Visual Representation
Introduction
and Side Note
While analyzing my data, I discovered
some interesting (and perplexing) research that is in opposition of teachers
tailoring instruction according to learning styles. Pashler et al. (2008) explains
in their abstract:
Our review of the literature
disclosed ample evidence that children and adults will, if asked, express
preferences about how they prefer information to be presented to them. There is
also plentiful evidence arguing that people differ in the degree to which they
have some fairly specific aptitudes for different kinds of thinking and for
processing different types of information. However, we found virtually no
evidence for the interaction pattern mentioned above, which was judged to be a
precondition for validating the educational applications of learning styles.
Although the literature on learning styles is enormous, very few studies have
even used an experimental methodology capable of testing the validity of
learning styles applied to education. Moreover, of those that did use an
appropriate method, several found results that flatly contradict the popular
meshing hypothesis. (p. 105)
This
information led me down the rabbit hole of trying to find definitive support
for my data interpretation. The most convincing information I found requires a
paradigm shift that explains that how teachers deliver information isn’t what
is most important; the importance lies with what the students (learners) do with
the information (Lander, 2024a). The two principal researchers responsible for
the development of the VARK learning style inventory stress that “the profiles
are promoted as insights and not as definitive diagnoses” (Fleming & Mills,
1992, p. 3). I have used this information to guide my answers with the
understanding that learning styles should not be used as a “be all, end all”
approach to teaching these students. The best lessons and assessments should use
a variety of activities that will work together to enhance the learning for all
students, regardless of learning style preference.
Learning Styles & Cognitive, Linguistic, Social, Emotional, & Physical Development
of Students
The visual representation of the
learning styles data helps highlight the interconnectedness of these learning
preferences with cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical
development:
- Cognitive
Development:
Students with strong preferences for certain learning styles often display
specific cognitive strengths. For example, auditory learners may have
stronger verbal processing skills, while kinesthetic learners excel at
problem-solving through hands-on activities.
- Linguistic
Development:
Auditory learners are likely to have stronger listening and speaking
skills, benefiting from discussions and oral presentations. Visual
learners may have better comprehension when processing written and visual
information.
- Social
and Emotional Development:
Socially, students who are multimodal (e.g., KA, MP, TR) often work well
in collaborative environments that engage multiple learning styles.
Emotionally, students may feel more confident and motivated when
activities align with their preferred learning modalities. This insight directly
relates to the way Fleming and Mills (1992) wanted their learning style
inventory to be used.
- Physical
Development:
Kinesthetic learners (e.g., TR, KA, MP) benefit from physical engagement,
linking their motor skills with learning. This can aid in developing fine
and gross motor coordination as they interact with materials and perform
tasks.
Using
the Learning Styles Inventory to Influence/Affect Planning
The learning styles inventory
provides a foundational guide for creating lesson plans that resonate with
students’ preferences. Here’s how it would influence my planning:
- Instructional
Strategies for Each Learning Style:
- Auditory
(MJ, HC, BB):
Implement read-alouds sessions to engage these students. Use discussions
and verbal instructions to clarify and deepen understanding.
- Visual
(All students to varying extents): Incorporate diagrams, infographics, videos,
and slideshows that visually represent information to support
comprehension.
- Kinesthetic (KA, MP, TR): Use role-play and movement-based activities to enhance learning.
- Reading/Writing (Lower preference overall): Provide written summaries and instructions but combine them with complementary strategies such as interactive writing tools and visual representations.
Evaluating and Using Students’ Strengths, Interests, and Needs for Growth
- Strengths: Identify students' dominant learning styles and use them as starting points for engagement. By educating the students about their strengths, I can help them better understand how they best process information and give them resources that provide study strategies specifically tailored for their strengths (Lander, 2024b). For example, use auditory resources for MJ to leverage their strength in verbal processing and engage HC with structured group discussions.
- Interests: Gather information about students’ hobbies and passions to integrate relevant content into lessons, making learning more engaging. For instance, if a student is interested in music, use song lyrics to teach literary analysis.
- Needs for Growth: Address areas where students show less preference by integrating these modalities subtly into lessons. For example, students with lower Read/Write scores can practice with scaffolded writing exercises paired with visual or auditory supports.
Addressing
All Learning Styles when Developing & Implementing Assessments
When developing and implementing
assessments, it’s essential to design them in a way that appeals to all
learning preferences:
- Auditory: Offer oral presentations or
discussions as part of assessment options. Students could also record
their explanations of concepts.
- Visual: Use diagrams or multimedia
presentations as assessment formats. Students could create visual posters
or infographics to demonstrate understanding.
- Kinesthetic: Include practical
demonstrations, project-based tasks, or models that require physical
manipulation to show comprehension and learning.
- Reading/Writing: While less preferred, ensure
that written tasks are present but supported by audio-visual cues or
interactive written exercises.
Holistic
Assessments:
Combining various formats within a single assessment helps address all learning
styles. For example, a novel or literary analysis project could require:
- A written
report for the Read/Write component.
- An oral
presentation to include auditory learners.
- A poster
or slideshow for visual learners.
- A physical
demonstration for kinesthetic learners.
Evaluation
Approach:
- Use
rubrics that account for multiple ways of demonstrating knowledge.
- Provide
feedback that emphasizes strengths and suggests areas for improvement in
less-preferred modalities.
- Conduct
reflective activities where students can express what strategies helped
them learn best and what they found challenging. Allowing time for
students to pause and reflect on how they are doing will give them time to
“actively engage in metacognitive strategies, such as self-questioning,
summarizing, and reflecting on [their] learning process” with the hope
being for the reflective process to become an automatic part of their
learning process (Lander, 2024b, Make Time for Metacognition section).
My hope is that this multi-faceted approach ensures that instructional plans are inclusive and consider the unique learning needs of each student, promoting balanced development across cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical domains.
References
Fleming, N. D., & Mills, C. (1992). Not
another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. To Improve the Academy,
11, 137–155. https://vark-learn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/not_another_inventory.pdf
Lander, H. (2024, May 20a). Adapting
teaching styles to VARK: A metacognitive approach. VARK. https://vark-learn.com/adapting-teaching-styles-to-vark-a-metacognitive-approach/
Lander, H. (2024, May 20b). How to encourage
student metacognition - 5 tips for teachers. VARK. https://vark-learn.com/how-to-encourage-metacognition-in-students-5-tips-for-teachers/
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., &
Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
No comments:
Post a Comment