Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 427433

WCES-2010

How valid and useful is the notion of learning style? A multicultural investigation
Tony Younga *
a

School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, Newcastle University, UK Received October 6, 2009; revised December 15, 2009; accepted January 4, 2010

Abstract
This study investigated the views of language teachers and learners on the utility and validity of applied learning style theory. Learning styles attempt to categorise peoples habitual cognitive, affective and psychosocial responses and approaches to new information. There are numerous definitions of the term, and a profusion of taxonomies inform the instruments which purport to index the learning styles of individuals, and of cultural groups. The study found little evidence of the validity of a Style Analysis Survey, especially as a predictor of cultural styles. However, learners and some teachers did see the instrument as a tool for empowering individual learners. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Learner centredness; learning styles; language teacher beliefs; language learner beliefs; culture and learning.

1. Introduction There are a profusion of definitions and taxonomies of learning style. Aspects often overlap, and terminology is confused and confusing: Galloway and Labarca (1991. p.113) state that readers reviewing the literature on learning styles will benefit from a high tolerance of ambiguity. More positively, De Vita (200, p.166) sees in this literature an extremely rich but fragmented theoretical landscape. It is possible to discern some points of commonality. For example, Keefes (1979, p.4) definition of learning style is frequently cited in the language pedagogical literature (see, for example, De Vita, 2001; Dreyer, 1998; Eliason, 1995; Ellis, 1994; Nelson, 1995). Here, learning styles are defined as, the characteristic cognitive, affective and psychological behaviours that serve as relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with and respond to the learning environment[ ]. Learning style is a consistent way of functioning that reflects underlying causes of behaviour. Keefes characteristic and relatively stable are reformulated by Ehrman and Oxford (1990, p.311) into the preferred or habitual patterns of mental functioning and dealing with new information. Scarcella (1990, p.114) frames learning styles as cognitive and interactional

* Tony Young. Tel.: + 44 (01) 91 222 7515 E-mail address: tony.young@ncl.ac.uk

1877-0428 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.037

428

Tony Young / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 427433

patterns which affect the ways students perceive, remember and think. Cornett (1983, p.9), in broader terms, has individual learning styles as the overall patterns that give general direction to learning behaviour. Learning styles theory has its central purpose the construction of tools for getting to grips with learners sensory characteristics and their psychosocial and cognitive involvement in their studies (De Vita, 2001). Taxonomies of learning styles frequently serve as underpinnings for curricular innovation. Areas where learning style theory has recently been particularly influential include e-learning and information and communication technology education (see, for example, Carswell, Thomas, Petre, Price & Richards, 2000; Federico, 2000; Gilbert & Han, 1999; Lewis & Orton, 2000; Mehlenbacher, Miller, Covington & Larsen, 2000; Palmquist & Kim, 2000). It is also prominent across a range of higher and tertiary educational disciplines from nursing, medicine and veterinary science (see for example Colucciello, 1999; Linares, 1999; Smith & Woody 2000; Stickle, Lloyd, Keller and Cherney, 1999) to teacher education (e.g. Hatvia & Birenbaum, 2000). In language learning pedagogical theory, the movement away from methodology to learner-centredness has been particularly marked since the 1980s. This period has seen a dramatic movement away from an emphasis on what a teacher does in following particular guidelines to the current focus on the learner, specifically who the learner is and what he/she wants, needs and thinks (Oxford, 1998). One result of this has been a change in the role of the teacher, from the fount of all wisdom and director of classroom activity, to a facilitator of learning and guide towards greater autonomy for the language learner. Central to this role is an awareness of an individual learners style of learning. Ely & Pease-Alvarez (1996) recognise the complexity of dealing with the notions of learning styles and strategies, observing that learner-centredness involves building up a complex picture of the student as both a product of his or her past and as an individual with future potentialities. Teachers need to find out as much as possible about how their students have been socialised and educated, and then, it is suggested, build upon the students current style preferences. Thus knowing a learning style entails knowledge of the learner at the very deepest level. Such knowledge may involve some understanding of their culturally informed learning style, culture being said to play a strong, possibly dominant, role in determining how an individual will prefer to learn (e.g. Dreyer, 1998; Shiraev & Levy, 2004). Numerous studies have purported to show how particular cultural groups share features of preferred learning style which are often different from those preferred by a dominant ethnic of linguistic majority (for summaries of cases see De Vita, 2001; Oxford & Anderson, 1995). Advocates of the utility of learner styles emphasise that the instruments used to test and measure them have as their central purpose the building up of self-knowledge. Tudor (1996), for example, states that the main goal of learning styles research is to help teachers get to grips with their students learning behaviours around a finite number of poles of difference, and thereby to be better able to respond to learners subjective needs in an informed manner. Whatever the frequently stated theoretical vagueness of the construct, the learner can, it is argued, ultimately take or leave any attempt to taxonomise his or her style. Even if they opt for the latter, they will, in the very act of self-reflection, have gone some way toward developing autonomy 2. The Study 2.1. Research Questions This study addressed the question of whether, despite its theoretical vagueness, the construct of learning style is seen by teachers as being a useful tool in informing their response to their students, i.e. whether it has the practical pedagogical utility which theoreticians ascribe to it. Thus, in a multicultural classroom setting, are individual learning styles discernible, and if discernible, useful, to teachers and to learners? Beyond individual styles, could cultural style preferences be found among different national groups of teachers and learners? No research prior to this study had investigated the attitudes of beliefs and teachers of multicultural classes toward the notion of cultural learning styles, although a growing body of research literature investigating teacher cognition has suggested that teachers beliefs directly affect both their perceptions and judgments of teaching and learning interactions in the classroom, and the different behaviours which ensue (e.g. Clark & Peterson, 1986; Clark & Yinger, 1987, Pajares, 1992).

Tony Young / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 427433

429

2.2. Participants There were 2 groups of participants. Firstly, qualified and experienced teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) with adult learners (N= 47): over 80% had at least 10 years of teaching experience, their ages ranged from 25 to 59 years old. The second group was 87 adult EFL learners undertaking courses of study in the UK. Of these, 39 were Brazilian, 19 Argentine, 18 were European (the largest nationality representation being Swiss, German and Italian), and 11 students of other nationalities (Japanese, Peruvian, Mexican, UAE and Saudi). All learner participants were of at least Council of Europe level C2 (2001), or lower advanced. All were undergoing a college education or were graduates, and their ages ranged from 19 to 29 years old. There were 67 female learners and 20 male learner participants. 2.3. Procedure Oxfords (1993) Style Analysis Survey (SAS) was chosen as the main instrument. It has been employed as a style measuring instrument in multicultural settings, and, unlike other learning style instruments, is especially relevant for learners of languages (Drnyei, 2005). The SAS has been normed on both native- and non-native English speaking populations, has been found to have high reliability (Cronbachs alpha of 0.92), and has shown both content and concurrent validity (Dreyer, 1998). In addition it was a self-contained instrument, suitable for a learner-centric approach, offering the participant the opportunity to self-score, then giving descriptors of styles based on these scores, and ending with suggestions for applying these styles most successfully. Table 1 below details the subscales of the SAS.
Table 1: Dimensions of learning Style in the SAS Dimensions Physiological Learning Style Aspect Sensory characteristics and preferences of the learner Polarities Visual Auditory Hands-on Social and affective Cognitive and executive (1) Preferred level of involvement of others in the learning process How a learner prefers to handle possibilities and degrees of certainty/uncertainty Extrovert Introvert Intuitive Descriptor Generally prefer to read and receive visual input Generally comfortable with oral instructions and aural input Preferring movement, action, touch, a.k.a. haptic, tactile, kinesthetic Preferring the involvement of others Preferring to work alone while learning Intuitive, non-linear, random-access mode, a.k.a intuitive-random. Prefers sequential, linear, concrete input and mental organization a.k.a. relational, field dependent, right-brain dominant. Tends to go from the big picture to detail. a.k.a. field independent, left-brain dominant. Detail orientated, moving from detail to the whole a.k.a. judging, seeks early decisions or judgements, disliking uncertainty a.k.a. perceiving , i.e perceiving a great deal of input and postponing decision or judgement, tolerant of ambiguity of uncertainty

Concrete Sequential Global

Cognitive

How a learner deals with ideas

Analytic Cognitive and executive (2) How a learner approaches tasks Closure orientated Open

Each subscale had ten related items, each of which were scored on 4-point Likert scales (from 0 3).

Teachers completed an instrument consisting of a consent form, and a personal information section, which included details of gender, age and years of EFL teaching experience. The third part of the pack consisted of the SAS; the fourth sought reactions to the survey and asking various questions arising from it, related to the results they would anticipate from Brazilian students completing an SAS. The researchers facilitated a 60-minute focus group

430

Tony Young / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 427433

with 8 teacher participants to discuss matters arising from the SAS in one of the schools where the teachers worked. The learners completed a similar instrument to the teachers, but were not asked for predictions of Brazilian learning style preferences. A random, self-selected sample of advanced level learners (N= 8) from 6 different nationalities took part in a separate focus group to discuss matters arising. 2.4. Findings 2.4.1. Cultural Style Preference Profiles Two participant groups were large enough for comparison, British (teachers) and Brazilians (learners). Using data drawn from the completed SAS, tests of between subjects effects revealed that British teachers are more visual (m = 15.7) than auditory (m = 12.7) or hands-on (m = 12.3) in a study or work situation (df = 43, p < .001). Paired sample t-tests revealed that British teachers are more extrovert (m = 15.9) than introvert (m = 12.3) when dealing with others in a study or work situation (t = 2.89, df = 43, p<.006). They are more intuitive (m = 16.6) than concrete sequential (m = 12.6) when handling possibilities in a study or work situation (t = 4.61, df = 43, p < . 001). British teachers are more closure-orientated (m = 17.9) than open (m = 13.5) in their approach to tasks in a study or work situation (t = 4.11, df = 43, p < .001). British teachers are more global (m = 17.1) than analytic (m = 11.9) when dealing with ideas in a study or work situation (t = 5.59, df = 43, p < .001). Tests of between subject effects revealed that Brazilian learners are more visual (m = 16.3) than hands-on (m = 14.0) or auditory (m = 12.9) in their preferred physical learning style (df = 38, p < .001). Paired sample t-tests revealed that Brazilian learners are more extrovert (m = 17.7) than introvert (m = 12.2) when dealing with others in a study or work situation (t = 3.45, df = 38, p< .001). Brazilian learners are more intuitive (m = 17.9) than concretesequential (m = 13.8) when handling possibilities in a study or work situation (t = 4.01, df = 38, p< .001). Brazilian learners are more closure-orientated (m = 19.4) than open (m = 13.0) in their approach to tasks (t = 5.28, df = 38, p < .001). Brazilian learners are more global (m = 17.7) than analytic (m = 12.2) in dealing with ideas (t = 4.41. df = 38, p < .001). Analysis therefore revealed that the groups of British and of Brazilian participants expressed the same preferences in all of the aspects of learning style examined by the SAS. Interestingly, not all individual participants shared this profile. Analysis revealed no significant relationship between grouping variables other than nationality, such as age group or gender, and learning style preferences, except in the single instance of Brazilian male participants (n=12) expressing a preference for an open approach to tasks (m=16.3) compared with the 27 female Brazilian participants (m = 11.62 ,t = 3.15, df = 39, p<.003). 2.4.2. Teachers Perceptions of cultural styles Teachers predictions of preferred cultural learning styles were analysed, and in the case of Brazilians, such predictions were compared with actual preferences. Analysis revealed that in two of the five aspects under investigation teachers predictions were different from those actually expressed by the majority of Brazilian learners. Findings are detailed in table 2 below.
Table 2 : A Comparison of Teachers Predictions with Actual Learning Style Preferences Learning Style Aspect Physical Dealing with others Handling Possibilities Approaching tasks Dealing with ideas Teachers Prediction (% of all valid teacher responses) Aud+visual+hands-on (21.3%) Extrovert (78.7%) Intuitive (80.9%) Open (70.2%) Global (83.0%) Global (m=17.7) Brazilians Stated Preference (from SAS) Visual (m=16.3) Extrovert (m=17.7) Intuitive (m=17.9) Closure Orientated (m=19.4) Confirmation of prediction? No. Yes. Yes. No. Yes.

Tony Young / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 427433

431

2.4.3. The utility of the SAS to teachers and learners Opinion was divided among the 43 teacher respondents to the survey, with the mean response at 3.06, very close to the midpoint on the 5 point Likert scale. Analysis revealed that 36% of respondents believed that it would be not useful, or not at all useful, 19% expressed a neutral opinion, and 46% said they would find it useful or very useful. The teacher focus group were equally divided, with half of the 8 participants saying they would use the SAS as a tool with advanced level learners, and the other half saying they would not. Those who stated that they would use gave the following reasons: 1. They perceived it to give an accurate picture of their own (and therefore learners) styles 2. They felt it would be a useful instrument as part of a needs analysis and syllabus negotiation exercise 3. It would give them and learners a common vocabulary with which to discuss learning in a meaningful way and thus aid learner centredness Those who stated they wouldnt use the SAS gave the following broad reasons: 1. They distrusted the validity of the survey in a small number of cases 2. Even if the validity of the survey was not questioned, these teachers felt unsure what to do with the results. What, for example, if they were presented with a plethora of different Styles within one group? A majority of teachers, 6 out of 8, were unhappy with the exercise of identifying cultural learning styles. They felt that this stereotyped learners by cultural background, and as such ran counter to their attempts to centre learning round learners, and to treat learners as individuals. The fact that the patterns reported were so consistent did not surprise any of the teachers, such stereotypical views do exist, but they reported that they did not act upon them. The learner focus group was much more positive about the utility of the SAS with individual learners. None questioned its validity, all were happy that the profile it produced of them as learners was accurate. All felt that it would be a useful tool in sharing their preferences with other learners and with teachers, thus aiding class integration. All felt it would have been useful as part of an induction process on the EFL course they were undertaking. Opinion was divided fairly equally among learner participants about cultural style preferences. Half of the participants felt that these existed, and that therefore it would be useful to reveal and discuss them. The other half felt that a cultural group was unlikely to exhibit a single set of preferred characteristics of the type defined and measured by the SAS. The learner participants who felt cultural profiles did exist felt able to identify aspects of the learning styles of out-group members, but had more difficulty in identifying in-group preferences in all cases. 3. Summary and conclusions A detailed view of the interface between learner and teacher beliefs and multicultural language classroom realities emerged from this investigation. Little evidence of the validity of the SAS was apparent, especially as a predictor of cultural styles. It should be noted that the relative homogeneity of the participant group (all adults, all college educated) may be a limitation on the possible generalisability of the findings. Learner and some teacher participants did see the instrument as a tool for empowering learners on an individual basis. Notions of style and of the realisation of independent learning seem fertile areas for future, action-orientated, classroom-based research. To summarise: 1. A strong awareness among teachers emerged about the social undesirability of stereotyping outgroup members as cultural types in any terms, specifically here in the psychosocial, sensory and cognitive terms employed by the SAS. Critical perspectives on culture, cultural essentialism and cultural stereotyping in language teaching (e.g. Holliday, 1999; Kubota, 2001; Spack, 1997; Zamel, 1997) thus gain some support from these findings. 2. On this evidence, strong and consistent perceptions of outgroup members do, however, exist among experienced teachers of multicultural EFL classes. The nature of the relationship between their beliefs and their actions towards outgroup members is worthy of further investigation. 3. Two groups, very different when measured using indexes such as Hofstedes (1986) 4-D Model of (purported) cultural difference, have here been shown to have identical learning style profiles. A number of implications are possible from this finding: It may be a product of the instrument: further testing of the reliability of the SAS is needed. The 2 groups may not be essentially different in their preferred sensory, psychosocial and profile and cognitive processing. Educational background and social class, common to both the groups

432

Tony Young / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 427433

4.

5.

investigated here, may be stronger determinants of style than national culture. Previous studies which have shown a difference of style between groups have tended to investigate groups from the lower ends of the socioeconomic spectrum (e.g. Dreyers 1998 investigation of Setswana/Sesothospeaking South Africans, Nelsons 1995 study of Hawaiian Americans, and Harshbargers 1986 study of Hispanic-Americans). Further investigation of commonalities of style between the upper echelons of socioeconomic groups in different societies may be warranted. Learners exposed to the nation of style are positively disposed towards it, and feel it is a valuable tool in getting to know themselves, and others, as a learner. This would imply strongly that there is a place for attempts to index individual learning styles in learner-centred language curricula, and that profiles arising may be useful tools for both learners and teachers who are prepared to use them. Teachers remain more ambivalent, with some seeing learning styles as a potentially valuable tool in learner-centring: others question the validity of the construct, and the utility of instruments measuring it. Further investigation is clearly needed, but there are indications from the findings of this study that teachers may still be thinking in terms of a methodological approach to pedagogy, where the diversity of preferred approaches to learning among language learners is not a social reality to be addressed, but a problem to be ignored or avoided.

References
Carswell L., Thomas P., Petre M., Price B. & Richards, M. (2000). Distance learning via the internet: the student experience. British Journal of Educational Technology 31 (1), 29-46. Colucciello, M.L. (1999). Relationships between critical thinking dispositions and learning styles Journal of Professional Nursing. 15 (5), 294301. Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P.L. (1986) Teachers thought processes. In M.C. Wittrock, Second handbook of research on teaching (p. 255-296). New York: MacMillan. Clark, C. & Yinger, R. (1987) Exploring teacher thinking. In J. Calderhead (ed.) Teacher Planning (p. 57 71). London: Cassell. Council of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: CUP. De Vita, G. (2001). Learning Styles, culture and inclusive instruction in the multicultural classroom: A business and management perspective. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 38 (2), 165- 74. Drnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. Dreyer, C. (1998). Teacher-student style wars in South Africa: The silent battle. System, 26, 115-126. Ehrman, M.E. & Oxford, R.L. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. Modern Language Journal, 74 (3), 311-327. Eliason, P. (1995). Difficulties with cross-cultural learning-styles assessment. In J.M. Reid (Ed.), Learning Styles In the ESL/EFL Classroom (pp.18 33). Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. .Oxford: OUP. Gilbert, J.E. & Han, C.Y. (1999). Adapting instruction in search of a significant difference. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 22 (3), 149-160. Federico, P.A. (2000). Learning styles and student attitudes towards various aspects of network-based instruction. Computers in Human Behaviour. 16 (4) 359 379. Harshbarger, B., Ross, T., Tafoya, S., & Via, J. (1986). Dealing with multiple learning styles in the ESL classroom. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Hatvia, N. & Birenbaum, M. (2000). Who prefers what? Disciplinary differences in learners preferred approaches to teaching and learning styles. Research in Higher Education 41 (2), 209-236. Holliday, A. (1999). Small Cultures. Applied Linguistics, 20 (2), 237-264. Keefe, J.W. (1979). Learning Style: an overview. In J.W. Keefe (Ed), Student Learning Styles: Diagnosing and Prescribing Programs (pp. 1 17). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals. Kubota, R. (2001). Discursive constructions of the images of U.S. classrooms. TESOL Quarterly 35 (1), 24 35. Lewis, N.J. & Orton, P. (2000). The five attributes of innovative e-learning. Training and Development 54 (6), 47-56. Linares, A.Z. (1999). Learning styles of students and faculty in selected health care profession. Journal of Nursing Education 38 (9), 407 414. Mehlenbacher, B, Miller, C.R., Covington, D. & Larsen, J.S. (2000). Active and interactive learning online: a comparison of web-based and conventional writing classes. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 43 (2) 166-184. Mittag, K.C. (1999). Measuring the Jungian personality types of Hispanic high school students. Assessment 6 (3), 293-300. Nelson, G. (1995). Cultural Differences in learning styles. In J.M. Reid, (Ed.), Learning Styles In the ESL/EFL Classroom (pp.3 18). Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Oxford, R.L. & Anderson, N.J. (1995). A crosscultural view of learning styles. Language Teaching 28, 201-215. Pajares, M.F. (1992) Teachers beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307-332.

Tony Young / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 427433

433

Palmquist, R.A.& Kim, K.S. (2000). Cognitive style and on-line database search experience as predictors of web search performance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51 (6), 558-566. Pickworth, G.E. & Schoeman, W.J. (2000). The psychometric properties of the learning style inventory and the learning style questionnaire: two normative measures of learning styles. South African Journal of Psychology 30 (2), 44-52. Scarcella, R. (1990). Teaching Minority Children in the Multicultural Classroom. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice Hall. Shiraev, E. & Levy, D. (2004). Cross Cultural Psychology: Critical thinking and contemporary applications. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Smith, P.J. (2000). Vocational students learning preferences: the interpretability of ipsative data. Psychological Reports 86 (1), 25-39. Smith, S.M. & Woody, P.C. (2000). Interactive effect of multimedia instruction and learning styles. Teaching of Psychology 27 (3), 220-223. Spack, R. (1997). The rhetorical construction of multilingual students. TESOL Quarterly 31 (2), 765-774. Stickle, J.E., Lloyd, J., Keller, W.F., Cherney, E. (1999). Learning styles in veterinary medicine; relation to progression through the professional curriculum and integration into the profession. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 26 (2), 9 12. Tudor, I. (1996). Learner Centredness as Language Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zamel, V. (1997). Towards a model of transculturation. TESOL Quarterly 31 (2), 341 352.