Suppr超能文献

学习风格:概念与证据。

Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence.

机构信息

University of California, San Diego

Washington University in St. Louis.

出版信息

Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2008 Dec;9(3):105-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x. Epub 2008 Dec 1.

Abstract

The term "learning styles" refers to the concept that individuals differ in regard to what mode of instruction or study is most effective for them. Proponents of learning-style assessment contend that optimal instruction requires diagnosing individuals' learning style and tailoring instruction accordingly. Assessments of learning style typically ask people to evaluate what sort of information presentation they prefer (e.g., words versus pictures versus speech) and/or what kind of mental activity they find most engaging or congenial (e.g., analysis versus listening), although assessment instruments are extremely diverse. The most common-but not the only-hypothesis about the instructional relevance of learning styles is the meshing hypothesis, according to which instruction is best provided in a format that matches the preferences of the learner (e.g., for a "visual learner," emphasizing visual presentation of information). The learning-styles view has acquired great influence within the education field, and is frequently encountered at levels ranging from kindergarten to graduate school. There is a thriving industry devoted to publishing learning-styles tests and guidebooks for teachers, and many organizations offer professional development workshops for teachers and educators built around the concept of learning styles. The authors of the present review were charged with determining whether these practices are supported by scientific evidence. We concluded that any credible validation of learning-styles-based instruction requires robust documentation of a very particular type of experimental finding with several necessary criteria. First, students must be divided into groups on the basis of their learning styles, and then students from each group must be randomly assigned to receive one of multiple instructional methods. Next, students must then sit for a final test that is the same for all students. Finally, in order to demonstrate that optimal learning requires that students receive instruction tailored to their putative learning style, the experiment must reveal a specific type of interaction between learning style and instructional method: Students with one learning style achieve the best educational outcome when given an instructional method that differs from the instructional method producing the best outcome for students with a different learning style. In other words, the instructional method that proves most effective for students with one learning style is not the most effective method for students with a different learning style. Our review of the literature disclosed ample evidence that children and adults will, if asked, express preferences about how they prefer information to be presented to them. There is also plentiful evidence arguing that people differ in the degree to which they have some fairly specific aptitudes for different kinds of thinking and for processing different types of information. However, we found virtually no evidence for the interaction pattern mentioned above, which was judged to be a precondition for validating the educational applications of learning styles. Although the literature on learning styles is enormous, very few studies have even used an experimental methodology capable of testing the validity of learning styles applied to education. Moreover, of those that did use an appropriate method, several found results that flatly contradict the popular meshing hypothesis. We conclude therefore, that at present, there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning-styles assessments into general educational practice. Thus, limited education resources would better be devoted to adopting other educational practices that have a strong evidence base, of which there are an increasing number. However, given the lack of methodologically sound studies of learning styles, it would be an error to conclude that all possible versions of learning styles have been tested and found wanting; many have simply not been tested at all. Further research on the use of learning-styles assessment in instruction may in some cases be warranted, but such research needs to be performed appropriately.

摘要

“学习风格”一词是指个体在何种教学模式或学习方式对他们最有效方面存在差异的概念。学习风格评估的支持者认为,最佳教学需要诊断个体的学习风格,并相应地调整教学。学习风格评估通常要求人们评估他们更喜欢哪种信息呈现方式(例如,文字、图片还是语音),以及/或者哪种心理活动最能引起他们的兴趣或共鸣(例如,分析还是倾听),尽管评估工具非常多样化。关于学习风格的教学相关性的最常见但不是唯一的假设是匹配假设,根据该假设,教学最好以与学习者偏好相匹配的方式提供(例如,对于“视觉学习者”,强调信息的视觉呈现)。学习风格观点在教育领域获得了很大的影响力,并且在从幼儿园到研究生院的各个层次都经常出现。有一个繁荣的行业致力于出版学习风格测试和教师指南,许多组织还为教师和教育工作者提供围绕学习风格概念构建的专业发展研讨会。本综述的作者负责确定这些实践是否得到科学证据的支持。我们的结论是,任何基于学习风格的教学的可信验证都需要有非常特定类型的实验结果的有力记录,这些结果需要满足几个必要的标准。首先,必须根据学生的学习风格将他们分成不同的组,然后必须将每个组的学生随机分配到多种教学方法中的一种。接下来,学生必须参加一个对所有学生都相同的期末考试。最后,为了证明最佳学习需要学生接受适合他们假定学习风格的指导,实验必须揭示学习风格和教学方法之间的特定类型的交互作用:具有一种学习风格的学生在接受与不同学习风格的学生产生最佳结果的教学方法不同的教学方法时,会取得最佳的教育效果。换句话说,对一种学习风格的学生最有效的教学方法,对具有不同学习风格的学生来说并不是最有效的方法。我们对文献的回顾表明,儿童和成人如果被要求,会对他们喜欢信息以何种方式呈现表达偏好。也有大量证据表明,人们在不同程度上具有某些相当具体的思维和处理不同类型信息的能力。然而,我们几乎没有发现上述交互模式的证据,而这种交互模式被认为是验证学习风格在教育中的应用的前提条件。尽管学习风格的文献非常庞大,但很少有研究甚至使用能够检验应用于教育的学习风格有效性的实验方法。此外,在那些使用适当方法的研究中,有几项研究发现的结果与流行的匹配假设截然相反。因此,我们得出结论,目前,没有足够的证据基础来证明将学习风格评估纳入一般教育实践是合理的。因此,有限的教育资源最好用于采用具有强大证据基础的其他教育实践,其中越来越多。然而,鉴于对学习风格的方法学上合理的研究缺乏,得出所有可能版本的学习风格都经过测试并发现不足的结论是错误的;许多根本没有被测试过。在某些情况下,进一步研究学习风格评估在教学中的应用可能是合理的,但这种研究需要适当地进行。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验