Department of Applied Physiology and Kinesiology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Adv Physiol Educ. 2010 Dec;34(4):197-204. doi: 10.1152/advan.00078.2010.
Students have learning style preferences that are often classified according to their visual (V), aural (A), read-write (R), and/or kinesthetic (K) sensory modality preferences (SMP). The purposes of this investigation were to compare student perceived and assessed SMPs and examine the associations between those SMPs and status (i.e., undergraduates vs. graduates), sex, and course performance. Students from the fall 2009 APK 3110 and APK 6116 Exercise Physiology courses were asked to indicate their perceived SMPs and complete the standard VARK SMP assessment. There were 64 student respondents: 50 undergraduates and 14 graduates (40 women and 24 men). According to the perceived SMP results, the largest number of respondents chose V (36%), followed by R (28%), K (19%), and A (17%). In terms of assessed SMPs, the largest number of respondents were classified as VARK (37%), followed by R (14%), AK (11%), K (8%), VK (6%), ARK (6%), A (5%), VAK (3%), RK (3%), V (2%), AR (2%), and VRK (2%). Nearly two-thirds of the respondents correctly matched their perceived and dominant assessed SMP. There was no statistical association between SMP and status. There was a very nearly significant relationship between sex and both perceived (χ(2) = 7.18, P = 0.06) and assessed (χ(2) = 17.36, P = 0.09) SMP. Finally, there was a significant relationship between perceived SMP and course scores (P = 0.01 by ANOVA). Post hoc tests revealed that the K group scored significantly lower than the other three modality groups.
学生有学习风格偏好,这些偏好通常根据他们的视觉(V)、听觉(A)、读写(R)和/或动觉(K)感官模式偏好(SMP)进行分类。本研究的目的是比较学生感知和评估的 SMP,并研究这些 SMP 与状态(即本科生与研究生)、性别和课程表现之间的关系。要求 2009 年秋季 APK 3110 和 APK 6116 运动生理学课程的学生表明他们感知的 SMP,并完成标准的 VARK SMP 评估。共有 64 名学生回答了问卷:50 名本科生和 14 名研究生(40 名女性和 24 名男性)。根据感知的 SMP 结果,选择 V 的人数最多(36%),其次是 R(28%)、K(19%)和 A(17%)。就评估的 SMP 而言,选择 VARK 的人数最多(37%),其次是 R(14%)、AK(11%)、K(8%)、VK(6%)、ARK(6%)、A(5%)、VAK(3%)、RK(3%)、V(2%)、AR(2%)和 VRK(2%)。近三分之二的学生正确匹配了他们感知到的和占主导地位的评估 SMP。SMP 与状态之间没有统计学上的关联。性别与感知(χ(2) = 7.18,P = 0.06)和评估(χ(2) = 17.36,P = 0.09)SMP 之间存在非常接近的关系。最后,感知 SMP 与课程成绩之间存在显著关系(ANOVA 检验,P = 0.01)。事后检验显示,K 组的得分明显低于其他三个模式组。