Learning styles impact research
In my teaching class, we're required to write a teaching statement (or teaching philosophy). I'm in the process of revising mine. One of the things I address in my teaching statement is that I would hope to facilitate learning for a variety of learning styles. While I was doing some background research on this, I came across an article on how learning styles may impact a graduate student's efficacy and perceived efficacy in research activities.
I found this intriguing because I have to admit that I never thought of the implications of learning styles impacting much outside of the classroom environment. However, this paper demonstrated that these preferences may impact how successful a student is at research as well as the possibility that the modern research environment may favor some learning styles above others.
The paper, "Learning Styles as Predictors of Self-Efficacy and Interest in Research: Implications for Graduate Research Training," was written by Crystal R. West, Jeffrey H. Kahn, and Margaret M. Nauta. (It's behind a paywall. Sorry.) This particular paper examines research training for students in a variety of psychology subfields. They used Index of Learning Styles based on Felder and Silverman's model and then used another test to look at how effective students were and thought they were in their research.
They found that of the four variables measured by the learning styles questionaire, three seemed to impact research. The one that did not was the global/sequential scale. They found that grad students with verbal, active, and intuitive preferences were drawn into research more easily than students with visual, reflective, and sensing preferences.
I found their conclusions quite interesting: the authors suggested to simple ways to draw the more "reluctant" students into research activities by making small changes that would help them access their strengths. For instance, reflective learners tend to be cautious before proceeding forward and like to spend a lot of time contemplating their research. The authors suggested that advisors recommend these students keep a research journal where they write down their thoughts and questions about research. Visual learners, of course, will appreciate more visual representations of processes, and sensing learners will benefit from many examples or more concrete advice about conducting research. All of these changes can be made without dramatically impacting any of the fundamental processes of how research is conducted.
While this paper addressed specifically psychology graduate students, I think it's important to remember that any advisor may have grad students with a variety of learning styles. Understanding learning styles could potentially have many positive benefits for both advisor and student if learning styles can be taken into account when approaching research. If the student is aware of their learning style and that this may affect their efficacy in research, it may help them to find ways to integrate their preferred approach with activities that seem difficult for them.
I found this intriguing because I have to admit that I never thought of the implications of learning styles impacting much outside of the classroom environment. However, this paper demonstrated that these preferences may impact how successful a student is at research as well as the possibility that the modern research environment may favor some learning styles above others.
The paper, "Learning Styles as Predictors of Self-Efficacy and Interest in Research: Implications for Graduate Research Training," was written by Crystal R. West, Jeffrey H. Kahn, and Margaret M. Nauta. (It's behind a paywall. Sorry.) This particular paper examines research training for students in a variety of psychology subfields. They used Index of Learning Styles based on Felder and Silverman's model and then used another test to look at how effective students were and thought they were in their research.
They found that of the four variables measured by the learning styles questionaire, three seemed to impact research. The one that did not was the global/sequential scale. They found that grad students with verbal, active, and intuitive preferences were drawn into research more easily than students with visual, reflective, and sensing preferences.
I found their conclusions quite interesting: the authors suggested to simple ways to draw the more "reluctant" students into research activities by making small changes that would help them access their strengths. For instance, reflective learners tend to be cautious before proceeding forward and like to spend a lot of time contemplating their research. The authors suggested that advisors recommend these students keep a research journal where they write down their thoughts and questions about research. Visual learners, of course, will appreciate more visual representations of processes, and sensing learners will benefit from many examples or more concrete advice about conducting research. All of these changes can be made without dramatically impacting any of the fundamental processes of how research is conducted.
While this paper addressed specifically psychology graduate students, I think it's important to remember that any advisor may have grad students with a variety of learning styles. Understanding learning styles could potentially have many positive benefits for both advisor and student if learning styles can be taken into account when approaching research. If the student is aware of their learning style and that this may affect their efficacy in research, it may help them to find ways to integrate their preferred approach with activities that seem difficult for them.