Veenman Marcel V J, Prins Frans J, Verheij Joke
Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology, Leiden University, The Netherlands.
Br J Educ Psychol. 2003 Sep;73(Pt 3):357-72. doi: 10.1348/000709903322275885.
Learning styles are often assessed through students' self-reports on instruments such as Vermunt's Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS). Recent research, however, has questioned the adequacy of questionnaires for the assessment of learning styles.
The objective of this paper is to evaluate methods of learning style assessment as a means for identifying students at risk. Therefore, the ILS as a self-report instrument will be compared with the students' actual study processes, assessed through the thinking-aloud method.
In the first study 1,060 students from the Technical University of Delft participated. Thirty-three of them were selected on the ILS for participation in the second study.
The ILS was administered to the 1,060 participants and their study results (GPA and credit points) were collected. Next, the selected 33 participants studied a technical text while thinking aloud. Knowledge acquisition was measured by means of a post-test. Thinking-aloud protocols were analysed on frequencies of study activities, thus representing process measures of learning styles.
The ILS proved to be a rather weak predictor of study results in Study 1. Results from Study 2 show hardly any correspondence between ILS and study process measures, although principal component structures of both measures were highly similar. Furthermore, study process measures outweighed the ILS in the prediction of study results (post-test, GPA and credit points).
Learning style theory was confirmed by results on the study process measures. The assessment of learning styles through self-report instruments such as the ILS, however, should be reconsidered.
学习风格通常通过学生在诸如弗蒙特学习风格量表(ILS)等工具上的自我报告来评估。然而,最近的研究对问卷用于评估学习风格的充分性提出了质疑。
本文的目的是评估学习风格评估方法,以此作为识别有风险学生的一种手段。因此,将作为自我报告工具的ILS与通过出声思考法评估的学生实际学习过程进行比较。
在第一项研究中,代尔夫特理工大学的1060名学生参与其中。根据ILS从中挑选出33名学生参与第二项研究。
对1060名参与者进行ILS测试,并收集他们的学习成绩(平均绩点和学分)。接下来,挑选出的33名参与者在出声思考的同时阅读一篇技术文本。通过后测来衡量知识获取情况。对出声思考记录进行学习活动频率分析,从而得出学习风格的过程性指标。
在第一项研究中,ILS被证明是学习成绩的一个相当弱的预测指标。第二项研究的结果表明,尽管两种测量方法的主成分结构高度相似,但ILS与学习过程指标之间几乎没有对应关系。此外,在预测学习成绩(后测、平均绩点和学分)方面,学习过程指标比ILS更具优势。
学习风格理论在学习过程指标的结果中得到了证实。然而,对于通过诸如ILS等自我报告工具来评估学习风格,应该重新进行考量。