to measure five categories of learning

styles and six aspects of learning skills.

27

Table 2.5: Research Gap

No Author/

Date

No of

Respon

dent

Instrument

Tools

Learning Style Model Used

VAK /

VARK

Model

Dunn

&

Dunn

Model

Felder

&

Silverm

en

Model

Honey &

Mumford

1

Baharin

(2007) 310 Questionnaire /

2

Rosniah

(2007) 138

Questionnaire,

Observation,

Literature

Review, Semi-

structure

interview

/

3

Mohamad


4

Razak


5

Wehrwein,

Lujan, &

Dicarlo

(2007) 48

Questionnaire /

6

Abutaher


7 Hall (2016) 59 Questionnaire /

8

Dobson


9

Awang, Abd

Samad, &

Mohd Faiz,

(2017) 103

Questionnaire /

10

(Omar,

Mohamad

and Paimin,

2015) 288

Questionnaire /

In another research with title “Mengadaptasikan Gaya Pembelajaran Pelajar

ESL: Satu Kajian Kes Pelajar Tahun Satu di UKM” by Rosniah (2007) are focusing

on focusing on questioning of whether one year's unskilled student who is not excluded

from taking the most basic English language course of the English Language Arts

Studies Program at National University of Malaysia (UKM) can adapt their learning

style beyond their preference mode by training and practice. Exercises provided are in

the form of visual and auditory modes as well as individual working methods

28

conducted by researchers for eight months. The tools that are used to collect the data

in this study consists of a questionnaire on Perceptual Learning Styles Preference by

Reid (1995), journal writing, interview half structure, and observation. The results gain

shows that most of the students have at least kinaesthetic style as major perceptual

learning style preference and they are choosing working with the group as a major

sociology learning style.

There is another research made by Mohamad (2012) in the title of “Gaya

Pembelajaran yang Dominan Dalam Kalangan Pelajar di Institut Kemahiran Mara

Johor Bahru” which conclude that the pragmatist domain is the dominant learning

styles among the students in IKM. He is using the questionnaire as the instrument tools

to identify the dominant learning styles among the student. The questionnaire consists

of 5 questions related to the demographics of the respondent and 40 question base on

the Learning theory by Honey and Mumford (1986). This study involves 163

respondent who is currently in a final semester of the program. The results of the study

show that there is no significant difference between the learning styles and gender.

With the Correlation Pearson test, there is no significant relationship between the

learning style and the academic achievement of the students.

Study conduct by Wehrwein, Lujan, & Dicarlo (2007) was aim to assess sex

differences in learning styles preferences among undergraduate physiology students.

By using VARK questionnaire the objective of the study was being analysed. The

results of the study show that there is a significant difference between genders on their

learning styles preference. Male students tend to used multiple modes of modalities

from VARK model while female students mostly preferred single mode modalities

that are major to Kinaesthetic Learner. Total of respondents involved in answering the

questionnaire was 48 out of 86 of undergraduate physiology’s Student at Michigan

State University

Razak (2008) also study the learning style among the engineering students in

Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. He constructs the study by distributing the

29

questionnaire to 438 UTHM’s engineering students as his respondent from three

faculties at UTHM which are FKAAS, FKEE, and FKMP. From his study, there is a

result shows that the most preferred learning styles among the respondent are visual

while there is no correlation between the most dominant learning styles and gender.

Abutaher (2017) has constructed another study on Learning Style Preference

among Quantity Surveyor Students in UTM. Set of questionnaire being distributed to

155 respondent which is a third-year Quantity Surveyor student. The questionnaire

was divided into 3 section. Section A was focusing on the demographics of the

respondent which is gender. In section B, he focuses on the learning styles prefer by

the students using the VAK learning styles model. Lastly, for section C, the question

is more details on the most preferred learning styles according to the program course

group that they are attending. This study shows that the most preferred learning styles

among the students are kinesthetic styles which students prefer learning through

touching, feeling and hands-on activities. While for program course group they

preferred difference kind of styles to the different subjects. This shows that the learning

styles are flexible according to the subject that they attend or learn.

Hall (2016) has conducted a study on “Investigating Learning Preferences and

Universal Design for Learning Principles”, also focus on VARK Learning Style

Model. By involving 59 people as her respondents to answer the questionnaire, the

results show that most of the respondents were preferred single-mode of information

presentation while others preferred the multiple modes. Half of the participants

involved are visual learners. This result is also gain by the number of videos assessed

by the participants. It indicated that there is statistically huge difference between the

four learning preference.

The VARK Model also being used in the research conduct by Dobson (2010).

A total of 67 respondents consist of 57 undergraduates and 15 graduate students

involved in fulfilling this research. 20 multiple choices questions adapting from

Fleming’s VARK inventory were answered by the respondents to determines their

30

learning styles. The results show that there was not statistically significant on the

relationship of the sensory modality preferences and status of the respondents.

However, females’ participants are preferred more on Reading learning rather than

others learning styles. Whereas males tend to choose the visual learning as the single

mode preference.

The study was continued being conducted with the same model of learning

styles which is VARK, by Awang, Abd Samad, & Mohd Faiz, (2017). The study was

to determine the relationship between the learning styles of Polytechnic students and

their academic achievement based on VARK Learning Styles Model. 103 students

from the International business of Malaysian Polytechnic were targeted as the

respondents of the study. By using the VARK Learning Style Index, a survey

questionnaire being adapted that need to be answered by the respondents. As a result,

no significant difference between learning styles and academic achievement of

students. He stated that individual learning styles are quite similar to the academic

achievement.

2.5.2 Relationship between Learning Styles and Academic Achievement

Apart from research and studies made for learning styles preference, there is

also a relation on the learning styles affect towards the academic achievement of the

students. A study that been construct by Hayati (2009) on “Hubungan Antara Gaya

Pembelajaran terhadap Pencapaian Akademik Pelajar Kejuruteraan Dalam Subjek

Berkaitam Grafik Kejuruteraan Komputer” was using the Grasha Riechmann

Learning Style model in identifying the preferred learning style among the engineering

students in UTeM. The instrument used in this research was questionnaire distributed

to 200 respondent student of Bach in Manufacture Engineering in UTeM. The finding

of this study conclude that no significant relationship between the learning style and

academic achievement of the respondent and the most preferred learning styles was

found is collaborative style. There also a results on gender differentiation with the

academic achievement which is the female grade are greater than the male student.

31

Although the collaborative study is the major learning style that being identified, male

students tend to learn independently compared to the female students.

This can be supported by other study made by Zalifah (2012) that using the

Dunn & Dunn learning style model in his study. He claimed that there is also no

significant relationship between the learning styles and academic achievement of the

students. His research data were collected with questionnaire instrument and answered

by 138 students of Polytechnic Merlimau, Melaka. The most dominant learning styles

from this research were emotional styles.

Anwar (2013) also claimed that there is no relation between the two variables.

The respondent involved in this research are the Form 4 students of Sekolah Menengah

Vokasional Segamat, Johor with total 131. The learning style adopted in this study was

Felder and Solomen model include the Active and Reflective, Concrete and Intuitive,

Verbal and Visual and Global and Structure. The most preferred and used learning

style among the student was Global and Structure style.

“An Analysis on Learning Behaviour and Academic Achievement: Case Study

of Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan” by Luqman (2014) also conducted his

study by using the Grasha Riechmann Model comprised with six different learning

styles which are independent, avoidant, competitive, dependent, collaborative and

participatory. The results of the study show that there was also no significant difference

found between male and female student’s learning behaviours and their academic

achievement at the university level. It was also identified that there was no correlation

between learning styles and academic achievement.

A study on dimensions of learning styles and student’s academic achievement

was conducted by Omar (2015) concluded the same thing as the previous researcher

did. However, Omar stated that all those identified learning styles can be used to assist

the students to improve their learning performance as well as used by the instructor or

32

teachers to improve the teaching method. However, the result shows that there is no

significant relationship between the dimensions of learning styles and the academic

performance of students. Felder and Silverman Learning Styles Model are being

adopted in this research by using Index of Learning Style as a set of a questionnaire

survey.

In spite of all the results achieve by those researchers claim that there is no

important difference between the two variables, Yazıcı (2017) in his study of the

relationship between learning style, test anxiety and academic achievement counter

that an academic achievement is an influence with a different type of learning styles.

Which by mean, different students have different preferred learning styles that would

highly or moderately affect their academic achievement. In his study, he concludes

that the level of academic achievement was depending on the learning styles

preference.

Zalizan Mohd Jelas, (2005) emphasized on the academic achievement within

the gender. The respondent involves in fulfilling this study are 3,000 students and

1,118 teachers from primary and secondary school with a different number of gender.

The questionnaire being distributed among them with the basic demographic question

and the other part are questioning the perception of the factors contributing to the

academic achievement. The learning style that is used in this study is concrete

sequential, abstract sequential, abstract random and concrete random. The result of this

study shows that female students are performing well in the public examination

compared to male students. This relates to the learning style that being used by them

and others factors contribute.

In a study of “Learning Styles & Academic Achievement among Building

Construction Students” by Mohaffyza (2013) state that there is a relevant relationship

between learning style and academic performance of the BCC students as they have

their own learning styles preference. Students BCC are mostly choose the visual styles

during their learning session. This has been proving in this study by the data collection

33

using the questionnaire being answered by 128 students and an interview with the

teachers. She adopted the Felder and Solomen model of learning styles in the study.

From the interview, the teachers revealed that they accommodated the learning style

by using a visual approach to improve the academic achievement of the students. This

showed that the visual style gives a significant approach to improving the academic

achievement.

The study from an international dimension is also included in this review.

Rezaeinejad (2015) from An International Conference on Teaching and Learning

English as an Additional Language, Antalya – Turkey, conduct the research on the

Iranian High School students learning styles and their academic achievement. The

results gain by using Felder & Silverman model which consist of sensory perception

intuitive, visual input auditory, inductive organization deductive, active processing

reflective and sequential understanding global, conclude that there is a significant

relationship between the learning style and educational achievement.

In other research by Sanjaya (2016) “Pengaruh Gaya Belajar Mahasiswa

Program Studi Bahasa dan Sastra TiongHoa di Surabaya terhadap Hasil Mata Kuliah

Bahasa TiongHoa Komprehencif” found that the most dominant learning style in this

study was the Auditory styles as it suits with the subjects. The learning style is stated

to be in high correlation with the achievement of the grade in the subject. This shows

that learning styles are influencing the scores to gain by the students in the subject.

The other styles that contribute the grade of the subject was an independent individual

learning style at home.

34


As a whole, this chapter is discussing the learning styles and the academic

achievement of the students. This chapter is focusing on describing the VARK learning

style model and also the previous research on the learning styles and its relationship

with academic achievement. The related definition and terms are also described in this

chapter. From the discussion, it can be concluded that there are flexible results on the

relationship of learning styles and academic achievement depends on the subjects or

the programs that the student involves.

As for that, this study aims to identify the learning styles among the final year

student of QS and SC program in UTM and identify its relationship with their

achievement by gender. This study is expected to help students in applying the

effective learning styles that they preferred as well as assist the teachers or instructors

in delivering the teaching styles in the best way. This might help to improve the

academic achievement of the students.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This section provides an explanation of the chosen research method for the

study and the process adopted to facilitate and analyse the data collection. In this

chapter, it covers the sections comprising of research design, population and sampling,

instrumentation, operational and measurement, data collection procedures and data

analysis.

3.2 Research Design

A quantitative research has been chosen in order to conduct this study and to

achieve the objectives of this study. This technique enables the researcher to collect

data that need to be measured and analysed in fairly quickly statistical form. The

results for the objectives could be more efficient (Naoum, 2007). The questionnaire

was adopted in this research not only because it is often used, it also an effective way

to obtain data in order to achieve the research objectives via a survey conducted on

targeted respondents.

36

Quantitative methods usually involve large-scale data (Patten and Newhart,

2013). According to Naoum (2007), quantitative methods is defined as an inquiry to

human and social problems based on testing of hypotheses or theories are composed

of a variable. As for that, a survey questionnaire is adopted in this research to measure

the variables and evaluated it in the statistical procedure. Its also time and cost saving

instrument as the respondents is geographically scattered (Bernard, 2011).

3.3 Research Population and Sampling

In this study, a total of 342 students were chosen as targeted respondents which

comprising 243 students of Quantity Surveying and 99 students of Science

Construction in Department of Quantity Surveying. The census sampling method was

applied which is all students from the first year to final year students in Quantity

Surveying Department, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,

Skudai, Johor were selected whereas the data was gathered on every member of the

population. They were selected because they have been through learning session in

this institute.

Table 3.1: Sample of Population

Program Year Students

Male Female

SBEC

1 6 13

2 17 16

3 9 18

4 7 13

SBEQ

1 10 36

2 24 40

3 19 47

4 24 43

Source 7 : Unit Akademik Fakulti Alam Bina, UTM (2017)

37

3.4 Instrumentation

This study was using the survey questionnaire as the research instrument. The

questionnaire comprises of 3 sections which are Section A, Section B and Section C.

Section A were on demographic information questions of respondents; gender, the

programs in Department of Quantity Surveying that they attend and current year of

study. Others related question was the CGPA achieve by the students for the previous

semester. The CGPA has been asked to gain an information of their achievement in

order to relate it to the preferred learning styles by the respondents.

Section B was on the learning styles of the students generally which has lead

the students to identify their learning styles according to VAK Learning Style model.

This set of questionnaire has been adapted from VARK Learning Style Questionnaire

Version 7.0 that can be accessed through the website http://vark-learn.com/the-vark-

questionnaire/. It consists of 16 items to measure the 4 modalities and it is a

standardized questionnaire that being invented by Neil D. Fleming. The questions are

based on situations where there are choices and decisions about how that

communication might take place. It has no right and wrong answer because respondent

can choose more than one answer. This indicates that the respondent may have

multiple modes in the learning process (Leite, Svinicki and Shi, 2010).

Section C was on the Scoring Chart of the VARK questionnaire that needs to

be filled by the respondents to give them the result of their own preference learning

styles. Maybe some of them are not aware of their own learning styles. As the score

has been calculated, they would know the result too.

38

i. Close Ended Question

The respondent has been given limited choices of answer for this part.

Respondents are required to tick the checkbox provided to indicate their gender and

classified their rate of achievement (CGPA) throughout the previous semester. They

also need to fill in the year of study in the programs option.

GENDER Male Female

The diagram below are examples of information needed for the year of the

programs they are attending and they need to fill in the current year of their study.

Whereas in Table 2 are the examples of information required for the CGPA ranking of

each respondent.

Table 3.2: Option of CGPA Achieve for Previous Semester

CGPA Tick(/) Rating

CGPA ≥ 3.67 Dean’s List

CGPA ≥ 2.00 Good Pass

1.70 ≤ CGPA ˂2.00 Conditional Pass

CGPA ˂1.70 Fail

Table 3.2 has been generally asked on the range of the CGPA achieve by the

respondents to indicate their rating academic based on Academic Guidelines Book of

UTM 15th Edition.

39

3.5 Data Collection

The Questionnaire was used in this study to collect the data that has been

distributed to the respondents by hand. A total of 342 questionnaires has been

distributed for the period of 3 weeks and the set of questionnaire was in English.

3.6 Data Analysis

In order to analyse the data collected, a few tools have been used. The

techniques and tools that have been chosen to analyse the results of the data were based

on the objectives of the research. All the Data collection has been analyzed using the

Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) and Microsoft Excel 2013. SPSS was

used as the analysis tools because this study used a structured questionnaire and it was

purposely used to provide a broad range of capabilities for the entire analytical process.

Apart from that, Microsoft Excel has been used to get the percentage for the descriptive

analysis and as for T-Test, One-way ANOVA and Pearson Correlation analysis the

SPSS has been used.

3.6.1 Descriptive Analysis

For research questions, “What are the learning styles among Undergraduate

students of Department of Quantity Surveying?”, “Does gender contribute to learning

style preference?”, “What is the difference in learning styles among respondents based

on background study?” and “Is there any difference of learning styles between Science

Construction and Quantity Surveyor students?”, the data are analysed descriptively.

The data are compiled in the form of tables and are statistical analysed which it will

be easy to overview the overall results.

40

3.6.2 Inferential analysis.

The inferential analysis is used to analysed data gain for the research question;

“Does gender contribute to learning style preference?”, and “Is there any difference of

learning styles between Science Construction and Quantity Surveyor students?”. The

inferential analysis is used to compare the two or more groups on the independent

variables in terms of the dependent variables. T-test has been used to analyse the

different learning styles between genders and the programs pursued by the respondents

because the sample group is two.

Other than that, ANOVA is used to analyse the question on “What is the

difference in learning styles among respondents based on background study?” because

the sample groups are more than two which are STPM level, Diploma, Foundation,

Direct-Entry UTM, and Matriculation. It compares all the scores of all the groups and

test to see if there any significant difference between one group from the rest of the

groups (Tuckman and Harper, 2012).

As for analysing the influences of learning styles towards the academic

achievement of the respondents, the variables are the score obtained from the VARK

questionnaire and the CGPA of their current semester. The Pearson Correlation

analysis has been enumerated to determine the relationship between learning styles

and the academic achievements of the respondents. It is because the number of

independent and dependent variables are only one and it is to correlate the relationship

between two variables.

41


This chapter discussed the research methodology used in this study. The setting

and the participants for the study were described as well as the instrument used. By

using survey questionnaires, this study has found out a variety of learning style

preferred by Quantity Survey and Science Constructions students and relate it to their

academic achievement. The questionnaires have been distributed to the respondents

by hand. Chapter 4 has discussed further the findings of this study.

42

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter discussed further on the results on data that has been analyse and

the findings from the questionnaire that has been distributed to the respondents that

relate to the research objectives which are to identify the learning style among

undergraduate students in Department of Quantity Surveying and to identify the

relationship of learning style and student’s academic achievement. By using the tools

and analysis that has been mention in chapter 3, the data gain was discussed in this

chapter.

4.2 Questionnaire Form

A set of questionnaire has been used as a tool of research method to collect

the data in order to achieve both objectives of the study. This questionnaire has been

prepared and divided into several sections which are:

43

4.2.1 Section A - Demographic Information

Section A in this questionnaire is related to the background of the respondents

which consist of gender, programs that they are in, the student entry stage and also the

CGPA of the respondents. The data in this section being used to analyse both

objectives of the study.

4.2.2 Section B – Learning Style Preferred Among Students in Department of

Quantity Surveying (VARK Questionnaire)

This section consists of 16 questions in total that have been adapted from

VARK Learning Style Websites where the questions also can be answered online and

respondents would get the results automatically. This set of questions have been

analysed by the previous researcher that using this set of questions and the validity of

the questions are reliable and can be used for research purposed (Fitkov-Norris, 2015).

The data to achieve both objectives were collected using this set of questions.

4.2.3 Section C – The VARK Questionnaire Scoring Chart

Purposed of this section is to enable the respondents to calculate and evaluate

the scores that have been obtained from answering all 16 questions to indicate the

learning style approach that is used by them throughout the learning session. From the

score that has been calculating respondents have been given some information on the

type of learning mode of VARK and the proper strategies to implement in each mode

that they preferred.

44

4.3 Data Analysis and Findings

A set of questionnaire that consist of demographic information of the

respondents and 16 questions adapted from VARK Learning Style websites has been

distributed and collected by hand from the respondents. The questionnaire has been

manually distribute to 342 respondents without using any Google forms as there is a

section that needs the respondents to calculate the score of the question in order for

them to know and notice their learning style approach.

In order to achieve the first objective, the demographic information has been

analysed relate with the 16 questions that have been answered by the students by

reviewing the score that obtain from the questions that have been calculated. From the

demographic section which is in section A of the questionnaire, the information

regarding the gender, student background study and also the program that they are in

were able to be analysed together with the data collected in section B and section C

which complies all 16 questions in this sections.

4.3.1 Analysis of Gender Contribution on Learning Style Preference

From section A of the questionnaire, the data on gender information has been

collected among the respondents. This part is to analyse the gender contribution to the

learning mode that the respondents preferred. The percentage has been used to analyse

the statistics of the gender contribution. The data has been tabulated as shown in Table

4.1.

45

Table 4.1: Gender Contribution on Learning Styles Preferences (n=342)

Variable

Number of Respondents

(n=342) Percent %

Male

Visual 30 8.77

Auditory 20 5.85

Reading 13 3.80

Kinaesthetic 40 11.70

Multimode 13 3.80

Total 116 33.92

Female

Visual 47 13.74

Auditory 57 16.67

Reading 32 9.36


Multimode 32 9.36

Total 226 66.08

According to Table 4.1, 342 respondents attempted the VARK questionnaire,

male students mostly tend to be a kinaesthetic learner with 11.70 percent gain out of

33.92 percent while female students are also mostly preferred kinaesthetic mode with

16.86 percent out of 226 total of female respondents in the study. However, for the

second choice of learning mode, there is slightly different weight between the genders,

where male respondents with 8.77 percent on visual mode while female with 16.74

percent on auditory mode. On the other hand, for reading mode and multimode, male

students shows that the percentage of both modes are similar which is 3.80 percent

each. Same goes for female students, where the percentage on reading mode and

multimode are 9.36 percent and it also shows that this two mode are least preferred

among the respondents.

46

As the focus is to identify the most preferred learning styles among the

students, the results show that respondents are most dominant in kinaesthetic mode.

Students that preferred kinaesthetic mode are most likely learn through touching,

physical experiences and hands-on activities. For this type of learner, the present

situation is very vital. This learner will totally immerse in the learning activity and the

rarely envision of the future (Glenn, 2009).

Generally, the study finding indicates that the most dominant mode of learning

styles among respondents is the kinaesthetic mode. This result is similar to the finding

of (Magdalena, 2015) who found that majority of the respondents involved in the study

are preferred the kinaesthetic mode. This data can be seen clearly in the chart below.

The highest percentage contribute from both gender are towards the kinaesthetic mode

compare to others mode.

Table 4.2 shows the finding results of t-test have been made on the gender

contribution on learning style preference among the respondents. The results show that

the p-value of the test is p=0.889, p>0.001. This means that there is no significant

difference between male and female respondents on the learning style preference. This

finding consistent with the finding of (Shah et al., 2013) who found out in their study

on differences of learning style among students that there is no difference on learning

styles between genders. However, a study done by (Wehrwein et al, 2007) found that

there is the difference in learning styles between genders.

47

Table 4.2: Gender Contribution to learning Style (T-Test)

Levene's Test

for Equality

of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed)

Mean

Differen

ce

Std.

Error

Differen

ce

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Learning

Style

Equal

varian

ces

assum

ed

0.562 0.454 0.140 340 0.889 0.022 0.159 -0.290 0.334

Equal

varian

ces not

assum

ed

0.139 230.154 0.889 0.022 0.160 -0.292 0.337

4.3.2 Analysis of Differentiation of Learning Style between Programs

There are 2 programs in Department of Quantity Surveying involve in this

study which are Bachelor of Quantity Surveyor (SBEQ) and Bachelor of Science

Construction (SBEC). It has been divided into the year of their study session to analyse

the differentiation of learning styles on each year of both programs. As for that, an

analysis of the percentage of the data has been achieving and the finding has been gain

on the differences in learning styles among both programs that have been analyse. The

data has been collected and analyse and shown in table 4.3.

48

Table 4.3: Learning Style Preference between Programs (n=342)

Variable Number of respondents (n=342) Percent

Year Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

SBEQ

Visual 14 12 12 17 16.08%

Auditory 10 11 20 14 16.08%

Reading 6 9 9 6 8.77%

Kinaesthetic 12 23 17 18 20.47%

Multimode 4 9 8 12 9.65%

TOTAL 46 64 66 67 71.05%

SBEC

Visual 6 8 4 4 6.43%

Auditory 2 7 8 5 6.43%

Reading 5 4 2 4 4.39%

Kinaesthetic 4 9 11 4 8.19%

Multimode 2 5 2 3 3.51%

TOTAL 19 33 27 20 28.95%

Table 4.3 shows the percentage of the statistics between programs in

Department of Quantity Surveying on the learning styles differences preferred by

respondent base on the year of the study session. The data shows that first-year

students of SBEQ and SBEC are preferred more on a visual mode where 14 of them

are from SBEQ and 6 of them are from SBEC. This might because of the way they

interpret the learning session is still fresh and new start for them. It is easy for them to

understand through seeing and watch the things that they learn. Whereas for second-

year students, both programs show that most of them are preferred more on

kinaesthetic mode which the total of them is 32 out of 97 of second-year students.

49

As for third-year students, SBEQ students are preferred more on auditory

which is 20 out of 66 respondents while SBEC students are more likely to have a

kinaesthetic mode. This difference might be due to the learning session during

internship training, where for SBEC, they would prefer to go to the site to see the real

work done and practically involved in the training session. SBEQ students might

choose the auditory mode because of the works that need them to be more focus on

the instruction from the senior quantity surveyor and they need to be alert on particular

instructions from the Engineer or Architect.

Last but not least, the fourth year students of SBEQ has shown that most of

them are preferred to learn with kinaesthetic mode because after the internship training

they might think that to see the real pictures are more helping rather than hear and

listen to the lectures. However, fourth-year students of SBEC shows that they preferred

more on auditory mode because they maybe think that if they just look and touch the

things that they want to learn without listens to the explanation would not help them

to understand either.

However, The overall results show that the most preferred mode between both

programs is the kinaesthetic mode with 20.47 percent from SBEQ students and 8.19

percent from SBEC students, which is the students are preferred to learn physically

and through active involvement in the class and learning session. The students tend to

have physically involved in the learning session to obtain an effective understanding

of what they learn (Peyman et al., 2014).

50

In order to indicate the finding for this part, T-test analysis was used to signify

the difference on learning styles between both programs. The results are shown in

Table 4.4. The p-value of the test shows that there is no significant difference between

SBEQ and SBEC on learning style preference which is p=0.893, p>0.001.

Table 4.4: Differentiation of Learning Style among Programs in Department of

Quantity Surveying

Levene's Test

for Equality of

Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed

)

Mean

Differenc

e

Std. Error

Differenc

e

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Program Equal

varianc

es

assume

d

0.321 0.571 -0.133 340 0.894 -0.022 0.166 -0.348 0.304

Equal

varianc

es not

assume

d

-0.134 185.347 0.893 -0.022 0.164 -0.346 0.302

4.3.3 Analysis of Background Study contribution to Learning Style

In this study, the data of student entry or the respondent’s background study

has been collected in section A. The purpose of this data collection is to analyse the

contribution of learning style preference with background study of the respondents.

The analysis has been divided into type of student entry involved.

51

Table 4.5: Learning Style Preference of Diploma Entry (n=10)

Variable


(n=10) Percent %

Diploma

Visual 3 30.00

Auditory 1 10.00

Reading 2 20.00


Multimode 2 20.00

Total 10 100.00

Table 4.5 shows the distribution of the mode of learning style among the

students from Diploma entry. Total of respondents from Diploma entry was 10 (n=10),

where 30 percent of the respondents are a visual learner, 10 percent is the auditory

learner and the weight of reading, kinaesthetic and multimode learner are 20 percent

out of the total of respondents from Diploma entry. It can be seen that most of the

students from Diploma entry preferred to learn visually that contribute with the aids of

the visual approach of the learning session, via videos, image and graphics.

Table 4.6: Learning Style Preference of STPM Entry (n=85)

Variable


(n=85) Percent %

STPM

Visual 18 21.18

Auditory 22 25.88

Reading 8 9.41


Multimode 13 15.29

Total 85 100.00

52

As for STPM entry, the total of respondents involved is 85. Base on Table 4.6,

most of the respondents are kinaesthetic learner where it contributes 28.24 percent out

of the students from STPM entry. Auditory learner contributes at the second where the

percentage is 25.88 percent while visual learner followed with 21.18 percent.

Multimode learner comes forth with only 15.29 percent whereas the least percentage

goes to reading learner from the STPM entry. It clearly shows that students from

STPM entry mostly are the kinaesthetic learner compare to respondents from Diploma

entry where most of the students are a visual learner. This might be because of a

different culture on their previous background of the study.

Table 4.7: Learning Style Preference of Matriculation Entry (n=158)

Variable


(n=158) Percent %

Matriculation

Visual 42 26.58

Auditory 29 18.35

Reading 26 16.46


Multimode 15 9.49

Total 158 100.00

Same goes from previous data gain from respondents of STPM entry,

respondents from Matriculation entry shows the same results where the higher

percentage contribute by the kinaesthetic learner with 29.11 percent. This might be

due to the culture of previous study session are almost similar. The visual learner has

contributed at second place with 26.58 percent whereas the third goes to the auditory

learner with 18.25 percent.

Followed by reading learner with 16.46 percent out of 158 respondents of

matriculation entry and last but not least the multimode learner has the least percentage

53

(9.49 percent). Respondents from STPM and Matriculation entry seems to prefer

kinaesthetic mode as the best learning practice and for understanding better in the

learning session. The kinaesthetic learner love to learn with a hands-on activity, some

demonstration and a real practice.

Table 4.8: Learning Style Preference of Foundation Entry (n=10)

Variable


(n=10) Percent %

Foundation

Visual 2 20.00

Auditory 1 10.00

Reading 0 0.00


Multimode 2 20.00

Total 10 100.00

Table 4.8 shows the data gain on learning styles among the respondents from

Foundation entry which is total of 10 out of 342 respondents involved. Out of 10, 2 of

them are a visual learner with 20 percent same goes with the multimode learner. The

highest percentage or most of the respondents from Foundation entry are a kinaesthetic

learner with half percent out of 10 total respondents. While reading learner is none

among them. This result is similar to results gain by respondents from Matriculation

and STPM entry.

54

Table 4.9: Learning Style Preference of Direct Entry UTM (n=79)

Variable


(n=79) Percent %

Direct Entry

UTM

Visual 12 15.19

Auditory 24 30.38

Reading 9 11.39


Multimode 13 16.46

Total 79 100.00

Respondents that come from direct entry UTM or Diploma in the University of

Technology Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur shows different results compare to other entry.

Out of 79 total respondents, 24 of them are an auditory learner which contribute almost

half percent of the total respondents. The kinaesthetic learner is on the second place

with 26.58 percent followed by the visual learner with 15.19 percent. While multimode

learner with 16.46 percent is the forth and the least are those who are reading learner

which only 9 of them. Most of them are an auditory learner might be due to the

previous learning culture that they have faced during their diploma session in UTM

Kuala Lumpur.

This indicates that most of the students from this entry preferred to learn

through listening to a lecture, voice record and sometimes tend to learn while speaking.

They are very sensitive and will easily get disturbed with other voices or sounds while

study or learn. In addition, this data has been analysed using the one-way ANOVA

because it consists of several groups of background study and several types of learning

mode. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to compare the effect of background study

on the learning style preference among the respondents. The finding of this data is

shown in Table 4.6.

55

Table 4.10: One-way ANOVA of Background Study on Learning Style

Preference

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Between Groups 7.098 4 1.775 0.919 0.453

Within Groups 650.495 337 1.930

Total 657.594 341

An analysis of variance showed that the effect on background study on learning

style preference was not significant, F (4,337) = 0.919, p = 0.453 (p>0.05). The

difference between background study among the respondents did not significant may

be explained by the student's attitudes and behaviour.

4.3.4 Analysis of Relationship of Learning Style and Student’s Academic

Achievement.

In this section, the most concerned data is based on the relationship of the

learning style with student’s academic achievement. In order to understand the

relationship between this variable, the guideline of interpreting the degree, size,

strength and magnitude of the relationship in a correlation was based on Table 4.7

(Phanny, 2014).

Table 4.11: Guideline of Interpretation of Correlation Coefficient

Rule of Thumb

Size of Correlation

Coefficient ® Strength of correlation

< 0.00 no correlation

0.01 - 0.20 very weak correlation

0.21 - 0.40 weak correlation

0.41 - 0.60 moderately strong correlation

0.61 - 0.80 strong correlation

0.81 - 1.00 very strong correlation

1.00 > perfect correlation

Source: Phanny (2014)

56

The data that need to be analysed are basically on the Cumulative Grade

Achieve by the respondents together with the learning mode that has been gain from

the questionnaire. The data have been tabulated and analysed using Pearson

Correlation analysis to indicate the relationship between the variables involved.

Table 4.12: Distribution of Learning Styles on CGPA’s Rate

Cumulative Grade Achieve

Tendency

Total

V A R K MM

CGPA

3.67 - 4.00 19 23 14 30 9 95

2.00 - 3.66 58 54 31 68 36 247

1.70 - 2.00 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 - 1.70 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 77 77 45 98 45 342

Table 4.7 shows the distribution of VARK learning styles and academic

achievement of students according to the classification of CGPA gain by them. For

visual (V) mode of 19 respondents who were with CGPA 3.67 – 4.00, 58 respondents

with CGPA of 2.00 – 3.66 and none respondents were classified under CGPA 1.70 –

2.00 and CGPA 0.00 – 1.70. As for auditory (A) mode,23 respondents were classified

in CGPA 3.67 – 4.00 while 54 others respondents are in CGPA 2.00 – 3.66 and none

respondents for the rest classified CGPA mention after that. Next is for reading (R)

mode, only 14 respondents were under CGPA 3.67 – 4.00 compared to another mode

in the same classification of CGPA.

57

The other 31 respondents under reading mode are classified under CGPA 2.00

- 3.66. For kinaesthetic (K) mode, a total of 30 respondents under CGPA 3.67 – 4.00,

while 68 respondents were with CGPA 2.00 – 3.66. Similar to others mode, there are

no respondents under CGPA 1.70 – 2.00 and CGPA 0.00 – 1.70. Finally, for

multimode (MM), 9 respondents are under CGPA 3.67 – 4.00, 36 of respondents

remained with CGPA 2.00 – 3.66 while zero respondents for another two lower CGPA

classification.

The study finding on the relationship of learning styles and student’s academic

achievement has been shown in the table of Pearson Correlation conducted to analyse

the significant relationship between the variables. As a result, there is no significant

relationship between learning styles and student’s academic achievement (p= 0.927, p

>0.05). The value of r =0.005 indicates that there is no correlation between the two

variables involved in this study

Table 4.13: Correlations between Learning Style and Academic Achievement

CGPA Learning Style

CGPA Pearson Correlation 1 0.005**

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.927

N 342 342

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

58


As a conclusion from the analysis and the findings, in fulfilling the

requirement of the first objective, the most preferable or dominant learning styles

among the respondents is kinaesthetic mode generally. According to year by year of

study by each programs, first-year students are preferred more on a visual mode while

the second-year students are among the major that preferred the kinaesthetic mode.

Third-year students, for SBEC program, they also preferred a kinaesthetic mode differ

to SBEQ program, they mostly preferred on an auditory mode. Last but not least,

fourth year students from SBEQ program seems to contribute a few numbers on the

most overall preferred mode and as for SBEQ program, they preferred to have an

auditory mode. It shows that there is some differents by year of the programs study.

Generally, This shows that students of Department of Quantity Surveying tend to learn

with physical contact, physical experience and hands-on activity. This could help the

instructors or lecturers to change or improved their teaching styles in order to make

pleasurable learning session as well as attract students with a new style of learning

(Awang et.al, 2017).

The overall finding of the analysis on the research questions indicate that by

using T-test and ANOVA, there is no significant difference on learning styles either

by gender contribution, a background study of the respondents and also programs in

Department of Quantity Surveying which pull out of 342 total respondents. By using

Pearson Correlation, the finding for second objectives results shows that there is no

significant relationship between learning styles and student’s academic achievement.

It is consistent with the results gained by the research done by (Nor Zalifah, 2012)

found that there is no significant relationship between learning style and academic

performance of the students. However, there are still many factors that need to be taken

such as, behaviours, attitudes, family background and etc, in order to enhance the

student’s academic achievement. It is hoped that the finding of the study would assist

the students in applying the preferred learning approach majorly.

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Introduction

This chapter is the final chapter of this study and the findings and summary will

be discussed thoroughly in this chapter. The results of the studies are gathered and a

conclusion will be drawn inferring to the objectives of the study. Other than that, the

difficulties and problems face along the way of completing this research will be

highlighted and more suggestion on improvement and upgrade will be given. Future

studies that can be carried out from the perspectives of current studies also will be

suggested in a part of this chapter.

5.2 General Conclusion

Data gathered from 342 participants had helped to draw few conclusions for

the study aligns to the earlier stated objectives. The first objective of the study is to

identify the learning style among Undergraduate students of Department of Quantity

Surveying. Among the 342 participants, 98 of them are kinaesthetic learners in which

the finding shows that 40 of them are male and the other 58 are female respondents.

The second preferred learning style is recorded as visual and auditory learning style

where a total of respondents score maximum for both types are 77 each. Male

respondents are 30 persons and the other 47 is female respondents for a visual while

for auditory male respondents are 20 persons and the other 57 is female respondents.

60

With not much number of differences, 45 respondents are discovered to have

reading learning style. Further, in which 13 of them are male respondents and 32

female respondents. The rest of the same total respondents with reading learner is the

multimode learner which 13 of them are male respondents and other 32 are female

respondents. The other information collected through this finding is, researcher

understands that male and female students of Department of Quantity Surveying

mostly prefer kinaesthetic learning style. Both male and female students are exhibiting

the characters of learning best through the aids of physical learning, involve in a hands-

on activity, practical experience and demonstrate a scene. On the other hand, both male

and female respondents think they are not learning their best when using reading

learning style.

The next objective of the study: to identify the relationship between learning

style and student’s academic achievement, the findings from Pearson Correlation

analysis, found that there is no significant relationship on learning style and student’s

academic achievements. The findings of this study are accordance with research

carried out by (Anwar, 2013) stated that learning style is not the main factors on the

student’s academic achievement, there are still other factors contribute to the

performance of the students such as cultural environment, student behaviour and etc.

5.3 Problems and Difficulties

They are few problems and difficulties identified throughout the time the

research was carried out. The first problem highlighted was the difficulty in

distributing the questionnaire among the respondents due to large in numbers. As the

respondents were identified from each year of both programs, it quite challenging to

distribute the questionnaire because the time for classes was not in the same timeframe.

The respondents were met and asked to fill up the questionnaire mostly during their

class time since it’s the only time they can be found gathering. However, there are also

few limitations since the lecturer permission should be granted and it’s quite disturbing

61

for the lecturers as well. Thus, it affects the time taken in distributing and collecting

the questionnaire.

The second problem recognized is dealing with data collection. Respondents

are found to not read the instructions carefully before attempting to answer the

questionnaire. This causes errors to occur. Most of the respondents did not notice the

scoring chart that has to be calculated from section C. This make them not aware of

their preferred learning style for real. This is considered as a loss since time and energy

was invested for this purpose. The other problem faced during the data collection was,

almost 35 questionnaires distributed were uncompleted in section C where they need

to circle back the answer in section B to allocate their learning styles. This happened

due to some not seriousness among the respondents. They did not take the

questionnaire as important as it should.

5.4 The implication of the Study

As a result of this study, it may consider learning style priorities when

planning teaching courses to maximize learning success. However, the lecturers can

handle every learning style at least some of the time in the teaching session to improve

the student's positive attitude towards the teaching and learning process. If students

understand and adapted a suitable learning style for themselves, they are able to learn

and comprehend knowledge better. As learning styles differ on the student to another,

it is important that students take note to organize it in a manner in improving quality

of learning. Through this, students will have the chance to reflect and assess their self-

learning style and work on the changes and improvement that can be done.

Besides that, the effectiveness of a person to learn and retain new information

is highly depending upon the educator and learning environment in which the material

is taught. From there, it is depending on the learner to make sure their success.

62

However, in many environments where formal learning is taking place, less attention

is given to recognizing the significance of how learners are able to absorb and process

the lesson presented. An educationally qualified educator solely is not enough to

ensure the success of the learners. A 'good teacher' is a teacher who should be capable

to give more than just instruction. They are able to appreciate the diversity of learners

in their classroom.

5.5 Suggestion for Future Study

After the study is conducted based on experiences and situation faced, the suggested

study which can be conducted in future studies are:

I. Learning styles preferred among students of Department of Quantity

Surveying base on a subject related to both programs.

II. Comparison research between Quantity Survey and construction

students based on their learning styles base on Measurement Subject.

III. The relationship of background study with the learning style approach

63


As the conclusion, it is hoped that finding of this study can be used as a guide

to improve the teaching practice and the performance of students. The learning process

will not become a burden if a new approach is presented in a style that can attract the

attention of the students. If learning is made pleasurable, the academic achievement or

the students could be enhanced. However, the obligation is on the students itself as the

university is encouraging them to apply the self-learning approach rather than putting

full responsibility towards the instructor or lecturers in identifying and realising

students learning style preference. Students should aware and realised the preferred

learning style that may contribute to their academic success by promoting self-

awareness and their use of learning strategies that work for it. Generally, even though

learning style does not have significant effects on academic achievement it still can be

used to determine the trend of learning styles that are owned by each student and also

can assist the lecturers and instructor for future teaching planning.

64

REFERENCES

Abutaher, M. I. bin S. (2017) ‘Learning Style Preference among Quantity Surveying

Students’, (August 1994).

Akande, A. et al. (2017) ‘If One Goes Up the Other Must Come Down: Examining

Gender Differences and Understanding of Models of Learning Style: A Non-

Western Perspective’, Social Indicators Research. Springer Netherlands, 131(2),

pp. 817–829. doi: 10.1007/s11205-016-1274-9.

Al-eraky, M. (2010) ‘Learning Styles’, 191(3), pp. 125–128.

Anwar, N. F. (2013) ‘Hubungan Gaya Pembelajaran Dengan Pencapaian Akademik

Pelajar Aliran Vokasional’.

Arba’eni, A. H. (2006) ‘Gaya pembelajaran dan hubungannya dengan pencapaian

akademik tahun # UTM skudai’, Program, 16(May), p. 66. Available at:

http://eprints.utm.my/6103/.

Awang, H., Abd Samad, N. and Mohd Faiz, N. S. (2017) ‘Relationship between the

Learning Styles Preferences and Academic Achievement Relationship between

the Learning Styles Preferences and Academic Achievement’, 12193, pp. 1–6.

doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/226/1/012193.

Baharin, A. et al. (2007) ‘Kemahiran Belajar Pelajar Universiti (Contrasting

Learning Styles And Study Skills)’, Vot 71881, Vot 71881, pp. 1–104.

Bernard, H. R. (2011) Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and

Quantitative Approaches - H. Russell Bernard - Google Books. fifth. Edited by

Nancy E. Roberts. Rowman & Littlefield.

Brophy, J. (2010) Motivating Students to Learn - Jere E. Brophy - Google Books.

second. Routledge. Available at: https://books.google.com.my/books?id=k-

E47OiDk9gC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false (Accessed: 10

November 2017).

Buku Peraturan Akademik. 14th edn (2015). Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Cassidy, S. (2004) ‘Learning styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures’,

Educational Psychology, 24(4), pp. 419–444. doi:

10.1080/0144341042000228834.

Cuevas, J. and Dawson, B. L. (2017) ‘A test of two alternative cognitive processing

models: Learning styles and dual coding’, Theory and Research in Education, p.

147787851773145. doi: 10.1177/1477878517731450.

65

Damon, W. (2007) ‘Dispositions and Teacher Assessment: The Need for a More

Rigorous Definition’, Journal of Teacher Education, 58(5), pp. 365–369. doi:

10.1177/0022487107308732.

Dobson, J. L. (2010) ‘A comparison between learning style preferences and sex,

status, and course performance’, AJP: Advances in Physiology Education, 34(4),

pp. 197–204. doi: 10.1152/advan.00078.2010.

Dunn, R. et al. (2009) ‘Impact of Learning-Style Instructional Strategies on

Students’ Achievement and Attitudes: Perceptions of Educators in Diverse

Institutions’, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues

and Ideas, 82(3), pp. 135–140. doi: 10.3200/TCHS.82.3.135-140.

Educational, U. N. (2004) ‘Changing Teaching Practices’, Strategies.

Entwistle, N. (2013) Styles of Learning and Teaching: An Integrated Outline of

Educational ... - Noel J. Entwistle - Google Books. New York: David Fulton.

Entwistle, N. and Ramsden, P. (2015) Understanding Student Learning (Routledge

Revivals) - Noel Entwistle, Paul Ramsden - Google Books, Groom Helm.

Fawcett, M. and Watson, D. (2016) Learning Through Child Observation, Third

Edition - Mary Fawcett, Debbie Watson - Google Books. third. London: Jessica

Kingsley Publishers.

Felder, R. and Brent, R. (2005) ‘Understanding student differences’, Journal of

engineering education, 94(1), pp. 57–72. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-

9830.2005.tb00829.x.

Fitkov-Norris, E. D. and Yeghiazarian, A. (2015) ‘Validation of VARK learning

modalities questionnaire using Rasch analysis’, Journal of Physics: Conference

Series, 588, p. 12048. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/588/1/012048.

Fleming, N. D. (2001) Teaching and learning styles : VARK strategies. Neil

Fleming. Fleming, N. D. (2006) ‘V.A.R.K. Visual, Aural/Auditory, Read/Write,

Kinesthetic’, 0(2006), p. 80819.

Fleming, N. and Vark, T. (2006) ‘Learning Styles Tips and Strategies’.

Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (2009) A Handbook for Teaching and

Learning in Higher Education, A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in

Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/03075079312331382498.

Hall, A. (2016) ‘The Use of Recorded Lecture Videos: investigating Learning

Preferences and Universal Design For Learning Principles’, M-PBEA, VII(1), pp.

12–17.

66

Ismail, A., Hussain, R. M. R. and Jamaluddin, S. (2010) ‘Assessment of students’

learning styles preferences in the faculty of science, Tishreen University, Syria’,

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), pp. 4087–4091. doi:

10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.645.

Kamus Dewan (2005).

Klašnja-Milićević, A. et al. (2017) ‘Personalization Based on Learning Styles’, in.

Springer, Cham, pp. 27–36. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-41163-7_3.

Kolb, D. A. (2015) Experiential learning : experience as the source of learning and

development. second edi.

Kurgun, H. and Işildar, P. (2016) ‘Investigation Of The Learning Styles Of Tourism

And Hospitality Students Using Kolb And’, 4(2), pp. 130–141.

Leite, W. L., Svinicki, M. and Shi, Y. (2010) ‘Attempted Validation of the Scores of

the VARK : Learning Styles Inventory With Multitrait – Multimethod

Confirmatory Factor Analysis Models’. doi: 10.1177/0013164409344507.

Loyens, S. M. M. et al. (2013) ‘Students’ approaches to learning in problem-based

learning: Taking into account professional behavior in the tutorial groups, self-

study time, and different assessment aspects’, Studies in Educational Evaluation,

39(1), pp. 23–32. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2012.10.004.

Luqman, M. (2014) ‘An Analysis of Learning Behavior and Academic

Achievement : A Case Study of Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan

Abstract ’:, (January).

Magdalena, S. M. (2015) ‘The Relationship of Learning Styles, Learning Behaviour

and Learning Outcomes at the Romanian Students’, Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier B.V., 180(November 2014), pp. 1667–1672. doi:

10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.05.062.

Marcy, V. (2001) ‘Adult learning styles: How the VARK Learning Styles Inventory

can be used to improve student learning’, Perspectives on Physician Assistant

Education, 12(2), pp. 117–120.

Mata Hernandez, G. and Garibay Jimenez, R. (2012) ‘Effective Learning Strategies’,

Edulearn12: 4Th International Conference on Education and New Learning

Technologies, pp. 2705–2711.

Meor Ibrahim Kamaruddin & Assaadah Mohamad (2011) ‘Kajian gaya pembelajaran

dalam kalangan pelajar UTM’, Journal of Educational Psychology and

Counseling, 2(1997), pp. 51–77.

67

Miller, P. (2001) ‘Learning Styles: The multimedia of the Mind. Research Report’,

Learning Styles: The Multimedia of the mind. Research Report, p. 11.

Mohaffyza, B. M. M. (2013) ‘Learning styles and academic achievement among

building construction students’, (January), p. 211. Available at:

http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/4645/.

Mohamad Zaki Mohamad (2012) ‘Gaya Pembelajaran yang Dominan dalam

Kalangan Pelajar di Institut Kemahiran MARA Johor Bahru. Laporan Projek

Sarjana. Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia.’, pp. 1–101.

Naoum, D. S. (2007) Dissertation Research & Writing For Construction Students.

second. Elsevier Ltd.

Newshub, U. (2017) ‘UTM ranked in the top 1% in the QS World University

Rankings 2017/2018’, NEWSHUB UTM, 8 June. Available at:

https://news.utm.my/2017/06/utm-ranked-in-the-top-1-in-the-qs-world-

university-rankings-20172018/ (Accessed: 11 December 2017).

Ng, S. C. (2005) Relationship between learning styles and understanding of selected

chemical concepts among pre-universitiy Science students / Ng Sook Chin.

University Malaya.

Nor Zalifah, S. (2012) ‘Hubungan Diantara Gaya Pembelajaran Dan Kemahiran

Insaniah Dengan Pencapaian Akademik Pelajar’, pp. 1–40.

Nur Fairuz Hayati, A. (2009) ‘Hubungan Antara gaya pembelajaran terhadap

pencapaian akademik pelajar kejuruteraan dalam subjek berkaitan Grafik

Kejuruteraan Berkomputer’, pp. 1–24. Available at:

http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/1091/.

Office Parrots, com (2016) Will Good Grades Get You Hired?, Office Parrots.

Omar, N., Mohamad, M. M. and Paimin, A. N. (2015) ‘Dimension of Learning

Styles and Students’ Academic Achievement’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral

Sciences. Elsevier B.V., 204(November 2014), pp. 172–182. doi:

10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.130.

Patten, M. L. and Newhart, M. (2013) Understanding Research Methods: An

Overview of the Essentials - Mildred L. Patten, Michelle Newhart - Google

Books. ninth. Routledge.

Peyman, H. et al. (2014) ‘Using VARK Approach for Assessing Preferred Learning

Styles of First Year Medical Sciences Students: A Survey from Iran.’, Journal of

clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR. JCDR Research & Publications Private

68

Limited, 8(8), p. GC01-4. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/8089.4667.

Phanny, I. (2014) Guideline for Interpreting Correlation Coefficient, Pearson

Australia. Available at: www.slideshare.net/phannithrupp/guideline-for-

interpreting-correlation-coefficient.

Ramli, S. (2013) ‘Pencapaian akademik penentu masa depan’, Utusan Online, 1

April.

Razak, N. S. B. C. A. (2008) ‘Gaya Pembelajaran Pelajar Kejuruteraan Di Universiti

Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia’.

Rezaeinejad, M., Azizifar, A. and Gowhary, H. (2015) ‘The Study of Learning Styles

and its Relationship with Educational Achievement Among Iranian High School

Students’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier B.V., 199, pp.

218–224. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.509.

RMK11 (2015) ‘RMK11-Meningkatkan pembangunan modal insan untuk negara

maju’, Economic Development Unit, Bab 5, p. 36. Available at:

http://rmk11.epu.gov.my/book/bm/Bab-5/Bab 5.pdf.

Rosniah (2007) ‘Mengadaptasikan Gaya Pembelajaran Pelajar ESL : Satu Kajian Kes

Pelajar Tahun Satu di UKM’, GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 7(1),

pp. 1–32.

Sanjaya, F. (2016) ‘Pengaruh Gaya Belajar Mahasiswa Program Studi Bahasa Dan

Sastra Tionghoa Di Surabaya Terhadap Hasil Mata Kuliah Bahasa Tionghoa

Komprehensif’.

Sarwar, A. (2016) Does CGPA matter in getting a job? | The Daily Star,

thedailystar.net. Available at: http://www.thedailystar.net/op-ed/politics/does-

cgpa-matter-getting-job-1274815 (Accessed: 11 December 2017).

Shah, K. et al. (2013) ‘How different are students and their learning styles?’,

International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 1(3), p. 1. doi:

10.5455/2320-6012.ijrms20130808.

Syarifuddin, A. (2016) ‘Penerapan model Pembelajaran Visualization, Auditory,

Kinesthetic (VAK)’, (April).

Tuckman, B. W. and Harper, B. E. (2012) Conducting Educational Research -

Google Books. 6th edn. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Wehrwein, E. a, Lujan, H. L. and Dicarlo, S. E. (2007) ‘Gender differences in

learning style preferences among undergraduate physiology students’, Adv

Physiol Educ, 48201, pp. 153–157. doi: 10.1152/advan.00060.2006.

69

West, A. (2014) Learning Styles. Available at: http://slideplayer.com/slide/5894667/

(Accessed: 3 December 2017).

Yahaya, A. dan Abd Majid, N. (2005) ‘Teori Dan Model Berkenaan Dengan Gaya

Pembelajaran’, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, (1984). Available at:

http://eprints.utm.my/10396/1/Teori_Dan_Model_Berkenaan_Dengan_Gaya_Pe

mbelajaran.pdf.

Yazıcı, K. (2017) ‘The Relationship between Learning Style, Test Anxiety and

Academic Achievement’, Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), pp.

61–71. doi: 10.13189/ujer.2017.050108.

Yusof, N. and Jamaluddin, Z. (2015) ‘Graduate employability and preparedness : A

case study of University of Malaysia Perlis ( UNIMAP ), Malaysia’, Malaysian

Journal of Society and Space, 11(11), pp. 129–143.

Zalizan Mohd Jelas, Saemah Rahman, Roselan Baki, J. A. (2005) ‘Prestasi akademik

mengikut gender’, Prestasi Akademik Mengikut Gender, 30, pp. 93–111.

Zubaidah Begam Mohamed Zakaria (2007) ‘Hubungan Gaya Pembelajaran Dengan

Pencapaian Akademik : Tinjauan Di Kalangan Pelajar-Pelajar Sarjana Muda

Pendidikan Tahun Pertama , Utm.’, Hubungan Gaya Pembelajaran Dengan

Pencapaian Akademik : Tinjauan Di Kalangan Pelajar-Pelajar Sarjana Muda

Pendidikan Tahun Pertama, Utm, Skudai, Johor. Zubaidah, pp. 1–18.

70

APPENDIX A

Questionnaire Form

QUESTIONNAIRE FORM

The Relationship of Learning Styles and Student’s Academic Achievement

Section of Question:

a) Demographic Information

b) Learning Style Preference

c) The Scoring Chart

Prepared By: Fatin Najwa Binti Jaafar

Bachelor’s Degree in Science Construction

Different learners possessed different styles in learning. Knowing and understanding our own

learning styles is significant in acquiring knowledge. After completing this survey, the

participants will be able to determine their learning style preference and utilize it in their study

to improve their academic performance. The objectives that need to be analyse in this

questionnaire are:

1. To identify the learning style among Undergraduate students of Department of Quantity

Surveying.

2. To identify the relationship between the preferred learning style and the student’s

academic achievements.

71

SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Tick (/) and circle the information.

Gender : Male

Female

Year/

Program

: 1/2/3/4 SBEC 1/2/3/4 SBEQ

Student

Entry

:

Diploma Foundation

STPM

Direct Entry

UTM

Matriculation

CGPA : 3.67-4.00

(latest) 2.00-3.66

1.70-2.00

0.00-1.70

SECTION B: LEARNING STYLE PREFERRED AMONG DEPARTMENT OF

QUANTITY SURVEYING STUDENT (VARK QUESTIONNAIRE)

Circle the answer which best explains your preference. Please circle more than one if a

single answer does not match your perception.

1 Remember a time when you learned how to do something new. Avoid choosing a physical

skill, e.g. Riding a bike. You learned best by:

a. Diagrams, maps, and charts – visual clues.

b.

Written instructions – e.g. a manual or

book.

c. Listening to somebody explaining it and asking questions.

d. Watching a demonstration

2

You have to make an important speech at a conference or special occasion. You would:

a.

Write a few key words and practice saying your speech over and over

b.

Gather many examples and stories to make the talk real and practical.

c.

Make diagrams or get graphs to help explain things

d.

Write out your speech and learn from reading it over several times

72

3 Do you prefer a teacher or a presenter who uses:

a. Diagrams, charts or graphs

b. Hand-outs, books, or readings

c. Question and answer, talk, group discussion, or guest speakers

d. Demonstrations, models or practical sessions

4 A website has a video showing how to make a special graph. There is a person speaking,

some lists and words describing what to do and some diagrams. You would learn most

from:

a. seeing the diagrams

b. Reading the words.

c. Watching the actions.

d. Listening.

5 A group of tourists wants to learn about the parks or wildlife reserves in your area. You

would:

a.

Take them to a park or wildlife reserve and walk with them.

b. Show them maps and internet pictures.

c.

Talk about, or arrange a talk for them about parks or wildlife reserves.

d. Give them a book or pamphlets about the parks

6 You are helping someone who wants to go to your airport, the center of town or railway

station. You would:

a. Go with her

b. Tell her the directions

c. Write down the directions.

d. Draw, or show her a map, or give her a map

73

7 You are using a book, CD or website to learn how to take photos with your new digital

camera. You would like to have:

a. Diagrams showing the camera and what each part does.

b. A chance to ask questions and talk about the camera and its features.

c. Many examples of good and poor photos and how to improve them

d. Clear written instructions with lists and bullet points about what to do.

8

Other than price, what would most influence your decision to buy a new non-fiction

book?

a. Quickly reading parts of it

b. It has real-life stories, experiences and examples.

c. A friend talks about it and recommends it

d. The way it looks is appealing

9 You want to learn a new program, skill or game on a computer. You would:

a. Read the written instructions that came with the program

b. Follow the diagrams in the book that came with it.

c. Use the controls or keyboard

d. Talk with people who know about the program.

10 You are going to choose food at a restaurant or cafe. You would:

a. Look at what others are eating or look at pictures of each dish.

b. Choose something that you have had there before.

c. Choose from the descriptions in the menu

d. Listen to the waiter or ask friends to recommend choices

74

11 You have a problem with your stomach. You would prefer that the doctor:

a. Described what was wrong.

b. Used a plastic model to show what was wrong.

c. Gave you something to read to explain what was wrong.

d. Showed you a diagram of what was wrong

12 I like websites that have:

a. interesting written descriptions, lists and explanations

b. Things I can click on, shift or try.

c. Audio channels where I can hear music, radio programs or

interviews

d. Interesting design and visual features.

13

You are planning a vacation for a group. You want some feedback from them about

the plan. You would:

a. Describe some of the highlights they will experience

b. Use a map to show them the places.

c. Give them a copy of the printed itinerary.

d. Phone, text or email them

14 You are about to purchase a digital camera or mobile phone. Other than price, what would

most influence your decision?

a. The salesperson telling me about its features

b. Reading the details or checking its features online

c. Trying or testing it

d. The design are modern and stylish

75

15 You are going to cook something as a special treat. You would:

a. Look on the Internet or in some cookbooks for ideas from the pictures.

b. Ask friends for suggestions

c. Cook something you know without the need for instructions.

d. Use a cookbook where you know there is a good recipe

16 You have finished a competition or test and would like some feedback. You would like to

have feedback:

a. using examples from what you have done

b. using a written description of your results

c. using graphs showing what you had achieved

d. from somebody who talks it through with you

76

SECTION C : THE VARK QUESTIONNAIRE SCORING CHART

Use the following scoring chart to find the VARK category that each of your answers

corresponds to. Circle the letters that correspond to your answers.

e.g. If you answered b and c for question 3, circle V and R in the question row

Question a b c d

3 A V R K

Scoring Chart

Question a b c d

1 V R A K

2 A K V R

3 V R A K

4 V R K A

5 K V A R

6 K A R V

7 V A K R

8 R K A V

9 R V K A

10 V K R A

11 A K R V

12 R K A V

13 K V R A

14 A R K V

15 V A K R

16 K R V A

77

Calculating Your Scores

Count the number of each of the VARK letters you have circled to get your score for

each VARK category.

Total Number of Vs circled :

Total Number of As circled :

Total Number of Rs circled :

Total Number of Ks circled :

If you are categorized under visual, you require more presentation of maps, charts,

diagrams and pictures that will help you to remember and understand the content

better.

If you are categorized under Auditory, you respond the best on voices and prefer to

listen to the presentation. Repeating and listening to your own voice after tutoring and

voicing out in group discussion would be able to improve your learning.

If you are categorized under Read/Write, you require to jot down the notes in the

classroom. Reading the textbook and notes are best way to make u understand on the

subject.

If you are categorized under Kinaesthetic, you require more “hands-on” activities to

improve your learning skills. You respond well if you are able to touch or feel an

object or learning prop

Documents

THE RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLES AND STUDENT’S …