Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of Kent]On: 16 November 2014, At: 18:18Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Community College Journal of Researchand PracticePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ucjc20
The Relationship Between LatinoStudents' Learning Styles and TheirAcademic PerformanceSonia Maldonado Torres aa Early Childhood Department , Hostos Community College , Bronx ,New York , USAPublished online: 27 Dec 2013.
To cite this article: Sonia Maldonado Torres (2014) The Relationship Between Latino Students'Learning Styles and Their Academic Performance, Community College Journal of Research andPractice, 38:4, 357-369, DOI: 10.1080/10668926.2012.761072
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2012.761072
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
The Relationship Between Latino Students’ Learning Stylesand Their Academic Performance
Sonia Maldonado Torres
Early Childhood Department, Hostos Community College, Bronx, New York, USA
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between Latino students’ learning styles
and their academic performance. Students’ academic performance was measured using their overall
grade point average (GPA). A group of 229 Latino students who were enrolled at an urban com-
munity college in New York City participated in the study. Two questionnaires were used to identify
students’ learning styles; the Learning Style Inventory (LSI) developed by Kolb (2000), and the
Productivity Environmental Preference Survey (PEPS) developed by Dunn, Dunn, and Price (2003).
The results of the LSI showed no relationship between students’ learning styles and their GPA.
Results of the PEPS showed a relationship between four of the PEPS’ elements and the students’
GPA. The elements of Responsible (r¼ .174, p¼ .015) and Design (r¼ .162, p¼ .009) positively
correlated with participants’ GPA. Conversely, the elements of Needs Mobility (r¼� .137,
p¼ .008) and Afternoon (r¼� .175, p¼ .039) negatively correlated with the participants’ GPA.
This study reinforced the premise that Latino students’ learning styles must be taken into consider-
ation when developing educational approaches geared to support their academic performance.
Findings of the study clearly indicated that students’ academic performance is related to the way
they learn.
According to the United States Census Bureau, in the year 1910, the total population of the
United States consisted of 92.2 million people (Day, 1996). Presently, the overall population
has increased to 300 million people (Day). This change in population is attributed to an influx
of different ethnic groups into the United States (Day). The U.S. Census Bureau indicated that
approximately one in three United States residents is a member of a racial group other than
White (Day). Latinos are the largest minority group in the United States with a population of
44.3 million. Blacks are the second-largest minority group, with a total of 40.2 million. Asian
people represent 14.9 million, while Native Americans and Alaska Natives comprise 4.5 million
of the population. This change in population has had an impact upon the demographic mix of
students in the United States educational system (Day).
In 1996, the U.S. Census Bureau predicted that Latinos would be the second fastest-growing
population in the United States (Day, 1996). This trend changed from Latinos being the second
Address correspondence to Sonia Maldonado Torres, Assistant Professor, Early Childhood Department, Hostos
Community College, City University of New York (CUNY), P.O. Box 1616, Bronx, NY 12551-1616. E-mail:
Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 38: 357–369, 2014
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1066-8926 print=1521-0413 online
DOI: 10.1080/10668926.2012.761072
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
group with the largest increase in number to becoming the minority group with the greatest
increase in population in the United States. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, this change
is attributed to an increase in both births and immigration (Day). From 1990 to 2010, an increase
of 25.4 million Latinos was reported. As the number of Latino students attending K–12 schools
and community colleges in the United States is increasing (Gonzalez-Sullivan, 2007), it is
imperative for educators and policymakers to implement methods and create conditions by
which to raise their educational attainment; otherwise, their lack of educational achievement will
be detrimental to American society at large (Brown, Santiago, & Lopez, 2003).
According to statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau, California has the largest Latino popu-
lation of any state in the nation, with 13.1 million Latinos; followed by Texas, with 8.4 million;
New York has 3.2 million; and Florida has 3 million. On the other hand, the Black population is
mainly concentrated in three states: New York, with 3.5 million; Florida, with 3 million; and
Texas, with 2.9 million (Day, 1996). Latinos represent the majority of the student body in some
of the largest school districts in the United States (Tapia, 2004; Trueba, 1987). Nevertheless, the
U.S. Census Bureau data show that more than one-quarter of Latinos living in the United States
have completed less than a ninth-grade education (Ryan & Siebens, 2012). The percentage of
Latino high-school dropouts is alarmingly higher than that for Caucasian students (Brown
et al., 2003; Chavez & Yzaguirre, 2003; Suarez-Orozco; 2001; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco,
1995). According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Latinos comprise 14.7% of the total dropouts of
the nation, more than double the rate for Whites (7%); this is significantly higher than the per-
centage of Blacks who drop out of high school (8.2%) (Ryan & Siebens, 2012). According to the
educational attainment statistics for the 25-year-old population in the United States for year
2009, only 32% of the Latino population possesses at least a high school diploma (Ryan &
Siebens). In contrast, 73.6% of White 25-year-olds hold a high school diploma (Ryan &
Siebens).
In addition, college enrollment, retention, and graduation rates present a large problem for the
Latino population (Chavez & Yzaguirre, 2003). Only 19.1% of Latinos have completed a
bachelor’s degree (Ryan & Siebens, 2012). The problem of retaining and supporting the aca-
demic success of Latino students in the realm of higher education has not been adequately
addressed. One way to support Latino students’ academic improvement is to develop and insti-
tute educational strategies that are more congruent with their needs (Almader, 2000). As a result,
this research will focus on the relationship between Latino students’ academic performance as
measured by their GPAs and their preferred way of learning, or learning styles.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This study explored the relationship between the learning styles and the academic performance
of a group of Latino students attending a community college in New York City. This study had
two purposes: (a) to discover the relationship between academic performance and the learning
styles of Latino students enrolled at an urban community college in a northeastern state; and
(b) to help both students and teachers become more aware of learning styles in order to improve
students’ academic performance. The information provided in this study supported the develop-
ment of individualized learning approaches for Latino students at the community college in
which the study took place.
358 S. M. TORRES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
Due to the projected increase of the Latino population in the higher education system,
particularly in the community colleges (Gonzalez-Sullivan, 2007), educators will need to
develop different approaches to fulfill these students’ diverse educational needs and demands.
Being that the Latino population is the fastest-growing ethnic group in the United States, with
16.3% of the nation’s population (Day, 1996), the academic success of this group should be an
important topic for Americans to consider, as the future of this country will rely to some extent
on the educational achievement of this particular group of students (Trueba, 1987).
A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Learning Styles
Sleeter and Grant (1999) stated that each student has a unique learning style, and teachers should
incorporate students’ learning styles into classroom activities. They also suggested that teachers
need to support students in discovering their own particular styles of learning in order to enhance
students’ academic performance. Researchers have emphasized the need for educational reform
to support the academic reality of Latino students in the United States (Nieto, 1999; Suarez &
Orozco, 1995; Trueba, 1987). According to Johnson (2006), one of the principles that could be
applied to support the academic achievement of community college students would be for edu-
cators to ‘‘customize’’ (p. 97) the process of learning. Johnson suggested that if educators could
teach toward each student’s learning style and learning preference, students could enhance their
academic attainment. Nieto (1999) indicated that one of the strategies that could help Latino stu-
dents to complete their education is for teachers to acknowledge the learning differences or
styles that students bring into the classroom. According to Nieto (1999), learning styles refersto the differences that students exhibit in taking in and processing information. Nietostated that
the way in which Latino students learn ‘‘may in effect be due to what is valued in their culture’’
(p. 112). Nieto also stated that the recognition of the differences in learning could represent a
challenge to teachers, because they would have to utilize the different mental organizations that
students bring to the classroom, rather than imposing new and unknown ones.
Learning Styles and Ethnicity
Vazquez (1985) explored the relationship between Puerto Rican students’ learning styles and
their academic performance. This study was conducted with 507 high-risk adult students in
an urban community college in the northern part of Puerto Rico. The purpose of the study
was to identify students’ learning styles in order to help them succeed in school. The Pro-
ductivity Environmental Preference Survey (PEPS), developed by Dunn and Dunn (1983),
was used to identify students’ environmental preferences. According to Vazquez (1985), this
study helped to measure environmental factors such as the following:
(a) classroom environment (sound—such as music—versus quiet; bright or soft illumination; cool
temperatures; and conventional desk and chair seating versus informal easy chairs); (b) emotionality
LEARNING STYLES AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 359
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
(motivation, responsibility, and structure); (c) sociological preferences (learning alone, in a pair, with
peers, in a team, with collegial adults, and needing variety versus patterns or routines); (d)
physiological strengths (auditory-kinesthetic memory; intake—the need for snacks or liquid while
learning; time-of-day energy levels); and (e) processing inclinations (global versus analytic, and
hemisphericity). (p. 2)
Findings fromVazquez’s study (1985) indicated that 53% of the Puerto Rican students preferred
an environment with no sound, while 23% preferred an environment with sound. In addition, 63%of the students indicated that they preferred to study with bright light, while 27% preferred dim
lighting. With respect to temperature, 57% of the participants indicated that they preferred cool tem-
peratures, and 37.1% preferred warmer temperatures. Fifty-three percent of the students chose a
formal environment in which to study, and 45.8% of the participants preferred an informal one.
In the area of structured environment, 44.6% of the students indicated that their environment should
be a structured one, while 13.1% of the students preferred an environment that was not structured.
Students, then, who preferred the element of structure while learning need to get detailed instruc-
tions from their teachers (Dunn, Dunn, & Price, 1996). Vazquez (1985) discovered that 48% of the
participants preferred the auditory learning style. Thirty-five percent of the participants preferred
the visual modality of learning, and 45.8% of the students indicated that their preferred learning
style was kinesthetic. Puerto Rican adult students indicated that they preferred to study in cool
environments with bright light and have structured information and structured classrooms.
Although 73% of the participants indicated that they were very motivated, 82% of them declared
that they needed to be motivated by their teachers in order to learn. In addition, students chose the
auditory learning style as a preferred one, followed by the kinesthetic learning style.
Vazquez (1985) concluded that students’ learning styles must be identified in order to help
them cope with their academic environment and perform at optimal levels. He emphasized
the importance of conducting further investigations relating learning styles with the socioeco-
nomic factors of the participants. Vazquez indicated that these findings could help teachers to
create an educational atmosphere in which students at risk could learn better and, consequently,
improve their academic performance.
Caldwell and Ginther (1996) examined the differences in learning styles of high- and
low-achieving elementary school students from low socioeconomic status (SES) homes. In order
to identify students’ learning styles, the Learning Style Inventory developed by Dunn et al. (1996)
was used. One hundred ninety-four participants who were enrolled in two elementary schools in
Texas from the third and fourth grades participated in the study. In order to compile data related
to students’ socioeconomic status, cumulative records were used. These records included
students’ ethnicity, gender, intellectual aptitude, reading ability, and mathematics ability.
Caldwell and Ginther concluded that high achievers in both reading and mathematics were char-
acterized as being highly motivated, persistent, responsible, and teacher- motivated. High achie-
vers differed from low achievers in the learning style preference of motivation. High achievers
were intrinsically motivated. Although the participants of the Caldwell and Ginther study were
elementary students, this study represents one of the few studies that relates Latino students’
learning styles with their academic achievement.
Warren (1997) identified the learning styles of a group of students attending supplemental
instruction at the University of Central Florida. The goal of supplemental instruction is to help
students improve their academic achievement by enhancing their skills in a variety of academic
areas (Shaya, 1993). Warren (1997) explored the personality, learning styles, gender, and ethnic
360 S. M. TORRES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
characteristics of the participants. In order to identify students’ learning styles, Warren used the
Learning Style Inventory (LSI) version 3 developed by Kolb (1993). Warren (1997) found sig-
nificant differences between ethnic groups in their preferred learning styles. Thirty-six percent of
White students indicated their preference for the assimilator and converger modalities of learn-
ing. Seventeen percent of White students were accommodators, while 11.1% of them indicated
that they were diverger learners. On the other hand, 44.4% of the Black students indicated that
their preferred learning style was assimilator, with 22.2% of them being accommodators and
22.2% being divergers. Just 11.1% of them preferred the converger style of learning. Forty-two
percent of the Latino students participating in the study indicated their preference for the assimi-
lator type of learning, while 21.1% were accommodators, 26.3% were divergers, and 10.5%were convergers. Asians’ preferred learning style was assimilator (54.5%). None of the Asian
students selected the accommodator learning style as their preference. Twenty-seven percent
of the Asian students participating in the study chose the diverger preference, and 18% of them
indicated their preference for the converger learning style.
Warren (1997) also included personality type as one of the variables in his study. Warren div-
ided personality into two different types: aggressive-dependent and passive-dependent. Findings
of the study indicated that 50% of the Latino students participating in the study scored higher in
the aggressive-dependent type of personality, exhibiting higher levels of energy and motivation,
and requiring higher levels of approval from others when compared with other groups. Accord-
ing to Warren, Latino students are more likely to seek help, are highly social, and like to talk
among themselves as part of their learning style.
Warren (1997) concluded that the use of the LSI developed by Kolb (1993) helped to provide
a clearer picture of the students who were taking supplemental instruction courses at the
University of Central Florida. The LSI (Kolbcould help educators to develop more personalized
approaches in the area of supplemental instruction, learning, counseling, and career decision-
making. As indicated above, the study found differences among students’ preferences in learning
styles according to their ethnicity.
Williams (2001) studied the relationship among learning styles, academic achievement, gen-
der, and the ethnicity of 103 students at Northern Virginia Community College. In order to ident-
ify students’ learning styles, the LSI survey developed by Kolb was used. Williams indicated
that, with regard to the relationship between learning styles and students’ academic achievement,
the ANOVA revealed no significant differences for the four learning styles categories
(F(3, 3.99)¼ 1.90, p¼ .13). Nevertheless, a Pearson r bivariate analysis showed a significant cor-
relation (r¼ .266; p� .001) between the abstract conceptualization learning mode and academic
achievement in higher-achieving students. Williams suggested that students at academic risk or
students who have fallen into the category of academic probation could benefit tremendously
from teachers identifying the ways in which they learn and the environmental factors that influ-
ence students’ academic outcomes.
Rochford (2004) recommended incorporating students’ learning styles into the preparation of
the City University of New York (CUNY) assessment tests workshops and class activities in
order to increase students’ GPA and knowledge acquisition. Students who are registered at
any of the CUNY community colleges could benefit if teachers take their learning styles into
account when developing learning approaches to assist them in passing the CUNY tests, as well
as their classes. Results of the study indicated that a significant difference was found between
students who have been trained how to identify and apply their learning styles in order for them
LEARNING STYLES AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 361
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
to pass their CUNY test in comparison to those students who did not receive this training
(p< .001). Findings of the study also indicated that students who had taken remedial courses
benefited from this learning-style approach, becoming self-directed learners better able to deal
with difficult and unknown learning situations.
METHODOLOGY
In this study, the relationship between Latinos’ learning styles, their academic achievement, and
their demographic factors was explored using three surveys to collect and analyze data: The LSI
developed by Kolb (2000), the PEPS developed by Dunn et al., (2003), and a demographic sur-
vey. The data were analyzed using descriptive and multivariate analysis of variance procedures
employing the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 11.5.
After participants’ learning styles were identified, the researcher conducted workshops to
explain their learning profiles as a group based on the results of the first two surveys the LSI
and the PEPS. These workshops helped students understand the results and how to apply them
to improve their study habits for their classes. Each workshop lasted two hours, and workshops
were offered four times during the semester. If students were not able to attend, individual meet-
ings were scheduled to enable them to discuss their results on the learning styles inventories. In
addition, a report of the results of the study was shared with the participants if they requested one
on the informed consent form.
Sample
This study took place at a community college that enrolls 4,480 students: 2,560 female and 1,920
male; with 67% of students self-identified as Latino. Of the participants, 75.5% spoke Spanish at
home, 5.2% of them spoke English at home, and 18.8% spoke both Spanish and English. A total
of 229 students ranging in age from 17 to 68 (mean¼ 27) participated in the study. The majority
of participants in this study were from the Dominican Republic (66.4%) and Puerto Rico (11.4%).
The rest of the participants were from other countries of Central and South America (22.2%).
Instruments
LSI and PEPS
Two instruments were used to collect data about students’ learning styles, the Learning Style
Inventory version 3.0 (Kolb, 2000), and the Productivity Environmental Preference Survey
(Dunn et al., 2003). A hard copy of the two learning styles inventories, the LSI version 3.0
and the PEPS, were offered to students in both languages, Spanish and English.
Kolb (2000) introduced his experiential learning theory, emphasizing the tendencies that
people have to input and to process information. According to Kolb’s model of experiential
learning, the learning process should integrate four dimensions. These dimensions were
identified by Kolb as ‘‘Concrete Experience (CE), Reflective Observation (RO), Abstract
Conceptualization (AC), and the Active Experimentation (AE)’’ (p. 64). Dunn and Griggs
362 S. M. TORRES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
(2000) declared that the theory developed by Kolb (1984) was focused on only one or two learn-
ing variables. For this reason, the PEPS was used as one of the instruments to identify the
environmental preferences of students.
Demographic Survey
In order to explore the relationship between students’ learning styles and demographic
factors, students filled out a demographic survey. This survey included questions regarding stu-
dents’ socioeconomic factors, language spoken at home, number of semesters enrolled at the
community college, type and place of high school diploma, ethnicity, time living in the United
States, English as a second language (ESL) level, and financial information. Although all the
aforementioned variables were used as control devices in relationship with students’ learning
styles, for the purpose of developing this paper, the researcher was only interested in understand-
ing the relationship between students’ learning styles and their GPAs.
Procedures
Participants were recruited from randomly selected classrooms. A letter was sent to professors
asking if students could be recruited from their classes to participate in the study. If professors
allowed, students were invited through a brief classroom presentation to participate in the study.
Students were given letters of invitation explaining the study that also included several dates and
times when they could fill out the surveys.
An informed consent form was given to those students who expressed interest in participating
in the study. Participation was voluntary and all information provided was confidential. All three
surveys were given to each voluntary participant in a 10- by 13-inch folder. Data were collected
using the three questionnaires.
Data Analysis
Descriptive statistics and the Pearson Moment correlation analysis were run to identify relation-
ships between students’ learning styles and their academic performance. Academic performance
was measured by using students’ general GPA.
Limitations of the Study
The study was conducted in an urban community college located in the Northeast. Different
results could be obtained with a population of students attending a rural community college
in another region of the United States.
RESULTS
A series of workshops was conducted with Latino students placed on academic probation.
Results of the workshops indicated that 15 out of the 36 students placed on probation, or roughly
LEARNING STYLES AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 363
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
42%, benefited from the workshops. These students improved their GPA to the extent that they
were removed from the academic probationary status. An increase in general GPA was also
noted. Additionally, workshops on learning styles were conducted with faculty members in order
to develop an awareness of the learning needs and preferences of Latino students who were
struggling with their academic performance.
Descriptive statistics were used to identify students’ GPA. Students’ GPA was divided into
three different categories; high, medium, and low (see Table 1). Thirty-six percent of the part-
icipants indicated having a GPA ranging from 3.00–4.00. Half of the participants of the study
(54%) had a GPA of 2.00 to 2.99. Students with a GPA of less than 2.00 comprised 11% of
the participants. One-hundred seventy-six of the participants (75%) were female, while 56
(24.5%) of the participants were male. Participants in the study included Dominicans (66.4%),
Puerto Ricans (11.4%), Ecuadorians (6.6%), Peruvians (4.4%), Mexicans (3.9%), Colombians
(1.3%), Salvadorians (1.3%), Hondurans (1.3%), Venezuelans (.9%), Costa Ricans (.4%),
Cubans (.4%), Guatemalans (.4%), Nicaraguans (.4%) and Paraguayans (.4%). In addition,
75.5% of the participants spoke Spanish at home, 5.2% of them spoke English at home, and
TABLE 1
Participants’ Grade Point Average (GPA), Gender, Country of Origin
Variable % N¼ 229
GPA
High 3.00–4.00 35.60 84
Medium 2.00–2.99 53.50 125
Low <2.00 10.99 19
Not Reported .4 1
Gender
Female 75.0 176
Male 24.5 56
Not Reported .4 1
Country of Origin
Dominicans 66.4 152
Puerto Ricans 11.4 26
Ecuadorians 6.6 15
Peruvians 4.4 10
Mexicans 3.9 9
Colombians 1.3 3
Salvadorians 1.3 3
Hondurans 1.3 3
Venezuelans .9 2
Costa Ricans .4 1
Cubans .4 1
Guatemalans .4 1
Nicaraguans .4 1
Paraguayans .4 1
Language Spoken at Home
English 5.2 12
Spanish 75. 173
Both 18.8 43
364 S. M. TORRES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
18.8% spoke both Spanish and English. The age of the participants ranged from 17 to 68 years;
the median age was 27 (see Table 2).
In order to determine the relationship between the two variables, students’ academic perfor-
mance and learning styles, a Pearson Moment correlation analysis was run. Academic perfor-
mance was measured by students’ GPA. Variables used to determine this correlation were
GPA and the scores on the four Kolb’s (2000) modalities of learning, as well as the scores
on the PEPS elements (see Table 3).
The analysis indicated that the Kolb’s modalities of learning—which are Reflective Obser-
vation (RO; r¼ .104, p¼ .117); Abstract Conceptualization (AC; r¼ .050, p¼ .454); Active
Experimentation (AE; r¼ .070, p¼ .289); and Concrete Experience (CE; r¼ .016,
p¼ .805)—did not correlate significantly with participants’ GPA. Nevertheless, four out of
the 20 elements of the PEPS correlated with students’ GPA (see Table 4). The element of
Responsible (r¼ .174, p¼ .015) and Design (r¼ .162, p¼ .009) correlated positively with
participants’ GPA. Conversely, the elements of Needs Mobility (r¼� .137, p¼ .008) and
Afternoon (r¼� .175, p¼ .039) correlated negatively with participants’ GPA.
TABLE 2
Mean and Standard Deviation of Age of the Participants
Variable M SD N
Age 27.00 8.71 229
TABLE 3
Relationship Between Grade Point Average (GPA) and Kolb’s
Modalities of Learning
Kolb’s modalities r p
Active Experimentation .104 .117
Abstract Conceptualization .050 .454
Concrete Experience �.070 .289
Reflective Observation �.016 .805
Note. N¼ 229.
TABLE 4
Relationship Between Grade Point Average (GPA) and the Elements
of the PEPS
PEPS Elements r p
Responsible .174�� .015
Design .162� .009
Needs Mobility �.137� .008
Prefer Afternoon �.175�� .039
Note. N¼ 229. �Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).��Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed).
LEARNING STYLES AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 365
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
DISCUSSION
Academic performance was measured using the students’ overall GPA. Results on the LSI
(Kolb, 2000) showed no relationship between students’ learning styles and their GPA. Although
no difference between the Kolb modalities of learning and students’ GPA was found in this
study, Williams (2001) found a significant correlation between the Abstract Conceptualization
(AC) modality of learning and higher academic achievers. A possible reason for these results
may be the country of origin of the participants. More than half of the participants in this study
were from the Dominican Republic. Williams’s study, on the other hand, never mentioned or
categorized the Latino participants by country of origin. Country of origin, as discussed by
Maldonado Torres (2011), might have an impact on the students’ preferred way of learning.
According to Nieto (1999), the different ways in which individuals learn are intimately connec-
ted with their culture. As country of origin is not determined in Williams’s study, this may have
influenced the preference in learning styles of the Latinos who participated in the study.
Results on the PEPS, on the other hand, showed a relationship between four of the PEPS’
elements and the students’ GPA. The elements of Responsible=Conforming (r¼ .174,
p¼ .015) and Design (r¼ .162, p¼ .009) positively correlated with participants’ GPA. The
element of Design means that the student needs to be in a desk or in a straight chair while study-
ing Dunn et al. (1996). The higher the students’ GPA, the higher was their preference for Design
while learning. The element of Responsible=Conforming implies that the student is less willing
to conform when people ask him=her to do things (Dunn et al., 1996). This element describes
students who prefer to do things because they initiate them and want to do them, rather than
because someone else wants them to do them. The higher the students’ GPA, the higher was
their preference for a nonconforming environment while learning.
Conversely, the elements of Needs Mobility (r¼� .137, p¼ .008) and Afternoon (r¼�.175,
p¼ .039) negatively correlated with participants’ GPA. A preference for the element of After-
noon means that the student is more productive and prefers to study during the afternoon Dunn
et al. (1996). The negative correlation between the element of Afternoon and students’ GPA
suggested that students with a high GPA prefer to study in the morning. The element of Mobility
was also negatively correlated with students’ GPA, indicating that students with higher GPAs
have a lower need for mobility, or moving around while learning.
The results of this study mirrored those of the study conducted by Vazquez (1985), who
found that students on academic probation or low-achieving students had a high preference
for the element of Mobility. Similarly, in the area of GPA and learning styles, results of this
study concurred with the results of a study conducted by Rochford (2004) at the City University
of New York (CUNY). Rochford found that low-achieving students at CUNY had a high pref-
erence for the element of Mobility.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between Latino students’ learning
styles and their academic performance. A group of 229 Latino students who were enrolled at
an urban community college in New York City participated in the study. This study concluded
that a correlation exists among some of the elements of the PEPS and students’ learning styles.
366 S. M. TORRES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
The following are some recommendations for teachers and for students on how to apply the
findings of this study.
Recommendations for Teachers
It is important to mention=point out that the academic attainment of this group cannot be improved
by merely identifying their learning styles. On the contrary, factors such as socioeconomic status,
ESL levels, and country of origin are strongly related to students’ academic outcomes. Neverthe-
less, by recognizing students’ learning styles, educators can create a more student-centered teach-
ing-learning approach. When teachers identify the differences that students bring to the classroom,
they will be able to more effectively support students’ academic performance.
Experiment with Diverse Pedagogical Approaches
Teachers must take a special interest in their Latino students by experimenting with diverse
pedagogical approaches. This is important because Latino students have traditionally not fared
well in school (Suarez-Orozco, 2001). If teachers take a more individualized approach to reach
their students by varying their teaching techniques and styles, these students might respond more
favorably, and their academic performance might also improve.
Develop Strategies to Increase Students’ GPA
Williams (2001) suggested that students at academic risk or students who have fallen into the
category of academic probation could benefit tremendously by professors identifying the ways in
which they learn. Professors who are aware of the impact that the environment has on the learn-
ing process could better customize it to improve students’ learning. Although this study did not
relate students’ socioeconomic factors with their learning styles, a connection with those factors
and learning styles, as well as an adjustment in environment, could produce a winning combi-
nation for professors to help bring about academic success for their Latino students.
Recommendations for Students
Expand Your Learning Strategies
Although each person has a preferred learning style, it is necessary to expand one’s learning stra-
tegies in order to learn effectively (Kolb, 1984). By being aware of their learning styles and
expanding learning strategies, students are exploring their possibilities to be academically suc-
cessful. Self-exploration is important for career decision-making, as well as for developing
creativity and problem-solving skills for life (Little, 2004).
Develop Supportive Relationships
The ability to learn is one of the most important skills that students could acquire (Ellis,
1998a, 1998b). Through the process of acquiring knowledge, students often confront new
LEARNING STYLES AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 367
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
experiences in both learning and in life. By understanding their learning styles, students could
become more aware of their strengths and current limitations in learning. Students could
improve their learning process by developing supportive relationships with people whose learn-
ing strengths and weaknesses are different than their own (Ellis, 1998a, 1998b). Although indi-
viduals tend to be drawn to people with similar learning styles, they will learn more if people
who have opposite learning styles are incorporated in their learning process.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
Further studies could explore the relationship between technology and Latino students’ learning
style preferences. Students who have been raised in the technology era might have different
learning styles than those students who were raised before technology was so popular.
High-achieving students at the community college in which the study took place indicated that
they preferred to study during the morning. Researchers could explore the impact that the time at
which classes are offered has on students’ levels of attendance and GPA, based on their prefer-
ences on the PEPS (Dunn et al., 2003). Researchers could also explore if students’ identification
and understanding of their learning styles has an impact on their retention and graduation rates.
Because the U.S. Census Bureau indicated that Latino students’ graduation rates are in jeopardy,
a study exploring Latino graduation rates may contribute toward students succeeding academi-
cally (Gonzalez-Sullivan, 2007).
REFERENCES
Almader, M. (2000). Characteristics of successful Mexican American junior and senior students at Northern Arizona
University. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(10), 3868A. (UMI No. 9989705)
Brown, S. E., Santiago, D., & Lopez, E. (2003). Latinos in higher education, today and tomorrow. Change, 35(2), 40–46.
Caldwell, G. P., & Ginther, D. W. (1996). Differences in learning styles of low socioeconomic status for low and high
achievers. Education, 117(1), 141–148.
Chavez, L., & Yzaguirre, R. (2003). Educating the largest minority group. The Chronicle Review, 50(14), B6.
Day, J. C. (1996). Population projections of the United States by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1995 to 2050 (U.S.
Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, P25–1130). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/1/pop/p25-1130/p251130.pdf
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Books.
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1983). Teaching students through their individual learning styles: A practical approach. Reston,
VA: Prentice Hall.
Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G. (1996). Manual: Productivity environmental preference survey. Lawrence, KS: Price
Systems.
Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G. (2003). Manual: Productivity environmental preference survey. Lawrence, KS: PriceSystems.
Dunn, R., & Griggs, S. A. (2000). Practical approaches to using learning styles in higher education. Westport, CT:
Bergin & Garvey.
Ellis, D. (1998a). Becoming a master student. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin.
Ellis, D. (1998b). Course manual for becoming a master student. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin.
Gonzalez-Sullivan, L. (2007). Preparing Latinos for a flat world: The community college role. Journal of Hispanic
Higher Education, 6(4), 397–422.
Johnson, J. (2006). Beyond the learning paradigm: Customizing learning in American higher education: 10 bellwether
principles for transforming American higher education. Community College Journal of Research and Practice,
30(2), 97–116.
368 S. M. TORRES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
Kolb, D. A. (1993). Facilitator’s guide to learning. Boston, MA: Training Resources Group.
Kolb, D. A. (2000). Facilitator’s guide to learning. Boston, MA: Training Resources Group.
Little, L. (2004). Kolb’s learning styles for leaders. Administrator, 23(8), 8–10.Maldonado Torres, S. E. (2011). We are Latinos from the Caribbean; Our first language is Spanish; However our learning
preferences are different. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 10(3), 226–236.
Nieto, S. (1999). The light in their eyes: Creating multicultural learning communities. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press, Columbia University.
Rochford, R. (2004). Improving academic performance and retention among remedial students. The Community College
Enterprise, 10(2), 23–30.
Ryan, C. L., & Siebens, J. (2012, February). Educational attainment in the United States: 2009 (U.S. Bureau of the
Census, Current Population Reports, P20-566). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p20-566.pdf
Shaya, S. B. (1993). A case study of supplemental instruction in biology focused on at risk students. Bioscience, 43(10),
20–31.
Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (1999). Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches to race, class, and
gender. New York, NY: John Wiley.
Suarez-Orozco, C. (2001). Afterword: Understanding and serving the children of immigrants. Harvard EducationalReview, 71(3), 579–89.
Suarez-Orozco, C., & Suarez-Orozco, M. (1995). Migration: Generational discontinuities and the making of Latino
identities. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
Tapia, J. (2004). Latino households and schooling: Economic and socio-cultural factors affecting students’ learning and
academic performance. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 17(3), 40–54.
Trueba, H. T. (1987). Success or failure: Learning and the language minority student. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
Vazquez, A. (1985). Description of learning styles of high-risk adult students taking courses in urban community
colleges in Puerto Rico. San Juan, Puerto Rico: The Union for Experimental Colleges and Universities.
Warren, B. Z. (1997, October). Personality, learning style, gender, and ethnic characteristics of students attending
supplemental instruction at the University of Central Florida. Paper presented at the Annual Teaching Conference,
Ashland, KY.
Williams, R. A. (2001). Learning styles and achievement motivation of community college students. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 62(02), 464A. (UMI No. 3005850)
LEARNING STYLES AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 369
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f K
ent]
at 1
8:18
16
Nov
embe
r 20
14
