« Per Linguas Communitas » (Society Through Language) (Société de par le langage)

« Per Linguas Communitas »(Society Through Language)

(Société de par le langage)

Canadian Forces Language SchoolÉcole de langues des Forces canadiennes

THE DYNAMIC BETWEENLEARNING STYLE and TEACHING STYLE

Presented by / présenté par :

Roksolana BaranPedagogical Advisor (Military Training and Cooperation Program)

CFLS Detachment Saint-Jean

2 Canadian Forces Language School / École de langues des Forces canadiennes

• Introduction

• Learning Style

• Teaching Style

• Dynamic between Learning Style and Teaching Style

• What now……

The Dynamic between Learning Style and Teaching Style


Why the interest in learning styles?

Student-centered education /

language teaching

Introduction


Learning Style

Definitions:

• “The ways in which an individual characteristically acquires, retains, and retrieves information…” (Felder, 1995)

• “The cognitive, affective, and psychological traits that are relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with and respond to the learning environment.” (Keefe, 1979)


Components Of Learning Style

• cognitive processing habits;• personality traits;

• perceptual responses;

• study preferences;

• instructional preferences;

•culture;•educational background;•popular wisdom; and•time spent in the target language country (e.g. USA, Canada)

EX: Notion of “face” in Asian cultures: focus on accuracy; little participation; minimal exchange: kinaesthetic, tactile & individual styles (Melton, 1990)


Learning Style Models

1. Kolb’s Model2. Gregorc’s Model3. Fleming’s Model4. Reid’s Model


Experiential learning: learning as “...the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience.

4 styles:

Diverger: likes divergent ideas; imaginative learners;Converger: likes technical tasks rather than social issues; strong practical orientation;Assimilator: likes abstract ideas; inductive reasoning;Accommodator: likes executing plans; risk-takers; intuitive;(Kolb,1984)

Kolb’s Model (Father of LS movement)




Measurement Instrument: Learning Style Inventory (LSI)

Critiques:• no adequate address of process of reflection;• claims about the 4 styles are very crude and unrefined;• insufficiently addresses cultural conditions &

experiences;

Kolb’s Model



LS as “..distinctive and observable behaviour that provides clues about the mediation abilities of individuals and how their minds relate to the world and therefore, how they learn.” (Gregorc, 1979)

Based on learning as perceiving and ordering:• 2 perceptual qualities: concrete & abstract• 2 ordering abilities: random & sequential

Ex: concrete-sequential; random-sequential

Gregorc’s Model



Measurement Instrument: Gregorc’s Style Delineator (GSD)

Critiques:• Psychometrically flawed;• Very unreliable for assessing individuals

Gregorc’s Model



LS as ``…an individual`s characteristic and preferred ways of gathering, organizing, and thinking about information.`` (Fleming, 2001)

VARK Model: perceptual modes:

Visual: maps, charts, diagrams, highlighter etc.Aural: explain new ideas to others, discuss, tape, etc.Read/Write: lists, essays, textbooks, handouts, etc.Kinaesthetic (tactile): field trips, labs, hands-on, etc.

Fleming’s Model



Measurement Instrument: VARK Learning Style Test - A Self-Reporting Questionnaire

Critiques:• Lack of independent research on the model

Fleming’s Model



Perceptual Learning Styles: (most widely accepted in applied linguistics)

• Visual : prefer seeing things in writing;• Auditory: prefer listening, (e.g. oral explanations);• Kineasthetic: prefer active participation (e.g. drama, role-play);• Tactile: prefer hands-on work, (e.g. taking notes, handling materials);• Group: prefer studying with others;• Individual: prefer studying alone.

Reid’s Model



Measurement Instrument: Self-Reporting QuestionnairePerceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire(PLSPQ 1987)

Research: most students correctly identify their learningstrengths/preferences particularly when an element isstrongly preferred or rejected. (Dunn, 1984)

Critiques:• Practical, immediately transferable to the classroom through

teaching practices, syllabus design and other instructional needs; and

• Based on learner input which has been proven to be reliable.

Reid’s Model


Learning Style Adaptability

• Young adult & adult learning styles are moderately strong habits rather than intractable biological attributes – can be modified and extended (Davidman,1981).

• More mature students learn intuitively to adjust to instructor cognitive styles (Dorsey & Pearson, 1984)

• Style shifting occurs when the same person responds to different contexts (Tarone, 1979)

• Learners stick with familiar styles even when these are inappropriate (Reid,1995; Kinsella, 1994)


Teaching Style

Definitions:

• “Teacher’s personal behaviours and media used to transmit data or receive it from the learner.”(Kaplan & Kies,1995).

• “Natural, habitual and preferred ways of teaching new information and skills in the classroom.” (Peacock,

2001)


Teaching Styles

• Formal Authority: teacher-centered; T feels responsible for providing and controlling information which S receives passively;

• Expert: teacher-centered; posses knowledge and expertise which Students need; makes a display of detailed knowledge;

• Demonstrator/Personal Model: teacher-centered; Teacher demonstrates what is needed and expected; some Student participation welcome;

• Facilitator: student-centered; T facilitates and focuses activities; Ss play independent, active and collaborative roles in classroom;

• Delegator: student-centered; T concerned with developing Students` capacity to function autonomously; Students work autonomously on projects or as part of teams;

(Kaufman, 2003; Grasha, 1996)

5 basic teaching styles


Origins of Teaching Styles

• All Teachers have their own style which can be identified (Reid, 1987)

• Teachers teach in the way they were taught or learned best (Oxford, 1992)

• Teachers emulate teachers they admired (Kinsella, 1994)

• Teachers also product of culture, personality, education (Felder, 1995)


The Dynamic BetweenLearning Style and Teaching Style

• Students & Teachers experience style conflicts 82% of the time (Wallace & Oxford, 1992 )

• 72% Students said they felt unhappy or frustrated when teaching style differed from their learning style;

• 76% of students claimed that their ESL/EFL learning was negatively affected when there was a style mismatch; (Peacock, 2001)


Match or Not

• Mismatch between learning style & teaching style causes learning failure, frustration & demotivation; (Felder, 1995)

• When there is a match between learning and teaching style, Student motivation & achievement usually improves; (Spolsky, 1989)

• Matching learning and teaching style promotes more efficient language acquisition. (Peacock, 2001)

Arguments for matching


Match or Not

• Matching means favouring one style over another;

• More effective to design curriculum so that every type of learner can engage with the material (Ehrman

& Oxford, 1990);

• “Stretching” learning styles – forcing learners to adjust their cognitive styles – guided style-stretching (Peacock, 2001);

• The more modalities a Student uses to learn, the deeper the processing of the information (Reid, 1995)

On the other hand


Students Retain...

10% of what they read;

26% of what they hear;

30% of what they see;

50% of what they see & hear;

70% of what they say;

90% of what they say as they do something.

(Stice, 1987)


What Now...

The way to go:

BALANCED TEACHING STYLE

(Felder, 1995; Oxford, 1992; Peacock, 2001)


Meaning what...

• Teachers MUST be aware of Learners’ needs, capabilities, potential & learning style preferences;

• Structure classes so all “learning styles are accommodated”; and

• Conscious accommodation.

(Oxford,1990)

Multi-Style Approach - Classroom Solutions


Meaning what...

• Students should be exposed to the concept of Learning Styles:

• Unconscious or subconscious learning styles can become conscious learning strategies;

• Students must be permitted to assess their own learning preferences and their effects on learning and in so doing be encouraged to diversify through conscious use of different learning strategies; and

• Learners should be encouraged to diversify through conscious use of different learning strategies;

(Reid, 1987)



Meaning what...

• Teachers can show students the versatility of learning styles by providing experiences in different teaching styles.

(Smith & Renzulli, 1984);

• Consciously teach different strategiesExample: Administer a strategy inventory: Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL).

(Oxford, 1990)



Meaning what...

Why bother...• Providing options vis-à-vis learning activities in class

gives Students a sense of control over learning;

• Encourages autonomy in their learning;

• Promotes self-knowledge and awareness;

RESULT: optimized learning experience



Meaning what...

• Devising alternative instructional situations to accommodate different learning styles;

• Making teachers more aware of both learning and teaching styles through teacher training, professional development, and assessment.

(Peacock, 2001)

Multi-Style Approach - Curricular Solutions


Meaning what...

Can this information be used to optimize the learning/teaching experience……

- part of evaluation;- professional development;

Examples:

Our School



THANK YOU!THANK YOU!



References

Davidman, L. (1981) Learning style: The myth, the panacea, the wisdom. Phi Delta Kappan, 62:641-645.

Dorsey. O.L. & Pierson, M.J. (1984) A descriptive study of adult learning styles in a non-traditional education program. Lifelong Learning: An Omnibus of Practice and Research, 7: 8-11.

Dunn, R. (1984).Learning style: State of the scene. Theory into Practice, 23: 10-19.

Ehrman, M & Oxford, R. (1990) Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. The Modern Language Journal. 74: 311-327.

Felder, R.M. (1995) Learning and teaching styles in foreign and second language education. Foreign Language Annals 28.1: 21-31.

Fleming, N.D. (2001). Teaching and Learning Styles: VARK Strategies. Christchurch, New Zealand: N.D. Fleming

Grasha, A. (1996) Teaching with style. Pittsburgh, PA: Alliance Publishers. P. 154-156.

Gregorc, A.F. (1979) Learning/Teaching styles: Potent forces behind them. Educational Leadership, 36,234-236.

Gregorc, A.F. (1997) Relating with Style. Columbia, CT: Gregorc Associates.

Kaplan, E.J. & Kies, D.A. (1995) Teaching styles and learning styles: which came first. Journal of Instructional Psychology. March.

Keefe, J.W. (1979) Learning style: an overview. In J.W. Keefe, Student learning styles: diagnosing and prescribing programs. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals. 1-7.


The Dynamic betweenLearning Style and Teaching Style

Kinsella,, K. (1995) Understanding and empowering diverse learners in ESL classrooms. In J.M. Reid, Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. 170-94.

Kolb, D. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Melton, C.D. (1990). Bridging the cultural gap: a study of Chinese students` learning style preferences. RELC Journal 21 (1): 29-58.

Oxford, R.L. (1990) Missing Link: Evidence from research on language learning styles and strategies. In Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1990. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Oxford, R.L. (1992). Who are our students: A synthesis of foreign and second language research on individual differences. TESL Canada Journal, 9(2): 30-49.

Peacock, M. (2001). Match or mismatch: Learning styles and teaching styles in EFL. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(1): 1-20.

Reid, J.M. (1985). Perceptual Learning style preferences of international students. National NAFSA Conference, Cincinnati


The Dynamic betweenLearning Style and Teaching Style

Reid, J.M. (1987). The learning style preferences of ESL Students. TESOL Quarterly, 21(1): 87-111.

Reid, J.M. (1995) Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. U.S.A.: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Smith, L. & Renzulli, J. (1984). Learning style preference: A practical approach for classroom teachers. Theory into Practice, 23(1), 45-50.

Spolsky, B. (1989) Conditions for second language learning. Oxford University Press.

Stice, J.E. (1987) Using Kolb`s learning cycle to improve student learning. Engineering Education. 77:29: 1-296.

Tarone, E. (1979). Interlanguage as chameleon. Language Learning, 29:181-191.

Wallace, B. & Oxford, R.L. (1992). Disparity in learning styles and teaching styles in the ESL classroom: Does this mean war? AMTESOL Journal 1: 45-68.

Documents

« Per Linguas Communitas » (Society Through Language) (Société de par le langage)