Learning styles of ESL students in a modern languages undergraduate program: matching student preferences and teaching materials

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

FEDERAL STATE AUTONOMOUS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION FOR HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

Bachelor's degree thesis

Learning styles of ESL students in a modern languages undergraduate program: matching student preferences and teaching materials

Otilia Roshu

Moscow 2020



Table of contents

Introduction

1. Literature review

1.1 Learning styles and cognitive styles

1.2 Learning styles and teaching

1.3 Learning styles and FL teaching

1.4 Matching learning styles and teaching materials

1.5 Methods of empirical study

2. Methodology

2.1 Participants, design, and procedure

2.2 Instrument: VARK Questionnaire

2.3 Questionnaire and table analysis

Conclusions

References

Appendix



Introduction

Scientists started investigating the way people study several centuries ago, and they still consider this process complex and crucial. Students of different age, gender, academic level, cultural background perceive and learn information differently. Nevertheless, teachers' materials are the same for a large number of children, which means they do not correspond to every pupil's individual needs. As these materials do not work for some individuals, they might face difficulties that impede the learning process. Since educational reforms began in 1990, more and more teachers and students seize that traditional methods of teaching do not function anymore due to the fact that contemporary students and people in general are different from learners decades ago.

It is important to recognize the fact that the knowledge of each student's learning style improves his or her academic performance (Griggs & Dunn 1984; Smith & Renzulli 1984). Therefore, it is highly recommended to match teaching styles with the learner's learning styles. Burke & Dunn (2003) emphasized positive effects of making teaching and learning styles to concur, that consist in test scores increase, unification of community and reduced boredom of scholars. Many teachers assume the responsibility and the expanded need to provide students with comfortable conditions and a more individualized approach.

Despite many investigations in the field of learning styles, for example of Dunn, R. & Dunn, K. (1979), Messick, S. (1984), Claxton, C. S. & Murrell, P. H., (1987), Pasheler et al., (2008), several questions have left unanswered. Moreover, there almost have not been studies connected with ESL (English as a Second Language) students in this realm apart from Reid, J. M. (1987;1995), Mulalic et al. (2009), Kruk & Zawodniak (2019), Peacock, (2001), Hsu et al., (1994) and Akbari et al., (2013).

The purpose of this study is to conduct a quantitative research on the most common learning styles among ESL students in a modern languages undergraduate program and the differences among these types of learning styles. The topic of learning styles has been investigated by various scholars before. My predecessors centred on studying learning styles of economics (Boatman, K., Courtney, R. & Lee, W., 2008), medical/ legal issues (Lefkowits, 2001), mathematics( Geiser et al., 1998; Dunn et al., 1990), medicine (Abdullah et al., 2018) anatomy (Cook, 1989; Lenehan, Dunn, Ingham, Murray, & Singer, 1994),marketing (Dunn, Deckinger, Withers, & Katzenstein, 1990), Chinese (Ren, 2013) and other sciences students ( Karuppan, 2001; Fei-Fei Cheng et al , 2017) as well as of ESL students (Sabeh et al.,2011; Reid, J. M. 1987; 1995, Mulalic et al.,2009; Kruk & Zawodniak, 2019; Akbari et al., 2013) and they discovered the interrelation between matching students' learning styles and teaching materials. Other authors (Hodges, 1982; Jenkins, 1982; Lemmon,1982) carried out studies concerning classroom experience in general, while not many authors analysed students' achievement through their learning styles or modalities.

Moreover, a correlation between cognitive styles and methods which work with separate students and are useless with others were discovered. The fact whether learning styles are matched or not affects student's motivation (Geiser, 1980; Kruk & Zawodniak , 2019) and attitudes (Frisby, 2005;Domino, 1979; Kazu, 2009; Griggs & Dunn 1984; Smith & Renzulli 1984) which then influence second language proficiency (Lightbown & Spada, 2006). Motivated students are willing to procced studying L2 (second language) irrespective of confronted difficulties and are more self-confident which makes them feel positive about learning new languages and communicating in general (Guilloteaux and Dцrnyei, 2008).

To attain the set aims, this study will address the following research questions:

What is the most common learning style profile of ESL students in a modern languages undergraduate program?

Do students with different learning style have different levels of knowledge?

To which extent the preferences of students with different learning styles are matched?

Is the performance of students whose preferences are matched higher that on students whose studying styles are different from the styles used in teaching materials?

What materials should teachers use in order to match partially every student's needs?

This study has again revealed the importance of matching teaching styles to the students' learning styles, which leads to a higher level of students' academic performance while learning English.

As a result, teachers can cease neglecting the significance of individual learning style preferences and initiate creating a curriculum that will contain such teaching materials that will correspond to scholars' needs according to their learning style. This can result in better marks at international standardized tests of English language proficiency for non-native English language speakers.

The limitations of this study are connected with the fact that the conclusions from the research are based only on the data obtained from the HSE university and limited to the students of FLACC (Foreign Languages and Intercultural Communication) undergraduate program. Moreover, the majority of students are from Russia and are female. On the other hand, students' academic performance was examined and compared before and after matching their styles, while this research concentrates on examining the data not in hindsight, but only comparing students between them.



1. Literature review

1.1 Learning styles and cognitive styles

Gregorc (1979) was among the pioneers in the realm of learning and teaching styles, defining them. According to him a “Learning style consists of distinctive behaviours which serve as indicators of how a person learns from and adapts to his environment. It also gives clues as to how a person's mind operates.”. As concerning teaching style, the writer described it as a method of presenting information which is perceived by the student as an environmental demand. Furthermore, the ability of students to acclimatize to certain teachers and the capacity of teachers to adapt to students' needs is named alignment on which student results depend.

Learning styles can be divided into three groups which are: Cognition-centred, Personality-centred, and Activity-centred styles. Styles from the first group are believed to interrelate with perception and cognitive abilities. These styles are established in early childhood and are psychologically based. Second group styles are connected to every individual's personality and rely on values, interests, attitudes and on how they interact with cognition. Finally, activity-centred styles stem from student's preferences of actions while studying (Frisby, 2005).

Rita and Kenneth Dunn continued examining learning styles. In 1978 they wrote two papers: “Teaching Students Through Their Individual Learning Styles: A Practical Approach.” and “Learning Styles/Teaching Styles: Should They...Can They...Be Matched?”. Both works contain theoretical and practical information connected with the analysis of Learning Styles employment in every day studying life of common students. The Dunns wrote about the 18 elements of Learning Style: Sound, Light, Temperature, Design, Motivation, Persistence, Responsibility, Need for structure, Working alone, Working with peers, Working with and adult, or some other combinations, Perceptual strengths, Intake, Time of day and Need for Mobility. In 1993 some other psychological stimuli were added to these elements: they were global/analytic, hemi-sphericity and impulsive/ reflective (Burke, K., & Dunn, R. 2003).

Moreover, the authors provide us with the nine elements of Teaching Style, which are namely: educational philosophy, student preferences, instructional planning, students groupings, room design, teaching environment, teaching characteristics, teaching methods, evaluation techniques. It is momentous to cognize the fact that the writers farther in their article gave answers to such questions as: “How teachers can adapt to different learning styles?” , “Is it realistic?” and “Why not just match teachers with students?”.

Figure 1. Rita Dunn & Kenneth Dunn “Diagnosing learning styles” (Dunn & Dunn, 1979).

Learning styles were characterized by Cassidy (2004) using various models of different scholars: Curry's model (1983) contains several layers, which are “instructional preference”, “social interaction”, “information processing” and “cognitive personality”. The first one is connected with students' choice of environment which includes teaching inventory (Rezler & Rezmovic, 1981). According to the degree to which students demand being socially active during studying, Reichmann and Grasha's divided them into groups: independent / dependent, collaborative / competitive, and participant / avoidant.

At the same time, learning styles were analysed on similar levels but two of them had another name: cognitive personality was personality and instructional preference was instructional methods (Claxton, Charles S. & Murrell, Patricia H. 1987). In their work the authors answered the questions whether information about learning styles can be utilized outside studying institutions and if it needs further investigation with the aid of colleges and universities.

Furthermore, learning styles were used for finding out which types of processors people have. According to Johnston there exist four processors and their combinations. They are “sequential”, “precise”, “technical”, “confluent” and “technical and sequential”, “sequential and precise”, “precise and technical”. Sequential processors require precise instructions and show best results during written tasks, precise processors detest the lack of information and can prove their knowledge in any format, technical processors must not be infringed by instructions and would rather choose group projects (Simonova 2011).

Kay Peterson and David Kolb have apparently a different vision of learning styles, as they visualize them as ways to withstand the Cycle of Experience. They assert here are nine learning styles which are: initiating (instigating and pioneering), experiencing (implication of knowledge) , imagining ( contemplating on data), reflecting(considering experience), balancing (amenability and cooperation), acting (powerful stimulus for action), analysing(consolidating information), deciding(arriving at a decision through experience analysis) , thinking (logic). People's preferences influence their choice of patterns and create “fixed Gestalts”. Being aware of one's learning style connote knowing one's hidden privileges and Achilles heels. An ideal learner should be able to utilize all nine styles depending on context (Sharma and Kolb 2010). On the other hand, a learning style is not a limitation and students need to be empowered to understand it (Barry & Egan).

The theory of learning styles was criticized by many scholars despite all the research which revealed their existence and their contribution to the learning process (Dunn et al., 1995).

For example Glenn claimed: “We were startled to find that there is so much research published on learning styles, but that so little of the research and experimental designs that had the potential to provide decisive evidence.”. Pashler et al. (2008) assert that the evidence from these papers is not enough to present practical utility and Yasuda (2019) believes analysis should be conducted with the usage of a “theoretically well-developed scale”. Moreover, it was proved that not all students reveal positive results after surveys (Geiser et al., 1998; Pashler et al, 2009; Geake, 2008; Riener and Willingham, 2010; Howard-Jones, 2014). On the other hand, many paper criticising learning styles do lack participants in their research (Allcock & Hulme,2010; Sankey et al, 2011).

There are scholars which even asked to “stop propagating the learning styles myth” and consider most of the studies on this topic not to the key criteria for scientific validity (Kirschner, 2017). Moreover, most of tests and questionnaires measuring learning styles can be purchased without a user qualification standard and therefore misinterpretation can arise. Scientist believe these tests should not be available for everyone but distributed to certain conditions (Barry & Egan, 2018). This fact is also connected to the belief that labelling possess limiting effects apart from positive ones (Gove, 1980). Barry & Egan suppose that learning styles should be implemented with caution and play only a limited role in training selection.

In 2004 Coffield carried out an investigation of learning styles with the aim of casting doubt on papers with poor evidential background and recount available and influential models. The evidence in each paper was examined in order to verify its internal consistency and construct, test-retest and predictive reliability. The author considered these are the irreducible norms for models which are going to be utilized. Thereby a list of 13 accepted models with validated instruments was developed:

Allinson and Hayes' Cognitive Styles Index (CSI)

Apter's Motivational Style Profile (MSP)

Dunn and Dunn model and instruments of learning styles

Entwistle's Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST)

Gregorc's Mind Styles Model and Style Delineator (GSD)

Herrmann's Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI)

Honey and Mumford's Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ)

Jackson's Learning Styles Profiler (LSP)

Kolb's Learning Style Inventory (LSI)

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA)

Sternberg's Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI)

Vermunt's Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS)

Other models and papers were considered to possess severe drawbacks as “low reliability, poor validity and negligible impact on pedagogy” (Coffield et al., 2004). Moreover, the writer depicted theoretical discrepancy, notional incertitude and diverse problems connected to the application of learning styles in practice, for example selfish concerns. Carbo also mentioned (1980) the previous facts in the chapter on related literature and added that many educators' papers contain poor designs and expose misinterpretation of data as well as faulty conclusions.

Aidan Moran et al (2006) claims many questionnaires inferior for two main reasons: they lack theoreticity and/or are not empirically valid. Furthermore, it is supposed that there are teachers which can implement what is considered to be evidence-based practice in teaching instead of utilizing learning styles while pretending doing it (Barry & Egan). On the other hand, this is much mor complicated than implementing just a set of instructions (Dunlosky et al. 2013).

According to Curry (1990) learning styles researchers tend to haste untimely to print and sell their works based on one prefatory dataset. Furthermore, the author claims that several papers do not show noticeable effects ascribable to learning styles modification. On the other hand, negative or null results cannot be achieved due to vested interest of direction of universities, poor selection of comparison groups and/or students' response to the experimental preparations.

Cassidy (2004) claims that research in the framework of learning styles must be carried out revealing deep knowledge of the field in order to present decent and credible results. Moreover, the huge quantity of research in the field do not give the teachers the possibility to implement learning styles rapidly as the information is so diverse and controversial. Apart from this, not all educators have the possibility to read reliable literature since it can be not free, or they prefer to go about marketing strategies.

Learning styles are often confused with cognitive styles, but the latter are persistent structures established by neurological factors. Learning styles depend on cognitive styles and are simultaneously more flexible and ready to change. Cognitive styles are the thing on which depends the interpretation of outside world as it is considered by them that this interpretation does not hinge in objective features of the world (Ranрeloviж & Laliж, 2013).

Cognitive styles are based on human cognition which consists of sensing, intuition, thinking and feeling. According to these dimensions four basic cognitive styles can be differentiated: sensation/thinking (ST), intuition/thinking (NT), sensation/feeling (SF), and intuition/feeling (NF). People using ST style tend to be logical and objective, performing an independent exploration. NT style differs from the previous one in its tendency of examining concepts in prospective. SF and NF styles are both more subjective, but while for people possessing a SF style only present issues play a pivotal role, NF individual tend to solve issues concerning interpersonal feelings.

Messick's (1984) definition of cognitive styles is similar to Gregorc's one of learning styles, except for the fact that he examines the effect of “intellectual and perceptual stimuli” during information perception process. Moreover, Messick in his work specifies the distinction between all cognitive styles due to the fact they are connected with diverse phases of information processing and compare them to “information processing habits”. The author claims that these styles are deeply rooted in a person's personality and do not tend to be changed easily. Furthermore, students' cognitive styles are believed to affect the way the seek for information (Drenoyianni et al, 2002).

In 1996 Michael Whyte investigated how computer utilization and information processing is affected by cognitive learning styles. He discovered an interrelation between students' style and their computers abilities which was also detected by Hsu, Frederick earlier. Moreover, several scholars declared that cognitive styles play an important role in humans' behaviour at work (Sadler-Smith 1998) and if people chose their future career in accordance to cognitive styles knowledge, they might be extremely content (Grasha 1987).

Despite the controversy on the issue, there are three styles which can be distinguished according to Messick and Witkin criteria and can be utilized in educational and organizational scope. These models are: Intuition - analysis (Allinson & Hayes, 1996), adaptor - innovator (Kirton, 1976), Wholist - analytical (Riding, 1991). Hayes and Allinson (1996) affirm that cognitive styles have an impact on staff recruitment, conflict management, career guidance, task styling, command structure and instruction and progress at workplace, therefore CSI - the Cognitive Style Index was developed.

Thinking styles contribute to metacognition and regulation of cognition out of the self-rated abilities. Different learning styles reveal diverse results. However, it can be possible that not styles affect cognition, but students with high levels of cognition are led to use certain styles (Li-fang, 2010).

1.2 Learning styles and teaching

It is believed that student's learning styles do not depend on the subject studied (Copenhaver, 1979) and affect students' fact knowledge, attitude, and efficiency (Frisby, 2005; Domino, 1979; Kazu, 2009). Moreover, students feel the impact of learning styles outside the classroom as students start being more respectful and acceptable to different teaching strategies due to their knowledge of different styles existence. Learners stop believing their academic performance depend only on the teacher but take the responsibility for their results. The atmosphere in the classroom becomes more friendly as students understand they are socially equal and terminate being biased, teacher- student relationship ameliorate (Dunn et al., 2009). Furthermore, students change their attitude toward school on positive (Dunn and Griggs 1998; 2000).

The correlation between matched learning styles and academical progress it is readily apparent in an experiment conducted within economic courses students (Boatman, K., Courtney, R. & Lee, W., 2008). Training and decision making among workers can be also affected by learning styles augmenting productiveness (Curry 1983). This fact arose the question of teaching materials in class, as they need to be compatible with pupils needs. Moreover, this study makes plain the fact that ethnicity and gender do not affect performance. If learning styles are not matched and students are provided with inconsistent materials for a long period of time, students tend to face stress, frustration and burn out (Smith & Renzulli, 1984).

Learning style awareness enhances student's behaviour (Searson & Dunn, 2001), minimizes the time necessary for homework and speeds the process of memorization (Howard-Jones, 2014). Students themselves report learning styles as a useful tool which refines cognition, motivate to endeavour outside the school curriculum (Geiser, 1998; Kruk & Zawodniak, 2019) and make learners more involved in the process (Orsak, 1990). Furthermore, it is noteworthy that learning styles are utilized while working with people with disabilities, mental and/or other disorders. The early diagnosis of dyslexia and the further development of learning environments with the usage of learning styles promotes the improvement of learning achievement (Tsampalas et al., 2018; Kumar & Chacko, 2010). Mildly handicapped students requiring special education began to earn high school diplomas more often due to the well-developed innovative curriculum the modifications of which root in individual leaners' strengths (Brunner & Majevski, 1990).

It is crucial to highlight the fact that teachers do also have their learning styles which can affect the teaching process. It happens because professors tend to teach in the way they learn, as if not aware of different learning styles; they believe their method is the only possible and the most effective. Interaction and discussion during lessons, instruction, problem solving methods and lecture types are generally guided by teachers' learning preferences. Based on this it can be concluded that not only must students are aware of their learning styles, but also teachers do (Campbell, 1991). Moreover, students can predict which learning style usage can enhance academic performance (Farr, 1971) and grammar tests performance depends on ESL students' learning style (Khalili, 2017).

In situations when teachers' learning styles are different from students' ones, teachers use preferably their learning style and impose students to do the same, they are forced to stretch or “style-flex”. When a group of students has a learning style and the teacher is cognizant about it, the teacher can give them the opportunity to accomplish tasks based on this style, in other words to create a personal learning environment. It is apparent that all students cannot be provided with a personal approach, therefore teachers should utilize tasks for different learning styles in order to match every student at least in one part of the class. (Campbell, 1991; Wolfe et al, 2006; Oxford 1990). Matching students' needs from time to time and providing them with tasks or information using other learning styles which do not match them will affect them positively (Kazu, 2009; Tulbure, 2011).

Teachers are affected by learning styles implementation as they become more motivated to question their teaching strategies to discover their efficiency. They do not utilize only one approached which previously was believed to fit every task and every student (Dunn & Stevenson, 1997)., but make a great effort to modify the classrooms (Dunn and Griggs 1998; 2000). Moreover, books and other materials start changing negating being only analytical or visual but developing versatility. (Favre 2007a, 2007b; Fine 2003; Shea Doolan 2004). This relates to the knowledge that scholars are responsible for student's cognition and can affect it through teaching materials and behaviours. (Dunn and Griggs 1998; 2000).

The process of learning a language differs for every student as well as do his or her learning and cognitive styles. Teachers cannot utilize the same methods with every student as it is not efficient and effective due to their otherness (Ьnsal 2018). Moreover, all perception organs should be active during the learning process of languages as four language skills must be trained (Ьnsal 2018).

1.3 Learning styles and FL teaching

Concerning the usage of learning styles in teaching foreign languages, Hartnett (1975) was one of the firsts to investigate the connection between them. Later his study was verified by Stieblich (1983) in an experiment with English and Spanish students learning German. The results revealed a correlation between cognitive styles and methods which work with separate students and are useless with others. At the same time language lateralization does not hinge on cognitive styles.

ESL student learning styles do also differ in correspondence to different language backgrounds and other variables as sex, age, and the period of studying English (Reid 1987). Students from countries with different levels of industrialization differ in their abilities as children form different cultures and classes within a culture are distinguished by different modes of thinking ( Honey & Mumford, 1986) School children have four basic learning modalities which are mainly identified by them as preferred correctly notedly when one of them is discarded. (Dunn 1983, 1984, Reinert 1976).

Foreign language teaching depends on language acquisition which is a complex operation consisting of the process and the results of learning a language (David, 1991). Second language acquisition is even a more complicated phenomenon as the language learned differs from the mother tongue. An important concept while teaching foreign languages is memory as vocabulary depends on it. Learning styles are considered to enable teachers make vocabulary learning easier.

Reid's study provided results displaying ESL students' preference to kinaesthetic and tactile learning styles and an aversion toward group work. Children's level played a role in the choice of style as well. Thereby graduated students are visuals and undergraduates are auditory. Moreover, males are more likely to choose visual and tactile learning in comparison to females.

The results of a survey conducted in Ecuador in 2018 revealed that role plays develop different languages skills if the learning styles preferred by the students imply their willingness to work in groups (Villafuerte et al.). These results are concurrent with the study of Whittington, Lopez, Schley, & Fisher (2000). Furthermore, dialogues between students or students and teachers make learners able to consider themselves equal with teachers which motivates them keep track of their progress (Kruk & Zawodniak 2019). Another study revealed that ESL students should give preference to pair or team work as individual work does not promote learning (Nosratinia &Soleimannejad, 2016) and make students less motivated (Naiman et al., 1996). Moreover, it is believed that social processes favour the development of language competence (Ashton-Hay, 2006; Sprenger & Wadt,2008).

Moenikiaa & Zahed-Babelan (2010) in their study on the role of learning styles on second language learning discovered that students with different learning styles differ in their scores for listening, writing and structure tasks. Moreover, the results of this study were in confrontation with the results of Loo (2004), and Riding (1991). Nosratinia & Soleimannejad (2016) in turn examined 595 ESL students in order to find out the relationship between the students' perceptual learning styles and critical thinking. It was ascertained that the more critical is the learners' thinking, the more perceptual learning styles he/she possess. The research was carried out as pursuant to Larsen-Freeman (1991), critical thinking, learning styles and other abilities contribute to second language learning. Moreover, students with multiple learning styles have better results (Mulalic, Mohdshad & Ahmad, 2009; Reid, 1987) and can switch these styles while completing various tasks in accordance to their demands (Riding & Cheema, 1991; Richardson, 1977).

Several studies examined the favourable outcomes of implementing interactive and collaborative tasks during classes (Ellis, 2008). Kruk and Zawodniak (2019) believe learning styles is not the only think needs implementation into the EFL classroom. Apart from this, students should be aware of the sociocultural theory to make their language evolution become a mediated and “social interaction-driven process” (Levine 2011).

1.4 Matching learning styles and teaching materials

As already mentioned above, there are huge implications of learning styles' awareness to student's academic performance. Teachers must at least try to match pupils needs according their styles to teaching materials. Moreover, as stated by Zul Astri and Isnaeni Wahab, it is essential for one to be aware of his or her learning style in order to obtain knowledge without professors' support. Furthermore, the results of their experiment conducted with 24 students conveyed that visual and auditory learners bettered their results with the aid of teacher materials, while not all kinaesthetic students were able to increase their scores.

Other specialist in information studies detected a substantial raise of scores for tasks connected to deep theoretical knowledge and a slight increase in practical activities during matching conditions. It is crucial to pinpoint that males had higher scores during both types of exercises, but the authors did not detect any obvious and clear reason for this gap (Nigel Ford & Sherry Y Chen, 2001).

A total of 1689 teacher student pairs were examined in 1980 by Cafferty, revealing a direct dependency between the match of student's and teacher's learning style and student's grade point average. Consequently, the greater the mismatch between learning styles, the lower student's grades. Moreover, students lose their interest and tend to change their specialization after their first years at colleges and universities because they styles are mismatched. Therefore, society remains with less passionate specialists (Tobias, 1990).

As regards learning styles while using web use, it was proved that pupils with different learning styles, namely assimilators and accommodators differ in the quantity of times of web pages visiting. Assimilators surpass accommodators, divergers and convergers. Moreover, the author asserts that accommodators tend to acquire information from own and others' experience and prefer working in teams. In conclusion it was stated that students should be provided a wide range of options of looking through materials. Furthermore, convergers would appreciate problems and simulations exercises, divergers and accommodators online discussions and other people's personal experience (Karuppan 2001).

Fei-Fei Cheng et al (2017) analysed the influence of learning styles effectiveness in web-based learning system utilizing Kolb's learning style model. The author discovered that students' satisfaction with the system does not depend on their learning style, meanwhile their performance and effectiveness differ among different learning style learners: accommodators and divergers show a significantly higher learning effectiveness than the assimilators.

Despite the fact that numerous scientists (Turner, 1993; Cook, 1989; Nelson et al., 1993; Lenehan et al., 1994) tend to believe in the beneficial effect of matching students' learning styles with teaching material, there exist experiments which demonstrated no relation between them( Klein, 2003) . For example, Moser and Zumbach tested two versions of a computer-based learning program, one of which was for verbal and another for visual learners. However, different types of multimedia instructions did not raise success and the results also confirm the fact that learning styles are flexible.

As the positive effect of knowing students' learning style can be noticed and numerous works provided proofs for it(for example Burke, K., & Dunn, R. 2003), a number of stages in order to encourage the usage of learning styles were developed (Claxton, Charles S. & Murrell, Patricia H. 1987). Primarily, professionals should be prepared for using them and create a storage of reliable data in this realm. Moreover, students need to be instructed in order to understand the overall process of learning and their own comfortable way to process information.

Apart from matching student's learning styles and teaching materials teachers can also provide individualized homework prescriptions and encourage them to follow it (Dunn & Stevenson, 1997). A study revealed the positive effects of students' knowledge on how to study and complete their homework in accordance with their strengths provided by unique learning styles. This knowledge has a favourable impact on student's achievement even if their styles are not matched during classes as they are cognizant how to adapt and teach themselves (Lauria, 2010; Geiser et al., 1998; Sarasin, 1999). As the teacher needs to maximize the stimuli the more possible, he/she must ensure that students' dominant learning styles will be implemented at home. This can be done by speaking with students' parents and instructing students to make them provided with suitable learning conditions (Kazu, 2009).

There are authors who gives instructions on how to implement learning styles in the teaching process. Cambell (1991) considers it to be vital to take several steps, some of which are:

Give students the permission to choose where to sit.

Make assignments of different duration (some short and some long).

Make group and individual assignments.

Utilize step-by-step instructions, but not be afraid of giving some freedom to students.

Combine oral and written feedback.

Permit students to help each other when possible and necessary.

Use a game activity for review.

Allow students to get marks not only form tests and written assignments.

Encourage students who need more time for understanding and writing.

Make relevant assignments which can help in real- life situations.

Analysing the way teachers implemented learning styles during student-teaching seminars, scholars detected environmental accommodations and global instructions (Dunn et al., 2009). Moreover, teachers tended to incorporate lesson plans and divide students by social grouping which produced such an impression on students that they inquired not to change anything during next classes (Ferdenzi et al, 1998/1999).Apart from this, it was discovered that learning styles matching is mostly beneficial for freshmen, pre-schoolers , poorly achieving and non-traditional students (Dunn & Stevenson, 1997; Clark-Thayer ,1988).Therefore, parents were instructed in order to be able to help their children study through different modalities (Ferdenzi et al, 1998/1999).

If educational institutions in which teachers work do not provide required training in order to make professors cognizant of how to utilize learning styles appropriately, teachers can find demanded information in corresponding literature. For example: “Felder's Index of Learning Styles” (ILS) (Felder, 1993), “The Learning Channel Preference Test “(LCPT) (O'Brien, 1989), Learning Style Profile” (LSP) (Keefe and Monk, 1988), “Learning Styles Inventory” (LSI) (Kolb, 1985) and “Gregorc Style Delineator” (Gregorc, 1982).

Some people tend to believe that it is impossible to match every students' needs as at school classes include up to 30 persons and the teacher cannot have enough time to please every student. However, students' learning styles should not be matched every class as providing convenient materials several times a month and teaching both globally and analytically does already show positive results. Scholars might suppose that if it is not impossible, then it is very difficult, but Dunn (1990) declares this teaching skill is something possible to acquire.

1.5 Methods of empirical study

Learning styles are analysed through different questionnaires which examine people's preferences to different types of presenting the information. Honey and Mumford (1982) published Learning styles questionnaire in 1982, then it was modified and republished in 1986. This questionnaire consists of 80 statements with which people can strongly agree or disagree and it detects students' attachment to one of the four learning styles of Kolb's cycle. They are activists, reflectors, theorists, and pragmatists (Kolb, 2010). LSQ was utilized to examine higher education in UAE and whether learning styles of students depend on demography (Yousef, 2016).

Ehrman and Leaver Learning Styles Questionnaire evaluated L2 learning styles. Students have to choose their preferences evaluating the items on a scale from one to nine. In such a way it is easy to determine whether they are synoptic or ectasias learners. Firsts' success depend on their subconscious while the seconds prefer to monitor the process conscientiously. Moreover, the author asserts these qualities are not innate but present individual preferences which change throughout life (Ragini, 2016).

Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Style Survey (1996) distinguishes the extent to which a student tends to utilize one of six learning styles. These stiles are: participant, competitive, dependent, avoidant, collaborative and independent. It is necessary to choose a number on the scale from one to five, where 1 is Strongly Disagree and 5 Strongly Agree. This questionnaire was utilized together with another one of the same author, namely with Teaching Style Inventory, in a Teaching Style Inventory in order to find out which teaching methods are able to enhance language acquisition.( Ford, J.H., Robinson, J.M. & Wise, M.E., 2016). The results indicated that the accommodation of learning styles has a positive effect on organizational process and studying outcomes.



2. Methodology

2.1 Participants, design, and procedure

The data was collected from the 2nd and 3rd year students in a modern languages undergraduate program, Foreign Languages and Intercultural Communication. The instruments were presented to 32 respondents during the second semester of 2019-2020 academic year. The questionnaire was available online to provide minimal contact between the researcher and the respondents.

2.2 Instrument: VARK Questionnaire

The current research aims to analyse learning and cognitive styles of ESL students in order to find out the results of matching teaching materials with pupils' need. The first part of the paper contains a theoretical basis, while the second is devoted to quantitative research with the usage of an adapted VARK questionnaire. Therefore, the information was gathered with the aid of three instruments: VARK questionnaire for students, a demographic data questionnaire and a special questionnaire designed especially for this study.

VARK questionnaire specialises on the verification of individuals' sensory modalities which can be Visual (V), Aural (A), Read/write (R) and Kinaesthetic(K). V perceive information utilizing symbolic elements such as arrows and boxes, graphs, maps, charts, and diagrams. (A) comprehend better speaking about the problem. (R) need to read while (K) appreciate real situations, experience, and personal stories. Moreover, there are people who do not have one favoured modality; therefore, they are named Multimodal (MM). This questionnaire was validated during an experiment with the usage of gaze tracking data which revealed significant correlation between the types of AoIs (Title, Text, Graph, Formula) and Vark modalities (Baltulionis et al., 2019).

The questions are intended to identify student's learning styles, the degree to which the students' preference are matched and whether their academic achievement depends on previous data. There are 34 questions with 4 (or more) options and they can be below. The scoring charts can be found in the appendix 1 and appendix 2.

As emphasized earlier this information might be beneficial for student's later studies.

A cover letter (Appendix 3) was attached at the beginning of the questionnaire so that students were aware of the aims of the questionnaire. Moreover, they had the possibility to negate answering the questions and were warned that their confidentliallity would be abided by.

The questionnaire includes 16 questions form VARLKs questionnaire and 18 question which were designed precisely for this study. These questions were developed according to next rules:

Questions are directed for a concrete audience: ESL FLACC students

Questions do not include double negations, are simple and concise

Questions are aimed to answer the research questions

Questions are not leading

There is room for both extremes in scales questions

Questions do not include to many options

There are minimum open-ended questions

The first 5 questions were designed and added to the questionnaire in order to gather general data about the students and their background. The students are asked their nationality, how much time they have been learning English, how many languages they know and in which year they are currently studying. This data analysed with further results can raise interesting facts.

The third part of the questionnaire consists of questions which help understand whether students' styles are matched by the students, how this fact affects their motivation, behaviour and performance and whether students consider teachers to be responsible for learning styles implementation and their success.

Moreover, these questions can reveal teachers' learning styles and the relation between student's view of their performance and teachers' perspective according to assessing criteria.

2.3 Questionnaire and table analysis

The questionnaire

Part 1

Choose the answer which best explains your preference and circle the letter(s) next to it.

Please circle more than one if a single answer does not match your perception. Leave blank any question that does not apply.

Q1) You are

a. male

b. female

c. another

d. not important

Q2) You are from (write your country)

Q3) You are studying English … years

a. <4

b. 4-6

c.6-9

d. >10

Q4) You know … languages

a. 3

b. 4

c.5

d. >5

Q5) You are currently studying in your ...

a.2nd year

b.3rd year

Part 2

Q1) I need to find the way to a shop that a friend has recommended. I would:

a. find out where the shop is in relation to somewhere I know.

b. ask my friend to tell me the directions.

c. write down the street directions I need to remember.

d. use a map.

Q2) A website has a video showing how to make a special graph or chart. There is a person speaking, some lists and words describing what to do and some diagrams. I would learn most from:

a. seeing the diagrams.

b. listening.

c. reading the words.

d. watching the actions.

Q3) I want to find out more about a tour that I am going on. I would:

a. look at details about the highlights and activities on the tour.

b. use a map and see where the places are.

c. read about the tour on the itinerary.

d. talk with the person who planned the tour or others who are going on the tour.

Q4) When choosing a career or area of study, these are important for me:

a. Applying my knowledge in real situations.

b. Communicating with others through discussion.

c. Working with designs, maps or charts.

d. Using words well in written communications.

Q5) When I am learning I:

a. like to talk things through.

b. see patterns in things.

c. use examples and applications.

d. read books, articles and handouts.

Q6) I want to save more money and to decide between a range of options. I would:

a. consider examples of each option using my financial information.

b. read a print brochure that describes the options in detail.

c. use graphs showing different options for different time periods.

d. talk with an expert about the options.

Q7) I want to learn how to play a new board game or card game. I would:

a. watch others play the game before joining in.

b. listen to somebody explaining it and ask questions.

c. use the diagrams that explain the various stages, moves and strategies in the game. bachelor language learning need

d. read the instructions.

Q8) I have a problem with my heart. I would prefer that the doctor:

a. gave me something to read to explain what was wrong.

b. used a plastic model to show me what was wrong.

c. described what was wrong.

d. showed me a diagram of what was wrong.

Q9) I want to learn to do something new on a computer. I would:

a. read the written instructions that came with the program.

b. talk with people who know about the program.

c. start using it and learn by trial and error.

d. follow the diagrams in a book.

Q10) When learning from the Internet I like:

a. videos showing how to do or make things.

b. interesting design and visual features.

c. interesting written descriptions, lists and explanations.

d. audio channels where I can listen to podcasts or interviews.

Q11) I want to learn about a new project. I would ask for:

a. diagrams to show the project stages with charts of benefits and costs.

b. a written report describing the main features of the project.

c. an opportunity to discuss the project.

d. examples where the project has been used successfully.

Q12) I want to learn how to take better photos. I would:

a. ask questions and talk about the camera and its features.

b. use the written instructions about what to do.

c. use diagrams showing the camera and what each part does.

d. use examples of good and poor photos showing how to improve them.

Q13) I prefer a presenter or a teacher who uses:

a. demonstrations, models or practical sessions.

b. question and answer, talk, group discussion, or guest speakers.

c. handouts, books, or readings.

d. diagrams, charts, maps or graphs.

Q14)

I have finished a competition or test and I would like some feedback. I would like to have feedback:

a. using examples from what I have done.

b. using a written description of my results.

c. from somebody who talks it through with me.

d. using graphs showing what I achieved.

Q15) I want to find out about a house or an apartment. Before visiting it, I would want:

a. to view a video of the property.

b. a discussion with the owner.

c. a printed description of the rooms and features.

d. a plan showing the rooms and a map of the area.

Q16) I want to assemble a wooden table that came in parts (kitset). I would learn best from:

a. diagrams showing each stage of the assembly.

b. advice from someone who has done it before.

c. written instructions that came with the parts for the table.

d. watching a video of a person assembling a similar table.

Part 3

Q1) Do you have fun learning during English lessons?

a. absolutely no

b. no

c. generally yes

d. absolutely yes

Q2) How would you describe the atmosphere in the class?

a. positive and friendly

b. with minimal participation

c. it depends on the materials utilized

d. it depends on the topics of the class

Q3) Is the teacher responsible for addressing the diversity of learning styles?

a. absolutely no

b. no

c. generally yes

d. absolutely yes

Q4) What does your teacher of English use most often?

a. diagrams.

b. listening tasks.

c. reading tasks.

d. videos

Q5) What does your teacher do when you need to learn how to do a task?

a. gives us the written instructions.

b. tells us how to do it.

c. tells us to start it and learn by trial and error.

d. gives us diagrams in a book.

Q6) Your English teacher mostly uses:

a. designs, images, and symbols and well laid out handouts.

b. YouTube demonstrations, laboratories, practical sessions and field visits.

c. question and answer, emails, webinars and online chat/texting.

d. bullet points on PowerPoint and easy access to my notes and handouts.

Q7) Your teacher gives feedback:

a. using examples from what you have done.

b. using a written description of your results.

c. talking it through with you

d. using graphs showing what you achieved.

Q8) Do you think that your scores depend on the way the teacher explains the task?

a. absolutely no

b. no

c. generally yes

d. absolutely yes

Q9) Do you get poor marks because the teacher explains the tasks using the materials you see useless?

a. never

b. a few times

c. yes, often

d. yes, always

Q10) Do you ask the teacher to explain the task using other materials if you don't understand it?

a. no, never

b. yes, sometimes

c. yes, often

d. yes, always

Q11) What changes would you like your teacher to implement?

a.to use other materials

b.to practice other language skills

c. to check whether students understand instructions

d. increase motivation to study

e. no changes are needed

f. other

Q12) Assess your academic performance at English classes

1 2 3 4 5

Q13) How does your teacher assess your performance? (please be honest)

1 2 3 4 5

Results

Table 1. General data

Student\criteria	Sex	Native country	Time studying English	Number of languages known	Current position at university
1	Not important	Russia	4-6	3	3rd year
2	Male	Russia	9>	3	3rd year
3	Female	Russia	9>	3	3rd year
4	Female	Russia	<4	3	3rd year
5	Female	Russia	9>	3	3rd year
6	Female	Russia	9>

Подобные документы

• Teacher of two languages

  Teaching practice is an important and exciting step in the study of language. Description of extracurricular activities. Feedback of extracurricular activity. Psychological characteristic of a group and a students. Evaluation and testing of students.
  
  отчет по практике [87,0 K], добавлен 20.02.2013
  

• Internet in teaching Foreign Languages

  The employment of Internet in teaching Foreign Languages. The modern methods of teaching 4 basic skills. The usage of Internet technologies for effective Foreign Languages acquisition. Analysis of experience: my and teachers of Foreign Languages.
  
  курсовая работа [2,3 M], добавлен 30.03.2016
  

• Methods and approaches in vocabulary teaching and their influence on students’ acquisition

  The development in language teaching methodology. Dilemma in language teaching process. Linguistic research. Techniques in language teaching. Principles of learning vocabulary. How words are remembered. Other factors in language learning process.
  
  учебное пособие [221,2 K], добавлен 27.05.2015
  

• The most common types of modern teaching approaches

  Approach - one’s viewpoint toward teaching. The set of principles, beliefs, or ideas about the nature of learning which is translated into the classroom. Learner, performance and competency based approach. Teacher’s and student’s role in the teaching.
  
  презентация [447,5 K], добавлен 21.10.2015
  

• How to Write a Lesson Plan

  What is the lesson. Types of lessons according to the activities (by R. Milrood). How to write a lesson plan 5 stages. The purpose of assessment is for the teacher. The students' mastery. List modifications that are required for special student.
  
  презентация [1,1 M], добавлен 29.11.2014
  

• The structure, particularities and meaning of distance learning

  The basic tendencies of making international educational structures with different goals. The principles of distance education. Distance learning methods based on modern technological achievements. The main features of distance education in Ukraine.
  
  реферат [19,1 K], добавлен 01.11.2012
  

• Methods of teaching foreign languages from an early age

  Process of learning a foreign language with from an early age. The main differences between the concepts of "second language" and "foreign language" by the conditions of the language environment. Distinguish different types of language proficiency.
  
  статья [17,3 K], добавлен 15.09.2014
  

• Intercultural Competence in teaching

  Intercultural Communication Competence: Language and Culture. The role Intercultural Communicative Competence in teaching foreign languages. Intercultural Competence in Foreign language teaching. Contexts for intercultural learning in the classroom.
  
  курсовая работа [94,1 K], добавлен 13.05.2017
  

• The University of Oxford

  Oxford is a world-leading centre of learning, teaching and research and the oldest university in a English-speaking world. There are 38 colleges of the Oxford University and 6 Permanent Private Halls, each with its own internal structure and activities.
  
  презентация [6,6 M], добавлен 10.09.2014
  

• "Blended Learning " як система інноваційних принципів та методів в освіті (на прикладі викладання дисципліни "Політології")

  Особливості філософії освіти у ХХІ столітті. Характеристика системи інноваційних принципів та методів викладання у вищій школі - "Blended Learning", що забезпечує значно вищу результативність освітнього процесу. Особливості застосування цієї системи.
  
  статья [23,8 K], добавлен 21.09.2017
  

• главная
• рубрики
• по алфавиту
• вернуться в начало страницы
• вернуться к началу текста
• вернуться к подобным работам