Higher Education has struggled to acknowledge and translate into better teaching and learning practices that sizeable literature base suggesting a link between cognitive style, learning preferences and performance. Eighty undergraduate students on a primary education degree were studied to examine the relationship between their cognitive style, learning preferences and perceived impact on their teaching practices. Significant differences were found between each of the three cognitive styles investigated: wholist, intermediate and analytic (Riding, 2000). Many of the differences reported in the literature between the different cognitive styles were not evident in this study. However, the interpersonal and intrapersonal characteristics of wholists and analytics respectively, were evident and perceived to impact on planning and delivery in the classroom. While further school-based research involving greater numbers is required, the interest in learning styles remains especially poignant if one intends to truly offer an inclusive education for all learners

Evans, Carol

Waring, Michael

English

Higher education has struggled to acknowledge and translate into better teaching and learning practices that sizeable literature base suggesting a link between cognitive style, learning preferences, and performance. Research is reported in which 80 undergraduate students on a primary education degree were studied to examine the relationship between their cognitive style, their learning preferences, and perceived impact on their teaching practices. All students completed the CSA measure of cognitive style, the ASSIST, two further questionnaires exploring learning preferences and perception of good teaching during the course, and an evaluation at the end of the teaching unit. Significant differences were found between the three cognitive styles investigated: wholist, intermediate, and analytic. In terms of learning preferences, using ANOVA statistically significant differences were found between the three styles with wholists being most concerned about speed of delivery and least liking computerassisted learning. In addition, wholists preferred less structure than analytics in their teaching and claimed to use more images while analytics claimed to use more speech in their teaching. Intermediates demonstrated a greater preference for tangential approaches to teaching and were least happy with the nature of the teaching they had received while at university. Many of the differences reported in the literature between the different cognitive styles were not evident in this study. However, the interpersonal and intrapersonal characteristics of wholists and analytics, respectively, were evident and perceived to impact on planning and delivery in the classroom. While further schoolbased research involving greater numbers is required, interest in learning styles remains especially relevant if one intends to offer a truly inclusive education for all learners.</p

Waring, M.

University of Birmingham Research Portal

Towards inclusive teacher education:Sensitising individuals to how they learn

Higher education has struggled to acknowledge and translate into better teaching and learning practices that sizeable literature base suggesting a link between cognitive style, learning preferences, and performance. Research is reported in which 80 undergraduate students on a primary education degree were studied to examine the relationship between their cognitive style, their learning preferences, and perceived impact on their teaching practices. All students completed the CSA measure of cognitive style, the ASSIST, two further questionnaires exploring learning preferences and perception of good teaching during the course, and an evaluation at the end of the teaching unit. Significant differences were found between the three cognitive styles investigated: wholist, intermediate, and analytic. In terms of learning preferences, using ANOVA statistically significant differences were found between the three styles with wholists being most concerned about speed of delivery and least liking computer‐assisted learning. In addition, wholists preferred less structure than analytics in their teaching and claimed to use more images while analytics claimed to use more speech in their teaching. Intermediates demonstrated a greater preference for tangential approaches to teaching and were least happy with the nature of the teaching they had received while at university. Many of the differences reported in the literature between the different cognitive styles were not evident in this study. However, the interpersonal and intrapersonal characteristics of wholists and analytics, respectively, were evident and perceived to impact on planning and delivery in the classroom. While further school‐based research involving greater numbers is required, interest in learning styles remains especially relevant if one intends to offer a truly inclusive education for all learners

Evans, C.A.

Durham Research Online

Towards Inclusive Teacher Education: Sensitising Individuals to How They Learn

UCL Discovery

Towards Inclusive Teacher Education: Sensitising individuals to how they learn

Institute of Education EPrints

(Eds) Bridging Theory and Practice:

(Eds) The Routledge Falmer Reader in Teaching and Learning.

ASSIST Approaches & Study Skills Inventory for Students (short version). Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction,

Big Policies/Small World: an introduction to international perspectives in education policy.

Cognitive Styles Analysis. Birmingham: Learning and Training Technology,

Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies.

Contrasting perspectives on learning. In:

Developing Teacher Sensitivity to Individual Learning Differences.

Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners. Department for Education and Skills.

From Access to Widening Participation: responses to the changing population in Higher Education in the UK.

Instructional media and technologies for learning (6th Ed.)

Learning Styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning - a systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.

Learning styles: Self report versus thinkingaloud measures.

Making Learning Effective-

Mentors’ perceptions of their roles. In: E.C. Wragg

New Teacher Education for the Future: International Perspectives.

Old Institutions fail on access targets. In:

Personal Style Awareness and Personal Development. Birmingham: Learning and Training Technology,

Professional Standards for Qualifies Teacher Status and Requirements for Initial Teacher Training. London: Teacher Training Agency.

Psychometric Theory.

School Learning and Cognitive Style.

Teacher Education Through Open and Distance Learning: world review of distance education and open learning volume 3.

Test-Retest Reliability of Riding’s

The Intuitive Practitioner: A critical overview. In: T. Atkinson & G. Claxton (Eds) The Intuitive Practitioner,

The Lived Space of Learning: An Inquiry into Indigenous Australian University Students’ Experiences of Studying. In

The nature of cognitive styles: problems and promises in educational research.

The relationship between learning style and cognitive style.

The relationship between the cognitive style(s) and preferred teacher style(s) of PGCE students. Unpublished Ed.D thesis,

The Reliability of Riding’s Cognitive Style Analysis Test, Personality and Individual Differences,

The Theory and Practice of Teaching.

Tracking the development of learning dispositions.

Understanding Trainees Cognitive Styles as Part of Teacher Education.

Higher education has struggled to acknowledge and translate into better teaching and learning practices that sizeable literature base suggesting a link between cognitive style, learning preferences, and performance. Research is reported in which 80 undergraduate students on a primary education degree were studied to examine the relationship between their cognitive style, their learning preferences, and perceived impact on their teaching practices. All students completed the CSA measure of cognitive style, the ASSIST, two further questionnaires exploring learning preferences and perception of good teaching during the course, and an evaluation at the end of the teaching unit. Significant differences were found between the three cognitive styles investigated: wholist, intermediate, and analytic. In terms of learning preferences, using ANOVA statistically significant differences were found between the three styles with wholists being most concerned about speed of delivery and least liking computer-assisted learning. In addition, wholists preferred less structure than analytics in their teaching and claimed to use more images while analytics claimed to use more speech in their teaching. Intermediates demonstrated a greater preference for tangential approaches to teaching and were least happy with the nature of the teaching they had received while at university. Many of the differences reported in the literature between the different cognitive styles were not evident in this study. However, the interpersonal and intrapersonal characteristics of wholists and analytics, respectively, were evident and perceived to impact on planning and delivery in the classroom. While further school-based research involving greater numbers is required, interest in learning styles remains especially relevant if one intends to offer a truly inclusive education for all learners

Evans, C.

Southampton (e-Prints Soton)

Towards inclusive teacher education: sensitising individuals to how they learn

http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10002509/1/Evans2006Towards499.pdf

Towards Inclusive Teacher Education: Sensitising individuals to how they learn

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Birmingham Research Portal

Durham Research Online

University of Birmingham Research Portal

UCL Discovery

Institute of Education EPrints

Southampton (e-Prints Soton)