LEARNING WITH ''STYLE'' A study on learning styles: analysis and correlation with results, motivation, context

Theoretical Background Recent discoveries within cognitive psychology and neurosciences bring about new crucial considerations about teaching and learning. It has become clear that, as far as learning is concerned, we have to shift our attention from ''what'' is learnt to ''how'' we learn. Learning Theories Learning only became part of cognitive sciences in 1800. Up to then learning theories belonged to Philosophy. Modern theories about learning date back to the end of the Nineteenth Century. The German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850- 1909) was among the first experimental psychologists who contributed with original and important research about learning and memory. Ebbinghaus can be considered the father of experimental psychology, more specifically of associationism. He was followed by Thorndike (1874-1949) and Pavlov (1849 1946) who laid ground for Skinner's research (1904- 1990). Thorndike can also be seen as an associationist, even though his main interest was about associations between actions and reactions rather than about associations of ideas. While Thorndike can be viewed as a forerunner, the real father of behaviourism is Pavlov who espressed the famous theory of classical conditioning. Skinner introduced the theory of operant conditioning which differs from classical conditioning in that the subject acts in an environment and modifies it by behaving in response to stimuli reinforcement theory) . According to behaviourism, learning consists in acquiring new attitudes and habits which can be the result of associating a stimulus with another (in classical conditioning) or associating the response of an individual with its consequence (operant conditioning). The Gestalt school (beginning of the Twentieth Century) laid the basis for the most recent cognitive learning theories. According to Gestalt, the typical learning form is ''insight'', consisting in a sudden reorganization of the cognitive field. Such theory was opposing both associationism and behaviorism which were very authoritative in those years. The term ''insight'' refers to a learning process which diverges both from the theory of association and from'' trial and error''. According to Gestalt, the individual experiences a sudden enlightenment and connects scattered elements into a ''new'' form giving them a new meaning. ''Insight'' is a sudden restructuring of the cognitive field which develops new learning. Starting from the 1960s this new cognitivism and the related research become very influential. Cognitive processes are described as the mental processes which allow us to perceive and elaborate information which support behaviour. The human mind is seen as a processor of information working within a given sequential organization. Only in the 1980s was this theoretical background partly questioned, when the idea was put forward that the world is not an outside objective reality, but a construction based on experience. Such outlook developed into the second generation cognitivism or ''constructivism''. The main assumption of constructivism is that knowledge is the result of active construction by the subject, closely connected with the actual situation where learning takes place. Therefore learning is active, not passive and receptive, and derives from comparing and contrasting new information with information and knowledge already stored in memory. New knowledge is influenced by previous knowledge and is organized in representational patterns which can add up and integrate previous patterns or sometimes create new ones. Kolb's theory of experiential learning derives from constructivism. He refers back to John Dewey, Jean Piaget, Kurt Lewin and Carl Rogers and ascribes a central role to experience in the learning process. According to Kolb, learning is a dynamic cycle where two main dimensions interact: 1. ''grabbing experience'' which develops from concrete experience (CE) to abstract conceptualization (AC); 2. ''transforming experience'' moving from active experimentation (AE) to reflective observation (RO). Kolb views learning as the result of a 4 phases cycle: a process through which people try to understand their experiences and to modify their behaviours accordingly. The 4 phases support one another and each of them requires different skills and competences. According to this model, people learn in four phases: - Concrete experiences (CE) in which learning is mainly influenced by feelings and reactions to experience; - Reflective observation (RO), in which learning is mainly influenced by listening and watching; - Abstract conceptualization (AC),in which learning is shaped by thinking and by a systematic analysis of problems; - Active experimentation (AE) in which learning is mainly influenced by doing, experimenting and observing results. While learning, the subject should go through all four phases, at least in part, but due to genetic factors and other variables depending on interaction with the environment, he starts preferring a phase to another (learning style) By learning style Kolb means the typical ''language'' of an individual which makes him process information in a way rather than another. Kolb identifies four styles: - assimilating - converging - diverging - accomodating (adaptive) each one characterized by a precise orientation on the axes of concrete experience/abstract conceptualization and active experimentation / reflective observation. The issue of the research In the last 15 years in Italy there have been about 3 million (31.9%) dropouts among state high school students. Most of them are included in statistics about Neet, young people between 15 and 29 years of age who neither study nor work or experience any form of training or internship. ISTAT estimates they are 2.2 million or 23.9 % of people within this age group. So the challenge of education for the twenty-first century is to endow schools with vocational guidance procedures in order to prevent early school leaving and promote the right and duty to effective education and training. We need to move from dealing with the negative results of early school leaving to preventing it. It is necessary to plan curricula and teaching practice which focus on the learner. We need to develop teaching activities which can encompass our students' different learning styles including verbal as well as visual information and logical as well as systemic sequences . Objective of the research The main objective of this research are: 1. Inquire into the different learning styles in a representative sample of third year lowersecondary school students in the Parma region in order to connect them with possible prediction of later school choice as well as educational success or failure. 2. Investigate mutual influence and relationship between learning style and: - attitude to study - school performance - socio-economic and cultural context MATERIALS AND METHOD The study population was chosen among lower secondary schools in the Parma area, more specifically 3 schools within the Parma municipality and 3 schools outside it. The analyzed classes were third year classes in each school making a total of 744 students. All Principals were sent a written request of collaboration. Two sample classes (not included in the study population) were administered a questionnaire aimed at testing the possible effectiveness of an online administration of the questionnaire and the reliability of the Italian translation of Kolb and Biggs' questionnaires. The study population came out as representative in terms of gender as well as matching the regional spread of foreign students. The questionnaire consisted of three sections. In Section 1 the researcher inserted socio-economic data (Reference were INVALSI and TIMSS tests) and questions about high school choices, average grade in school subjects and feelings about school. Section 2 consisted in the Kolb's test, carefully translated by the researcher in agreement with David and Alice Kolb. Such test (Learning Style Inventory LSI) is one of the most widely used tools in research about learning styles. It is based on a precise theory of learning derived from the thinking of psychologists and educationists of the last century (Jean Piaget, John Dewey, Carl Rogers, Carl Jung, Paulo Freire). For these reasons LSI has been used as a tool for testing of styles in the present research. LSI 3.1, revised in 2005, is the most recent version of original LSI which was developed, validated and tuned up by David Kolb. The main purpose Kolb describes as the aim of his investigation tool is increasing the individual's awareness of his own learning and improving his meta-cognitive skills as well as the learning process itself. LSI has been planned to measure an orientation or a preference profile in how an individual faces reality. The tool format has three main features: 1. the test is short and simple and is suitable for both research and teaching purposes; 2. the test is devised to match learning situations; each item requires a choice between abstract vs concrete and between active vs reflective orientation; 3. the test should measure a preferred learning style closely connected with the experiential learning theory. The test appears to inquire four dimensions: ï‚· concrete esperience ï‚· abstract conceptualization ï‚· active experimentation ï‚· reflective observation Each subject is given a score related to the four dimensions (preference ) which should signal his preferred approach to the experience cycle. The assumption is that each person has a personal preferred way of learning: CE (EC) Concrete experience who scores high in this area usually feels directly and personally involved in experience- He emphasizes feeling rather than thinking. RO (OR) - Reflective observation - who scores high in this area usually tries to understand the meaning of ideas and situations. To do so he relies on careful observation and unbiased descriptions. He emphasizes understanding rather than doing; CA (AC)- Abstract Conceptualization: who scores high in this area usually manipulates ideas and concepts following a strict logic. He emphasizes thinking rather than feeling; AE (SA)- Active Experimentation: who scores high in this area usually acts to try and change situations and people. He emphasizes doing rather than watching; Besides preferences, Kolb describes four main learning styles: accomodating, diverging, converging, assimilating. Learning styles are oriented on an XY-plane where the Y axis represents concrete vs abstract style whereas the X axis represents active vs reflective style. Each subject will find himself in one of the four quadrants shown in the picture according to the interpretation of the graph: Accommodating style: People with an accommodating learning style are primarily oriented to concrete experience and active experimentation. They are good at setting targets and working actively trying different ways to achieve an objective. This style is described as adaptive because these people can easily adapt to new situations. Diverging style: People with a diverging learning style are primarily oriented to concrete experience and reflective observation. They tend to be imaginative and are good at understanding meanings and values. They are best at viewing situations from different viewpoints and organize what they observe in a consistent way . Converging style: People with a converging learning style are primarily oriented to abstract conceptualization and active experimentation. They are good at problem solving, decision making and using their learning to find solutions to practical issues. This style is described as converging as it is typical of people who are best at solving problems which a single solution or answering questions with a single correct answer. Assimilating Style: People with an assimilating learning style are primarily oriented to abstract conceptualization and reflective observation. They excel at inductive reasoning, generating wide ranging ideas and organizing single observations in a clear and logical format. Section 3 refers to the attitude to study. The choice of this questionnaire is consistent with the reasons for choosing the Kolb questionnaire. The questionnaire is based on a series of answers on a Likert scale and includes items concerning two dimensions: - motivation (attitude) to study - learning strategies both dimensions are investigated both on a superficial and on a deeper level. RESULTS The study population came out as representative in terms of gender and percentage distribution of foreign students in Emilia Romagna. The socio-economic status (SES) of the interviewed students is close to the regional average. The sample also matches the regional trend in terms of the type of upper secondary school students choose, showing a high percentage of students opting for a College Preparatory High Schools (Licei) and a low percentage opting for Vocational Schools. Enrolments to Technical School are about 30% . Students' perception of learning difficulties calls for special attention. Most of them relate difficulties in reading, writing and calculation. Data are highly relevant: 30% of students in their third year of lower secondary school claim they ''have more difficulties than their classmates'', whereas only 3.2% state they ''have sought professional help to improve their learning''. 22,3% of students scoring passing grades express their difficulty compared to only 6.1 students scoring failing grades (relevant result) and clearly to 1.5% of students achieving excellent results. Students perceiving difficulties are equally distributed as far as the choice of high school is concerned. (see chart). This accounts for a widespread unease within lower secondary school population which could be seen as a drop out indicator. Inquiry about learning styles (Kolb's test) shows a minimal percentage of converging students within the study population. The most frequent appears to be the diverging style. Accommodating and assimilating styles are represented, though to a lesser degree. Diverging students show a deeper approach to learning in comparison with students with other learning styles. The low number of converging students could depend on everyday school teaching which does not encourage the two dimensions typical of this style (abstract conceptualization and active experimentation). It would appear that our school usually offers very little opportunities for developing such dimensions. On the contrary reflective observation is by far the predominant activity in a standard lesson. Therefore learning styles which rely more on that dimension perform better in school education. In terms of predictability, the results show that the difference between learning styles and school performance and approach to learning is statistically relevant. More specifically accommodating students differ greatly both from diverging and from assimilating students, showing better performance, school achievement and a deeper approach to learning particularly if compared to assimilating students. This is probably due to their higher ability to adapt to situations. With reference to their school career, students who opt for vocational schools are significantly stronger in the ''doing'' dimension (lower score) compared to those who opt for technical or grammar schools. These latter courses of study also show a relevant difference. The ''thinking'' dimension is definitely stronger (lower score) in students who choose a grammar school than in the ones who choose a technical or vocational school. CONCLUSIONS Italy appears to confirm the general trend that one student out of five experiences learning difficulties at least once in his school career. Some of these difficulties can be ascribed neither to specific reasons nor to poor learning abilities, but seem to derive from family or cultural background, quality of education, general school context or the student's individual features (motivation, self-control, sensitivity, relationship problems or communication difficulties, cognitive styles). Immediate evidence of qualitative differences in cognitive processes comes from observing how people with similar general intelligence tackle certain tasks differently. Such variations occur in all areas of cognitive activity. Therefore the idea of cognitive style and learning style acquires increasing significance. It appears that a ''thinking style'' can be the key to interpret school failure, which can be due to a mismatch between a student's learning style and the characteristics of the learning context. Most teachers share the belief that all students apply the same strategies in dealing with a given learning task. It has been proved that teachers and learners who share the same learning profile interact more effectively. To promote meaningful learning for all students, we should enable learners to become aware of their own learning style (meta-cognition) in order to pursue two objectives: relying on a student's learning style to achieve effective learning while at the same time helping him develop new learning strategies they would not normally use. The ''recipe'' for reducing early school leaving could consist in allowing students to reflect on their own learning style as well as providing them with diversified teaching methods and materials.