Learning Styles
Philosophers, academics and laymen have long attempted to define and categories learning styles. The problem is that learning is a complicated, multifaceted and unique experience for every individual. There are many learning style theories to be found in the literature, below are definitions of a few of the major one's.
Neil Flemming's VAK/VARK model
The VAK (or sometimes referred to VARK) is probably the most widely accepted learning theory. The VAK model includes three types of learners
- Visual - Visual learners are believed to learn more efficiently through a visual process, this includes pictures, diagrams and any other visual aid.
- Auditory - Auditory learners prefer to learn through an auditory process such as spoken word, audiotapes and verbal discussions.
- Kinesthetic learner - Kinesthetic learners prefer to learn through experience, this includes physically moving, touching and doing an activity
David Kolb's Model
(This section is from David's book Experiential Learning: Experiencing as a source of learning)
Converger - Convergers are characterized by abstract conceptualization and active experimentation. They are good at making practical applications of ideas and using deductive reasoning to solve problems
Diverger - Divergers tend toward concrete experience and reflective observation. They are imaginative and are good at coming up with ideas and seeing things from different perspectives
Assimilator - Assimilators are characterized by abstract conceptualization and reflective observation. They are capable of creating theoretical models by means of inductive reasoning
Accommodators - Accommodators use concrete experience and active experimentation. They are good at actively engaging with the world and actually doing things instead of merely reading about and studying them
Felder and Solomon model
The Felder and Solomon model propose 4 different learning styles.
Active and reflective learners - Active learners learn best by actively applying the concept and explaining it to someone else. Reflective learners best learn by critically thinking about the concept/activity.
Sensing and intuitive learners – Sensing learners prefer to learn fact through logical and mechanical steps where as intuitive learners prefer to approach learning through a personal journey of self discovery. I think out of all the learning styles I can most relate to intuitive learning.
Visual and verbal learners – These learning styles are the same defined in the VAK model
Sequential and global learners – Sequential learners prefer to go through a step-by-step process of learning, making sure that one concept is learnt before moving building on it, almost like climbing stairs. Global learners prefer to “look at the big picture” and can struggle to learn through the step-by-step process so familiar with sequential learners.
Multiple Intelligences
As with learning styles, man’s ability to define and categories intelligence has continually been refined. But it was Howard Gardener’s groundbreaking 1983 book Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences that was the first to define intelligence as a multidimensional construct. Previously intelligence was seen as a single general ability. In the book, Gardener proposes that intelligence can be defined though nine specific cognitive abilities. (These definitions have been taken from the book)
Logical-mathematical - This area has to do with logic, abstractions, reasoning and numbers and critical thinking. This also has to do with having the capacity to understand the underlying principles of some kind of causal system. Logical reasoning is closely linked to fluid intelligence and to general intelligence.
Spatial - This area deals with spatial judgment and the ability to visualize with the mind's eye. Spatial ability is one of the three factors beneath g in the hierarchical model of intelligence.
Linguistic - People with high verbal-linguistic intelligence display a facility with words and languages. They are typically good at reading, writing, telling stories and memorizing words along with dates. Verbal ability is one of the most g-loaded abilities. This type of intelligence is associated with the Verbal IQ in WAIS-III.
Kinesthetic - The core elements of the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence are control of one's bodily motions and the capacity to handle objects skillfully. Gardner elaborates to say that this also includes a sense of timing, a clear sense of the goal of a physical action, along with the ability to train responses.
Musical - This area has to do with sensitivity to sounds, rhythms, tones, and music. People with a high musical intelligence normally have good pitch and may even have absolute pitch, and are able to sing, play musical instruments, and compose music
Interpersonal - This area has to do with interaction with others. In theory, individuals who have high interpersonal intelligence are characterized by their sensitivity to others' moods, feelings, temperaments and motivations, and their ability to cooperate in order to work as part of a group.
Intrapersonal - This area has to do with introspective and self-reflective capacities. This refers to having a deep understanding of the self; what your strengths/ weaknesses are, what makes you unique, being able to predict your own reactions/emotions.
Naturalistic - This area has to do with nurturing and relating information to one’s natural surroundings.
Existential - Some proponents of multiple intelligence theory proposed spiritual or religious intelligence as a possible additional type.
Reflection on Prensky's ideas
What is your belief and understanding of the nature of today's learners? Do they really "demand" technology in the classroom?
I like the categorisation of “digital natives” and “digital immigrants”, it perfectly explains the two types of students that are in today's classrooms. I believe that in a current snapshot of students from K-12, you would expect to see a higher percentage of “digital natives” the younger the learners are. This is because technology is now more readily available and is becoming more widely acceptable as a pedagogical tool. New technology have been slowly evolving for centuries, this slow evolution has allowed humans to easily grasp incoming technology. The current gap in technological literacy can be put down to the speed at which technology changes, this exponential growth doesn't allow many people time to adopt new technologies within the lifetime of a given cycle.
Is there substance to the "engage or enrage" argument?
There is a substantial amount of research that provides proof for technologies role in shortening the average human’s attention span. Teachers have always needed to engage their students, the problem educators face today is the time that it takes for a child to disengage is shorter than ever. This means that the problem of bored and disengaged learners is now more prevalent. As educators we can either choose to teach patients and try to lengthen attention spans of learner or have plans that continually and effectively keep learners engaged. Ask any educator, they will say the most common reason a learner is misbehaving is because they are disengaged and bored. So yes, I think the engage or enrage argument does have some substance.
Reflection on Connectivism
I believe strongly that connectivism has a huge potential to change and expand the learning experience for students in today's technological climate. Being able to quickly and free able to access the world’s leading authority of most subjects is something that 15 years ago would seem impossible. In regards to the question of whether that learning is a state within the individual, and therefore connectivism cannot be regarded as a theory of learning, I would agree. Connectivism is the process in which learners open up the ability to gain knowledge and learning occurs as a result of connectivism.
