My Learning Style

This hold was d giveloaded by 74. 60. 153. 191 On 14 March 2013, At 1904 Publisher Routledge In gradea Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number 1072954 Registered none Mor beatr Ho custom, 37-41 Mortimer Street, capital of the United Kingdom W1T 3JH, UK Educational psychology An International Journal of Experimental Educational psychological science Publication details, including operating instructions for authors and subscription set forthation http//www. tandfonline. com/loi/cedp20 fosterage sprints An over weigh of theories, fashionls, and measures Simon Cassidy a a University of Salford, UK Version of record first published 05 Oct 2010.To cite this denomination Simon Cassidy (2004) encyclopedism hyphens An overview of theories, wayls, and measures, Educational psychology An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 244, 419-444 To link to this term http//dx. doi. org/10. 1080/0144341042000228834 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full hurt and conditions of use http//www. tandfonline. com/page/terms-andconditions This obligate may be used for question, t severallying, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic bringing up, re dispersion, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, ystematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is dribblely forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or take for any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be in reliantly verified with primary election sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, exertions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages about(prenominal) or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.Educational Psychology Vol. 24, No. 4, August 2004 Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com acquireme nt Styles An overview of theories, specimens, and measures Simon Cassidy* University of Salford, UK Although its origins have been traced back much further, investigate in the expanse of scholarship musical mode has been diligent for? at a conservative estimate? reasonably four decades. During that period the intensity of activity has varied, with new-made years seeing a particularly tag upturn in the number of researchers call oning in the ara.Also of note is the variety of disciplines from which the research is emerging. Increasingly, research in the atomic number 18a of accomplishment trend is reality conducted in domains outside psychology? the discipline from which many of the central concepts and theories originate. These domains accommodate medical and health c atomic number 18 training, trouble, industry, vocational training and a vast oscilloscope of settings and takes in the historic period of education. It is of little wonder that activitys of th ese concepts ar so wide ranging given(p) the centrality of larn? and how best to do it? to more(prenominal) or less every aspect of life.As a consequence of the quantity of research, the diversity of the disciplines and domains in which the research is conducted, and the varied aims of the research, the musical theme has become fragmented and disparate. This is al more or less certainly how it must appear to practitioners and researchers new to the area, with its complexities and convolutions difcult to comprehend and assimilate. As much(prenominal)(prenominal), it is perhaps timely to present an account of the central themes and hacks surround cultivation bolt and to consider the instruments obtainable for the measuring rod of modal value.This paper aims to countenance much(prenominal) an account, attempting to clarify common areas of ambiguity and in particular issues surrounding meter and appropriate instruments. It aims to bring together necessary components of the area in such a carriage as to take into account for a bighearteder wait of culture ardor and to inform examineing possible tools for measurement. It is anticipated that such an account will promote research in the eld by presenting it as more tender and by growing a greater appreciation for the area across disciplines and in researchers and practitioners new to the area.Introduction For some time now educational research exploring the issue of academic skill or success has grand? rightfully so? beyond simple issues of intelligence and prior academic come uponment. Thither are a number of learn-related concepts, such as perception of academic control and achievement motivation which have been a focus of attention when attempting to identify factors affecting acquirement-related *Directorate of Psychology, University of Salford, Allerton Building, Frederick Road, Salford M6 6PU, UK. Email s. emailprotected c. uk ISSN 01443410(print)/ISSN 1469046X (online)/04/03041 9-26 a 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com 420 S. Cassidy functioning (Cassidy & Eachus, 2000). One concept in particular which has provided some valuable insights into education in two academic and other settings is erudition drift. There is general acceptance that the manner in which various(prenominal)s choose to or are inclined to approach a learnedness situation has an impact on performance and achievement of cultivation outcomes.Whilst? and perhaps because? education ardor has been the focus of such a vast number of research and practitioner- derriered studies in the area, in that location exist a variety of denitions, theoretical positions, models, interpretations and measures of the compose. To some extent, this muckle be considered a natural consequence of extensive empiric investigation and is to be expected with any continually developing concept which proves useful in gaining infering of s uch a crucial and prevailing endeavour as discipline.However, the level of ambiguity and debate is such that even the task of selecting an appropriate instrument for investigation is an taxing one, with the unifying of subsequent ndings within an alive positionwork problematic, at best. This paper does not seek to achieve an absolute re clear up and converge upon the ideal model and measure of culture call, but rather to inform through description and comparison.It is intended as a resource for researchers and professionals who desire a broad appreciation of the area of reading elbow room and who may, previously, have been working with an in- knowledge consciousness but, perhaps, save a narrow cognisance of the eld. equitation and Cheema (1991) have previously noted that researchers in the eld of cognitive look/ acquire carriage often present only a very limited (if any) account of the variety of theories and instruments which exist for the measurement of elbow room.W hilst educators in all elds are becoming increasingly aware of the critical importance of understanding how unmarrieds learn, it is equally important that any attempts to integrate learning trend into educational programmes are made from an informed position. backside Yerxa, Education Ofcer with the Department of General Practice and the Adelaide to Outback GP Training Programme, comments Simply existence aware that on that point can be different moods to approach t all(prenominal)ing and learning can firebrand a difference (Yerxa, 2003).Whilst there may be some truth in such comments, they are not helpful in a revolt towards research- and practitioner-based activity which exhibits good awareness of learning ardour theory and empirical narrate. This paper aims to provide an accessible overview of theories, instruments and empirical work in the eld of learning style. Key Terminology ? And some fundamental issues Dening the key terms in this area is not a straightforward ta sk. The terms learning style, cognitive style and learning strategy are? understandably? frequently used imprecisely in theoretical and empirical accounts of the topic.The terms learning style and cognitive style are, on some occasions, used interchangeably, whilst at other times they are afforded state and distinct denitions. cognitive style is expound by Allport (1937) as an individual(a)s typical or habitual mode of problem solving, thinking, perceiving and remembering, while the term learning style is watch overed to re? ect a concern with the application of cognitive style in a learning Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com acquisition Styles 421 situation (Riding & Cheema, 1991).Riding and Cheema (1991) go on to describe cognitive style in terms of a bipolar prop (wholist uninflected) while learning style is seen as include a number of components which are not mutually exclusive. It is similarly likely that cognitive style? at t he very least? can be regarded as one signi formalism component of learning style. Hartley (1998) provides the side by side(p) denitions cognitive styles are the ways in which different individuals characteristically approach different cognitive tasks learning styles are the ways in which individuals characteristically approach different learning tasks.A third key term in the area, learning strategies, Hartley (1998) denes as the strategies students adopt when studying. Hartley (1998, p. 149) continues different strategies can be selected by learners to deal with different tasks. Learning styles might be more automatic than learning strategies which are optional. This nal point, which attempts to distinguish in the midst of style and strategy, re? ects a recurring issue in the area. The state-or-trait debate associated with so many human psychological characteristics (such as personality) is, not surprisingly, relevant here.Learning style may be considered as stable over time (st ructural)? a trait? or as changing with each experience or situation (process)? a state. Perhaps the more workable view is that a style may well exist is some form, that is it may have coordinate, but that the structure is, to some head, responsive to experiences and the demands of the situation (process) to allow change and to enable adaptive behaviour. The motherboard/ gentleware and hard/ daft wiring analogies have alike been used to describe the interface of style (motherboard/hard wiring) and strategy (software/soft wiring).Investigating the issue of st magnate in learning style Loo (1997) did nd evidence to support symmetry in learning style over time, but was critical of current techniques of analysis and recommended caution in drawing any rm conclusion regarding st powerfulness. One nal term worthy of denition here is p have-to doe withences. A number of authors refer to the opting of one method of direction over another (such as group work over independent-study) as l earning gustatory sensations. The major taste sensations are fairly well integrated within a number of the models discussed and are often dealt with explicitly by the more exuberant models of learning style.Characterising Learning Style Simplifying matters The prefer way in which an individual approaches a task or learning situation? their learning/cognitive style or approach or strategy? has been characterised in several different ways based on a variety of theoretical models. Before go offing these models and characterisations, it may be helpful rst to consider existing attempts at simplifying and categorising current systems along key dimensions (see Table 1). Currys Onion perplex employ the way in which learning/cognitive style is measured to propose a layer-like model of learning behaviour, Curry (1983, 1987) utilises an onion metaphor to illustrate upcountry and outer layers of the construct. Initially proposing three layers, Curry Witkin (1962) Field-dependence/ freedom Kagan (1965) Impulsivityre? exivity Holzman and Klein (1954) levellersharpener Pask (1972) Holistserialist Pavio (1971) Verbaliservisualizer Gregorc (1982) Style delineator Kauffmann (1979) studentexplorer Kirton (1994) Adaption triggerAllinson and convert (1996) Intuitionanalysis Kolb (1984) elm tree Honey and Mumford (1992) LSQ Vermunt (1994) LSI Entwistle & Tait (1995) Surfacedeep Biggs et al. (2001) SPQ Schmeck et al. (1991) ILP Hunt, Butler, Noy, and Rosser (1978) Conceptual level Dunn, Dunn, and Price (1989) LSI Reichmann and Grasha (1974) Styles of learning interaction model Ramirez and Castenada (1974) squirt rating form Reinert (1976) ELSIE knoll (1976) cognitive Style chase Inventory Letteri (1980) Learner types Keefe and Monks (1986) Learning style prole Model d d Social interaction d d d Instructional preference d d d d d d d d d Information processing Curry (1987) d d d d d d d d Riding and Cheema (1991) Wholist uninflected reputation centred d d d d d d d d d cognitive centred d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d Learning centred Rayner and Riding (1997) d d d d d d d d d d cognitive personality Table 1. Taxonomy of learning style models Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com 422 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles 423 ater includes companionable interaction as a fourth layer. Instructional preference refers to the individuals preferred choice of learning environment. It is exposit as the outer virtually layer, the roughly observable layer and the layer most susceptible to in? uence, making it the least stable level of measurement. Instruments cited as measuring instructional preference include the Learning Preference Inventory (Rezler & Rezmovic, 1981). Social interaction provides the next layer and relates to the individuals preference for social interaction during learning.Reichmann and Grashas (1974) Student Learning Style Sc ale denes learners agree to their type and level of interaction (independent/dependent, collaborative/competitive, and participant/avoidant). The third and more stable layer is info processing style and is draw as the individuals intellectual approach to the processing of discipline. Instruments associated with the measurement of this layer are Kolbs Learning Style Inventory (Kolb, 1976), cognitive Preference Inventory (Tamir & Cohen, 1980) and Inventory of Learning Processes (Schmeck, Ribich, & Ramaniah, 1977).The nal layer described is cognitive personality style. This appears the most robust component, described as a relatively permanent personality dimension ? bare only when an individuals behaviour is sight across many different learning situations (Riding & Cheema, 1991, p. 195). Associated instruments for measurement are the Embedded Figures interrogation (Witkin, 1962), Myers Briggs Type Indicator, (Myers, 1962) and Matching Familiar Figures rivulet (Kagan, 1965). Ri ding and Cheemas Fundamental DimensionsHaving identied in excess of 30 labels used to describe a variety of cognitive and learning styles, Riding and Cheema (1991) propose a broad categorisation of style according to two fundamental dimensions representing the way in which information is processed and be wholistanalytic and loudspeaker systemimager. The wholistanalytic dimension represents the manner in which individuals tend to process information, either as a whole (wholist) or broken down into components parts (analytic). Quoting Nickerson, Perkin, and Smith (1985), Riding and Cheema describe the wholistanalytic dimension using commonly associated terms analytic? eductive, rigorous, constrained, convergent, formal, critical and synthetic wholist? inductive, expansive, unconstrained, divergent, informal, diffuse and creative. The verbaliserimager dimension describes the degree to which individuals tend to represent information as words (verbaliser) or as images (imager). They suggest a number of models of cognitive style which can be subsumed under these dimensions (or families). Table 1 includes examples of these family groupings along with the plane frameworks proposed by Curry (1987) and Rayner and Riding (1997).Riding and Cheema (1991) make the point that many of those styles identied do not give birth heavily in empirical work and that attention has focused on only a sharp number of styles. They conclude that whilst there is relatively little research comparing the various styles, they can at least be placed into the two broad categories of wholistanalytic and verbalimagery. The two fundamental cognitive styles exist 424 S. Cassidy independently and are not contingent upon one another an Imager may be positioned at either end of the wholistanalytic dimension.Riding (1991) has positive the Cognitive Styles outline (CSA) as an mind tool faith the two dimensions. Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Cogn itive-Centred, Activity(Learning)-Centred and temperament-Centred go upes Using Grigerenko and Sternbergs (1995) countersign of style-based theory and research, Rayner and Riding (1997) consider learning style within the framework of personality-centred, cognitive-centred and learning-centred approaches.There is only limited discussion of personality-centred approaches given, according to Rayner and Riding, its limited in? uence in the area and the existence of only a single model (Myers Briggs style model) which explicitly incorpo pass judgment personality as a major factor. Cognitive-centred approaches focus on the identication of styles based on individual difference in cognitive and perceptual surgical operation. The discussion of cognitive-centred approaches attempts to integrate the earlier work of Riding and Cheema (1991), categorising models according to holistanalytic and verbalimager principles. The discussion revisits models considered earlier by Riding and Cheema and extends to include a number of additional models including Ridings (1991) Cognitive Style Analysis (CSA). The CSA is a computerised sound judgement tool which identies an individuals position along some(prenominal) the wholistanalytic dimension and the verbaliserimager dimension. The CSA is an example of a model and instrument of learning style which incorporates the two proposed fundamental dimensions of style.Learning-centred approaches are distinguish on the basis that there is a greater interest in the impact of style on learning in an educational setting, and the organic evolution of new learning-relevant constructs and concepts, often born out of the utilisation of assessment instruments. Rayner and Ridings subsequent discussion of learning-centred approaches is framed around the distinction in the midst of process-based models, preference-based models and cognitive skills-based models.Process models are dened in terms of perceiving and information processing, with Kolbs Experiential Learning Model representing one such approach. Preference models focus on individuals preferences for the learning situation and include preferred time of day for study, temperature, light, preference for group/independent study. Cognitive skills-based approaches are characterised by the desire to apply cognitivecentred models of style to a learning situation. These approaches focus on elddependency, perceptual modality and memory. Further check outs are provided by De Bello (1990) and Swanson (1995).De Bello provides a systematic review of 11 of what he considers major models, selected according to the following criteria represent a historical perspective have in? uenced others re? ect individual practitioners attempts to identify style relate to concurrent issues in education are research oriented or are widely known in the eld. De Bello presents a comprehensive account of those models reviewed with an evaluative component, making this a useful guide for the selecti on of appropriate models for work in the area. Swansons review uses Currys onion model as a framework forEducational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles 425 categorising models and measures according to the outlined component layers of learning style. Swansons article also provides a relatively rare review of the effects of culture and ethnicity on learning style. Currys (1987) review is concerned with the psychometric properties of measures of learning style. Her article examines 21 measures of style, focusing on issues of reli capability and hardship, issues which continue to be raised as a matter of concern in the area (Rayner & Riding, 1997).Whilst each of these reviews offers a slightly different perspective on the topic, the impetus for each of them is the wish to rationalise an area littered with a confusing array of terms, denitions, models, and measures. Theories, Models, and Measures The following discussion of learning style models and instruments is? as is frequently the case? by no means exhaustive. It is, however, fairly comprehensive and includes descriptions of most of the models at least referred to in new-made and signicant review papers (De Bello, 1990 Riding & Cheema, 1991 Rayner & Riding, 1997).The selection process certainly did not centre on identifying models which differed from each other in such a way as to provide alternative perspectives. Rather, the aim is to make a point of report overlaps between different models in order to make explicit the inquire for rationalisation in research and practice and encourage readers to identify further similarities. Whilst it would, conceivably, be possible to cumulate an exhaustive list of instruments, this would probably include many derivatives and adaptations along with a number of instruments without an empirical base and an absence of reliability and validity data.Witkins Field-Dependence/Field-Independence (Wholist uninflected Style Family/ Cognitive-Centred onward motion / Cognitive spirit Style) Model. Field-dependence/eld-independence is essentially an individuals ability to disembed in perceptual tasks? likened to spatial intelligence (Widiger, Knudson, & Rorer, 1980)? and is associated with the ability to disembed in non-perceptual problem solving tasks (Riding and Cheema, 1991). Evidence that eld-dependence was also relevant to intellectual ability as ell as a range of other psychological competencies, such as sense of self, has led to the construct being given the broader label of differentiation. As a style it associated with a general preference for learning in isolation (eld-independence) as opposed to consolidation (elddependence) (Witkin & Goodenough, 1981). Field-independent learners are characterised as operating with an internal frame of reference, intrinsically motivated with self-directed goals, structuring their own learning, and dening their own study strategies.Field-dependent learners on the ot her hand are characterised as relying more on an external frame of reference, are extrinsically motivated, respond get out to clearly dened performance goals, have a necessity for structuring and guidance from the instructor, and a desire to interact with other 426 S. Cassidy learners. These characteristics will clearly have implications for the preferred learning situation and consequently learning outcomes. Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. andfonline. com Measurement. riddles such as the Embedded Figures Test (EFT), involving the disembedding of a casting from its surrounding eld, have been used to measure the construct. Comments. Although it has stimulated a great deal of research in the eld of education in particular, Witkins theory is criticised on the following grounds to generalise performance on perceptual tasks to personality and social behaviour is an over-extension of the theory (Grifths & Sheen, 1992) and that eldindependence? ecause of i ts lavishly correlations with measures of intelligence (Arthur & Day, 1991)? is a measure of ability as opposed to style and therefore is of little value in the eld of cognitive style. Kagans Impulsivity-Re? exivity (Wholist uninflected Style Family / Cognitive-Centred improvement / Cognitive Personality Style) Model and measurement. Impulsivity-re? exivity is measured using the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) which requires familiar line drawing of objects to be matched against several possibilities.Individuals who make quick responses after brie? y see the alternatives are labelled cognitive impulsives while those who scrutinise each alternative before making a nal decision are labelled cognitive re? ectives. Comments. Of note here is the association reported between eld-dependence/eldindependence and impulsivity-re? exivity with a number of studies reporting signicant correlations between MFFT and EFT haves (for example, Massari & Massari, 1973). Re? ctives are reporte d as more eld-independent and impulsives as more eld-dependent (Messer, 1976), indicating a signicant overlap in the two constructs. Convergent-Divergent Styles (WholistAnalytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred admission / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Convergent style is characterised by the generation of the one accepted elucidate answer from the available information and divergent style as a propensity to produce a number of potencyly acceptable solutions to the problem.Measurement. Assessment of convergent thinking is the more straightforward of the two, using banner intelligence tests, multiple-choice items, as well as being inferred from performance on the EFT and MFFT. Because the number of Learning Styles 427 Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com potentially correct answers is used as an index of divergent thinking, tests such as Uses of Objects Test and the Consequences Test are usual methods of assessment.Comments. There ar e a number of suggested implications here that certain subject areas may encourage, and therefore reward, convergent over divergent thinking (that is, science-related disciplines) that there necessitate to be a like-for-like match between teacher and student in terms of preferred style (Hudson, 1966) that, because of the inherent structure and routine in most formal educational settings, divergent thinking proves unpopular with teachers and is discouraged (Getzels & Jackson, 1962).There has been an association drawn between divergent thinking and eld-independence (which is considered to be more creative), given that individuals hit high on divergent thinking also score high on eld independence (Bloomberg, 1971). Holzman and Kleins Leveller-Sharpener Styles (WholistAnalytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Using the degree of complexity with which the individual compasss the task, Holzman and Klein (1954) introduced the style dimensio n levellersharpener.The leveller has a purpose to oversimplify their perceptions of the task, assimilating detail and reducing complexity. In contrast, the sharpener fails to assimilate in effect but instead introduces complexity, treating each piece of detail or event as novel. Assimilation is therefore the dimension dening this particular cognitive style, with levellers and sharpeners being positioned at the extremes of the continuum. Measurement.The failure to assimilate characteristic is demonstrated by the Schematising Test which requires the individual to judge the size of a serial of squares of light which get progressively bigger. The disposition is to underestimate the size of previous squares judged against the current larger squares. Whilst levellers show a particular sensitivity to this effect, sharpeners make more accurate estimations as a consequence of failing to assimilate current and past events (squares of light). Comments.Whilst there is relatively little work utilising the levellersharpener cognitive style (Riding & Cheema, 1991), Riding and Dyer (1983) were able to identify similarities between this style and eld-dependence/independence. Pasks HolistSerialist Style (WholistAnalytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Interestingly, Pask (Pask, 1972 Pask & Scott, 1972) makes the point that Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com 428 S. Cassidy hilst both groups operate through a different process for learning? in the end? both groups achieve a similar level of understanding. Serialists operate a step-bystep approach to learning, choosing to deal only with smaller amounts of information or material at any one time before going on to link these steps and achieve understanding. Holists on the other hand will utilise signicant amounts of information from the start, looking to achieve understanding by identifying and focusing on major patterns or trends in the data.The serialists perceive the learning task in terms of a series of independent discrete topics and issues and focus on developing links between them, but for holists the focus is on the task as a whole. Pask observed the relative characteristics of serialists and holists as serialists? stepby-step, logical linear progression, narrow focus, cautious and critical leading to a tendency to fail to see the task from a world(prenominal) perspective wholists? broad perspective and global strategies resulting in a tendency to make hasty decisions based on insufcient information or analysis. Measurement.Pask and Scott (1972) devised a series of problem-solving tasks which allowed individuals to adopt either a in stages or global approach to solving the task. Individuals adopting a step-by-step strategy to test simple hypotheses were labelled as serialists while holists were those individuals who attempted to reach a quick solution by testing more complex hypotheses. Comments. Riding a nd Cheema (1991) point out that despite being widely accepted, the dimension is based on only a relatively small sample and has not beneted from any empirical work examining its association with other learning styles.Notwithstanding these comments, Pask (1976) did report that holists scored higher on the Analogies Test and Divergence Test than serialists, suggesting possible similarities with the convergent-divergent style dimension. Pavios VerbaliserVisualiser Cognitive Style (VerbaliserImager Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model and measurement. The assertion that individuals have an habitual propensity to process information either verbally or imaginally emanates from dual coding theory (Pavio, 1971) and may have important implications for learning.The verbaliservisualiser cognitive dimension is assessed through tests examining individuals ability to generate information not present but dependent upon the presence of a spontaneous image ( Riding & Taylor, 1976). Individuals capable of responding quickly are considered visualisers and those with slower response rates verbalisers. Evidence exists to support the notion that, whilst the ability to switch between modes exists, some individuals rely heavily on one or other mode (Riding & Cheema, 1991).The fact that individuals have preferences for either visual or verbal thought has implication for learning. Alesandrini (1981) reported that the tendency for visualisation was inversely related to science and verbal analytic Learning Styles 429 ability, while the generally reported nding is that verbalisers learn best from textbased material and visualisers from pictorially presented material (Riding & Buckle, 1990). This suggests that a mismatch between learner and mode of presentation will adversely affect performance.Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Gregorcs Style Delineator (WholistAnalytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Ap proach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Gregorc (1982) describes four distinctive and observable behaviours abstract, concrete, random, and accompanying tendencies. A combination of these tendencies is indicative of individual style. These tendencies are, Gregorc believes, re? ective of in-born predispositions but individuals need to be capable of functioning outside their natural style.Four learning styles are identied concrete sequential, featuring direct, step-by-step, orderly, sensory-based learning concrete random, featuring trial and error, a priori and independent approaches to learning abstract sequential, featuring analytic, logical approaches and a preference for verbal instruction and abstract random, featuring a preference for holistic, visual, experiential, and unstructured learning. Measurement. The Style Delineator is a 40-item self-report inventory involving the rank ordering of sets of words.The format is similar to that of Kolbs (1976) Learning Styles Invent ory and it has been suggested that observation and interviews should be used alongside the instrument to assist in the identication of learning style and preferences (De Bello, 1990). The measure identies an individuals learning style according to Gregorcs model. Comments. Rayner and Riding (1997) argue that the wholistanalytic dimension of cognitive style is present within Gregorcs model. Kaufmanns AssimilatorExplorer Style (WholistAnalytic Style Family / CognitiveCentred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model.The assimilatorexplorer cognitive style (Kaufmann, 1979) denes style in terms of an individuals propensity to solve problems through either novel or familiar strategies. The style was developed around problem-solving behaviour and has a close association with the use of creativity. Measurement. A-E style is measured using a 32-item self-report questionnaire developed by Kauffmann and Martinsen (1991) in which individuals are scored according to their level of apparent desire for novelty (denoting explorers) or familiarity (denoting assimilators) in cognitive function. 30 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Kirtons AdaptionInnovation Style (WholistAnalytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Grounded in an assumption that cognitive style is related to creativity, problem solving and decision-making strategies as well as aspects of personality, Kirton (1994) argued that style develops early in life and remains stable over both time and situation. Kirton introduced an adaptioninnovation dimension along which cognitive style could be measured ith adaptors characterised by the desire to do things better and innovators by the desire to do things differently. Measurement. A-I is assessed using the Kirton AdaptorInnovator Inventory (KAI), a 32-item self-report instrument developed for use with an adult population with both workplace and life experience. Seen as a measure of problem-solving style and creativity, the KAI is in frequent use in the eld of concern and training. Allinson and Hayes IntuitionAnalysis Style (WholistAnalytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model.The Cognitive Style Index was developed by Allinson and Hayes (1996) in an effort to operationalise cognitive style for use in the area of management. It focuses on the dimension of suspicion versus analysis which, Allinson and Hayes argue, represents a superordinate dimension of cognitive style. Hemispheric asymmetry underlies the dimension, with right encephalon orientation characterised by intuition with a tendency for rapid decision making based on feeling and the adoption of a global perspective. Left brain orientation is characterised by analysis where decisions are a result of logical reasoning focusing on detail.Measurement. The CSI is a 38-item self-report questionnaire which provides a score apocalyptical of either a n intuitive or analytic nature. Kolbs Experiential Learning Model ( elmwood) and Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) (Learning-Centred Processed-Based Approach / Information bear upon Style) Model. Kolb (1976, 1984) proposes a four-stage hypothetical learning cycle. Individuals will show a preference for or will cope with some stages better than others and learning is seen as a continuous, inter officious process.The four stages of the ELM are described as concrete experience (CE experiencing) which favours experiential learning abstract conceptualisation (AC thinking) where there is a preference for conceptual and analytical thinking in order to achieve understanding active experimentation (AE doing) involving active trial-and-error learning and re? ective observation (RO re? ecting) where extensive consideration is given to the task and potential solutions before there is any attempt at action. The four learning orientations form two orthogonal bipolar dimensions of learning. Educati onal Psychology 2004. 4419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles 431 The rst dimension is prehension? the grabby of information from experience? and is constituted by the bipolar orientations CEAC. The second dimension described is version? the processing of grasped information? and is constituted by the remaining orientations AERO. Relative positioning along these dimensions denes the learning styles described by Kolb as convergence, divergence, assimilation and accommodation. The individual who adopts a convergent approach uses abstract conceptualisation to drive active experimentation.Action is based on abstract understanding of the task and projected strategies for successful completion of the task. Divergers combine re? ective observation with concrete experience to devise an often creative solution. Divergers are often described as creative learners because of their propensity to consider multiple potential strategies for learning and problem solving. As similators, concerned to begin with with the explanation of their observations, favour abstract conceptualisation and re? ective observation. As such, assimilators seek mainly to rene abstract theories rather than develop workable strategies and solutions.Lastly, Kolb denes the accommodator. Using active experimentation and concrete experience, these individuals have a clear preference for hands-on learning. The accommodator has been described as having a tendency for prompt action and a noted ability for adapting to diverse situations (Lynch, Woel? , Steele, & Hanssen, 1998). Measurement. before developed as a 9-item self-report graduated table (Kolb, 1976), the rewrite LSI (Kolb, 1985) is a 12-item self-report questionnaire. Respondents are required on each of the items to rank four sentence endings corresponding to each of the four learning styles.LSI scores re? ect an individuals relative fury on the four learning orientations and enable categorisation according to the corr esponding learning style. Two combination scores measure an individuals preference for abstractness over concreteness (ACCE) and action over re? ection (AERO). Comments. Assertions that the styles outlined by Kolb will be associated with student performance have been borne out in a number of studies where, for example, convergers perform better on conventional examinations involving concrete answers (Lynch et al. , 1998).Despite such support, studies examining the psychometric properties of the LSI have raised concerns regarding its reliability and validity (Freedman & Stumpf, 1981 Geiger, Boyle, & Pinto, 1992 Geller, 1979 Newstead, 1992 Sims, Veres, Watson, & Buckner, 1986). Kolbs emphasis on experiential learning and the developmental nature of learning suggests a potential for change in style (Rayner & Riding, 1997). Studies which have examined stability and change using the LSI present a mixed picture. Low test-retest reliability statistics and changes in style classication rep orted by Sims et al. 1986) are countered by reports of exceptionally high test-retest reliability of 0. 99 found by Veres, Sims, and Locklear (1991). Although also reporting high test-retest reliability 432 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com statistics, Loo (1997) is cautious about them, believe that inappropriate statistical techniques may be masking individual changes in style in favour of group effects. The ELM forms the basis of the work of Honey and Mumford (1986) in the eld of learning style and management and the development of their Learning Styles Questionnaire.Honey and Mumfords Learning Styles Questionnaire (Learning-Centred ProcessedBased Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Honey and Mumfords (1992) description and measurement of learning style is grounded in Kolbs experiential learning model, with styles closely corresponding to those dened by Kolb. The Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ) was developed fo r use with management trainees and has been proposed as an alternative to Kolbs LSI. The four learning styles measured by the LSQ are activist (Kolbs active experimentation) re? ctor (Kolbs re? ective observation) theorist (Kolbs abstract conceptualisation and pragmatist (Kolbs concrete experience). Measurement. The LSQ is an 80-item self-report inventory based on Kolbs ELM but developed specically for use in industry and management. Individuals tendency towards a preferred learning style is indicated by their ratings of behavioural and preference orientations. Comments. Although developed for use with management trainees, the LSQ has been used in a range of settings including education.However, concerns regarding the psychometric qualities of the LSQ have been raised. Duff and Duffy (2002) report a failure to support the existence of either the bipolar dimensions or learning styles proposed by Honey and Mumford and found the LSQ to have only modest levels of internal consistency ( ranging from 0. 52 to 0. 73 for the four style subscales). Given that their sample was 388 undergraduate students, Duff and Duffy conclude the LSQ is not an acceptable alternative to the LSI and that its use in the eld of higher education is premature.Vermunts Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) (Learning-Centred Processed-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Vermunt (1992) describers the concept of learning style in terms of processing strategies, including an awareness of the aims and objectives of the learning exercise used to determine what is learnt regulation strategies, which serve to monitor learning mental models of learning, encompassing the learners perceptions of the learning process and learning orientations, described as personal aims, intentions and expectations based on past experience of learning.Based on these strategies and orientations, Vermunt derives four learning styles undirected, Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandf online. com Learning Styles 433 where there is difculty in assimilating learning material, coping with the olume of material and prioritising the importance of components of the material reproduction, where little or no effort is made to understand but instead information is reproduced to complete the task or achieve the minimum required measuring stick application directed, which is characterised by the application of learning material to concrete situations in order to gain understanding and lastly, importee directed learning, which involves attempts to gain a deeper understanding of learning material and to draw on existing and related knowledge to achieve critical understanding.Vermunts Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) was developed as a diagnostic tool for use in a higher education context. Measurement. The degree to which each of the four styles is favoured is assessed using Vermunts LSI (Vermunt, 1994). The LSI comprises 20 subscales and 120 items relating to study strategie s, motives and mental models. Individuals respond to statements along a ve-point scale according to the degree to which the statement is descriptive of their behaviour or the extent to which they agree with the statement.Comments. Vermunts (1992) own reports of acceptable reliability and validity of the LSI received some support form Busato, Prins, Elshout, and Hamaker (1998) who conrmed the existence of four factors corresponding to learning styles described by Vermunt. The in? uence of Kolb, Honey and Mumford, and Entwistle and Tait (see down the stairs) all seem present in Vermunts approach to the assessment of learning styles. Entwistle et al. s Approaches to Study Inventory (Learning-Centred Process-Based Approach / Information Processing Style)Model. Based on earlier work by Marton and Saljo (1976) Entwistle, Hanley, and Hounsel (1979) developed an instrument for assessing learning style which focuses on the level of engagement or depth of processing applied during learning. The proposed model centres around four modes of orientation of the learner meaning orientation reproduction orientation achieving orientation and holistic orientation. Tendencies towards particular combinations of orientations identify individuals as conforming to one of he following learning styles deep (intention to understand, relating ideas, use of evidence, and active learning) surface (intention to reproduce, unrelated memorising, passive learning, and fear of failure) strategic (study organisation, time management, alertness to assessment demands, and intention to excel) and apathetic (lack of focus and lack of interest). Measurement. The original 64-item ASI has undergone a number of revisions, its most radical in 1994 when it was abbreviated to 38 items, and then to 44 items in 434 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. om 1995 (Entwistle & Tait, 1995). The revised ASI (RASI) is a 44-item self-report inventory of learning activ ities using a Likert scale response format. The RASI now identies six approaches to learning deep approach surface approach strategic approach lack of direction academic self-condence and metacognitive awareness of studying. Comments. The ASI inventory has been used extensively in educational research and a recent study examining the psychometric properties of the RASI and its utility in an educational setting recommends its continued use for educational management and research (Duff, 2000).Biggs Study Processes Questionnaire (SPQ) (Learning-Centred Process-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model and measurement. Entwistles model was further developed by Biggs (1985) to incorporate an extended motivational dimension dened as intrinsic, extrinsic and achievement orientation. Biggs study processes measure includes both a strategy dimension? deep/surface? and a motivational dimension? deep/surface. Measurement. Originally a 42-item self-report questionnaire, the revised tw o-factor SPQ (Biggs, Kember, & Leung, 2001) has 20 items and provides scores in relation to strategy (deep/surface) and otive (deep/surface). An overall composite score is indicative of a consistently deep or surface approach to learning. Achieving approach is no semipermanent separated out as in earlier versions. Schmecks Inventory of Learning Processes (ILP) (Learning-Centred Process-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Schmeck et al. s (1977) learning processes style construct is developed around the public opinion that it is the quality of thinking during learning which affects the learning outcome.Like the models proposed by Entwistle and Biggs, the learning process model follows the work of Marton and Saljo (1976), focusing on learning orientations with an emphasis on information processing (Duff, 2000). The four subscales of the ILP are synthesisanalysis elaborative processing fact property and study methods (Rayner & Riding, 1997). Measurement. The ILP was originally a 62-item self-report inventory with the four subscales identied above. A revised version (ILP-R) has clx items and seven subscales (Schmeck, Geisler-Brenstein, & Cercey, 1991).However, each version of the ILP has come under heavy criticism and Richardson (2000) concludes that the ILP cannot be recommended for use in investigating student learning. Learning Styles 435 Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Hunt et al. s Conceptual Level Model (Learning-Centred Process-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Hunt, Butler, Noy, and Rosser (1978) described learning style in terms of an individuals need for structure and the conditions under which that individual will learn most effectively.Students requiring a highly structured learning environment, who are impulsive and concrete, are described as having a low conceptual level (CL). lavishly CL students are independent, inquiring, self-assertive, and have little or no ne ed for structure. The aim of the model therefore is to match students learning style with the most appropriate methods of teaching. Measurement. The Paragraph Completion Test requires individuals to complete and elaborate on six incomplete sentences.Because responses are scored according to their degree of complexity, scoring and interpretation of the test requires medical specialist training (De Bello, 1990). Comments. Suedfeld and Coren (1992) reported an association between conceptual level and divergent thinking and support the existence of the construct as a cognitive style rather than a mental ability. Some evidence for the validity of the CL model was presented by McLachlan and Hunt (1973) who found that low CL students showed signicant benet in their learning from a high as opposed to a low structure teaching method.It was also reported that teaching method did not impact signicantly on learning in high CL students. In line with such ndings, Hunt believes that although teac hing needs to be geared towards students learning style to facilitate learning, there may be a developmental component to style which would allow for teaching methods to become gradually less structured to encourage more independent learning. Dunn et al. s Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) (Learning-Centred Preference-Based Approach / Instructional Preference / Social Interaction)Model and measurement. Dunn, Dunn and Prices (1989) LSI is a 100-item selfreport questionnaire asking individuals to respond to items relating to the key factors of the construct environmental (light, sound, temperature, and design) emotional (structure, persistence, motivation, and responsibility) sociological (pairs, peers, adults, self, and group) physical (perceptual strengths auditory, visual, tactile, kinaesthetic, mobility, intake, and time of day) and psychological (global-analytic, impulsive-re? ctive, and cerebral dominance). Versions of the scale have been developed for use with primary and seconda ry school children and with adults (the Productivity Environmental Preferences Survey). The factors are reported independently to provide proles which can be used to guide the construction of the learning situation, material and teaching approach. 436 S. Cassidy Comments. Currys (1987) review of different learning/cognitive style models reports the LSI as having one of the highest reliability and validity ratings.The LSI has also been identied as being practitioner oriented and the most widely used assessment for learning style in elementary and secondary schools (Keefe, 1982). Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Riechmann and Grashas (1974) Style of Learning Interaction Model (LearningCentred Preference-Based Approach / Instructional Preference / Social Interaction) Model. Described as a social interaction scale (Jonassen & Grabowski, 1993), the style of learning interaction model focuses on learner preferences but introduces social and aff ective dimensions to the measurement of style.The three dimensions described by the model are avoidant-participant competitivecollaborative and dependentindependent. The model incorporates the belief that style is, to some degree, ? uid and will alter according to the learning situation. Measurement. The Student Learning Styles Scale (SLSS) is a 90-item scale presented in two versions, one to assess class style and one to assess individual style. Comments. Rayner and Riding (1997) note the similarity between the style of learning interaction model and the model proposed by Dunn et al. (1989) because of the focus on learning preferences.Ramirez and Castenadas (1974) Child Rating Form (Learning-Centred Cognitive Skills-Based Approach / Cognitive Personality Style / Instructional Preference / Social Interaction) Model and measurement. The model incorporates the cognitive style dimension eld-dependence/eld-independence (Witkin, 1962) and focuses particularly on cultural differences and minority groups. Field-independence is viewed as positive because its associated traits (detail orientated, independent and sequential) are those which Ramirez believes are rewarded by schools.The Child Rating Form is a direct observation tool measuring behaviour frequencies which is completed by teachers or can be completed as a self-report questionnaire by the student. The Edmunds Learning Style Identication compute (ELSIE) (Reinert, 1976) (Learning-Centred Cognitive Skills-Based Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model and measurement. Described as a form of assessment which aims to provide the teacher with information which will be used to work to the students strengths or preferred mode of responding to learning stimuli (Rayner & Riding, 1997, p. 9), the ELSIE aims to identify the individuals natural perceptual modality in the context of a learning situation. The 50 one-word items of the instrument assess Learning Styles 437 response in terms of imagery, verbalisation, so und, and affect. Similarities between ELSIE and several other models including those of Dunn et al. (1989), Hill (1976) and Keefe and Monks (1986 the NASSP-LSP) have been noted. Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. comHills Cognitive Style Interest Inventory (Learning-Centred Cognitive Skills-Based Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Dening learning style in terms of the unique way in which an individual searches for meaning, Hill (1976) used a process of cognitive style mapping, attempting to establish perceptual modality (auditory/visual), modalities of demonstration (such as critical thinking and hypothesis testing), and cultural determinants in order to integrate learning style with curriculum design. Hill labelled the resulting construct educational cognitive style.Measurement. The Cognitive Style Interest Inventory is a 216-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess educational cognitive style using the following categori es symbols and their meaning (perceptual modality) modalities of inference and cultural determinants. There is also an interview component to the measure. Comments. The instrument itself suffers from a lack of empirical support (Jonassen & Grabowski, 1993), poor reliability and validity (Curry, 1987) and has been criticised for the elaborate and time-consuming nature of the instrument (De Bello, 1990).De Bello (1990) draws comparisons between Hills model and both Ramirez and Castenadas (1974) model, because of the identication of cultural differences, and Dunn et al. s (1989) model because of the in? uence of peer and family orientation. Letteris Learner Types (Learning-Centred Cognitive Skills-Based Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Viewing learning essentially as information processing involving the effective storage and recovery of information, Letteri (1980) was concerned with the diagnosis of ineffective cognitive processing and advocated interventions teaching eff ective cognitive skills.The model identied three types of learner Type 1 is re? ective and analytic Type 3 is impulsive and global with a lack of direction and Type 2 falls midway between Types 1 and 3 in approach to learning. Letteri provided evidence linking Type 1 learners with above average and type 3 learners with below average academic success. Measurement. Letteris instrument represents a number of existing cognitive dimensions, including eld-independence/eld-dependence, impulsivityre? exivity, 438 S. Cassidy scanning/ counseling and levelling/sharpening, which are assessed through a series of bipolar continuums.In general, bipolar extremes correspond to either wholist (global) or analytic characteristics. Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Keefe and Monks (1986) Learning Style Prole (Learning-Centred Cognitive SkillsBased Approach / Cognitive Personality Style, Instructional Preference and Social Interaction) Model. Keefe and Monks (1986) Learning Style Prole (LSP) was the result of extensive re-examination of existing learning style models with the aim of developing a single instrument capable of assessing learning style across the range of already established characteristics.The LSP assesses style in three areas cognitive skills, including information processing and memory perceptual response to visual and auditory stimuli and study and instructional preferences, including motivation and environmental preferences. The model is intended for use in the development of educational programmes and focuses on the development of effective cognitive skills for learning. Measurement. The LSP is a 126-item assessment tool for secondary students which includes self-report items and cognitive tasks (derived from the EFT).Responses are computer scored and provide students with an individual learning style prole. Comments. Not surprisingly, given its origins, the LSP has been found to gibe signicantly with other instrumen ts, most notably Dunn et al. s (1989) LSI and Reinharts (1976) ELSIE (Curry, 1987 Keefe & Monks, 1986). Commenting on these reported correlations, De Bello (1990) notes Currys (1987) concerns regarding the reliability and validity of ELSIE. Learning Styles in Action? Some Examples Interest in dening, characterising and studying the associated effects of learning style results? ainly? from its distinction from ability and its association with performance. Whereas the relationship between ability and performance is relatively straightforward, such that performance improves with increased ability, the effects of style on performance are contingent on the nature of the task. For example, imagers are likely to perform better on pictorially-based tasks than on verbal-based tasks (Riding, 1997). In support of the independence of learning style and intelligence, Riding and Pearson (1994) found that there were no signicant correlations between intelligence? s measured by the British Abilitie s Scale? and the wholistanalytic and verbalimager dimensions of learning style. A less clear distinction between learning style and personality is presented (Riding & Wigley, 1997), although only a probationary link is reported. The identication of an individual characteristic, separate form Learning Styles 439 ability, which impacts on learning performance has led to the application of learning style theory and measurement in a number of diverse areas. Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. andfonline. com Academic Achievement Cassidy and Eachus (2000) used the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (Tait & Entwistle, 1996) to measure learning style in undergraduate students. They found that academic achievement was positively correspond with a strategic approach, negatively correlated with an apathetic approach, and unrelated to a deep approach to learning. Learning style was also found to correlate signicantly with other academic performance-re lated factors such as academic self-efcacy and academic locus of control.Clinical Training in medical Schools McManus, Richards, Winder, and Sproston (1998) found, in a large-scale prospective study of two cohorts of medical students at a London medical school, that the students learning styles, but not their nal examination results, were related to the amount of knowledge gained from clinical experience. Using an abbreviated 18-item version of the Study Process Questionnaire (Biggs, 1987) they reported positive correlations between strategic and deep learning styles and amount of knowledge gained from clinical experience. Career DevelopmentIn reviewing weaknesses in current practices within industry towards the retention and development of individuals labelled as high ? yers, Bates (1994) lists learning style as one key factor. Bates cites Honey and Mumfords (1986) model of learning style as an appropriate model for individual learning and one capable of encompassing a framework fo r high ? yer development. In the move to cultivate the top managers of the future, Bates calls for individual learning styles to be taken into account through the provision of a variety of learning situations which should create the opportunity for the development of a full range of styles.Police Training In a review of existing methods of police training in the U. S. , Birzer (2003) criticises traditional behavioural approaches in favour of instructional methods which recognise individual differences in learning. Citing recent studies identifying individual approaches to learning, Birzer illustrates the paradoxical way in which much police training is currently delivered with little regard for individual differences in learning, and calls for a more student-centred approach to training in the future.These examples illustrate the range of potential applications of learning style and underline the need to promote clarication and rationalisation in the eld. 440 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Working with Learning Style The researcher or practitioner entering the area of learning style may well do so with some sense of trepidation given the volume, diversity and apparent dissociation of writing, theory and empiricism in the eld. De Bello (1990) notes that there exist almost as many denitions as there do theorists in the area.For the academic concerned with pure theory this may offer an excite