Effect of moderate learning style-teaching mode mismatch on academic performance among 2 year medical students in Pakistan.

INTRODUCTION

The vagueness surrounding "learning style-teaching mode mismatch" makes its effects uncertain. This study tried to tackle that controversy by comparing and assessing the effect of different learning styles on performance in physiology examination when teaching mode was somewhat different than learning preferences of the 2 year medical students.

METHODS

A total of 102 2 year medical students participated in this study. Honey and Mumford learning style questionnaire was used to categorize the participants into one of the four learning styles (activist, reflector, theorist, and pragmatist). Many teaching modes were used in the medical college. The first professional theory and practical physiology scores of these 102 students of University of Health Sciences were obtained online. Learning styles were compared with physiology scores and age using one-way analysis of variance and statistical analysis and between males and females by using Chi-square test.

RESULTS

Pragmatists had the lowest total physiology score ( < 0.001), while theorists had the highest total physiology scores ( < 0.001). Activists and reflectors had scores in between pragmatists and theorists, and there was no statistical difference between these two styles of learning ( = 0.9). No student scored below 60%.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the effect of moderate teaching-learning mismatch is different for different learners. Theorists excelled as they had the highest physiology score, while pragmatists lagged in comparison. Reflectors and activists performed better than pragmatists but were worse than theorists. Despite this, none of the students scored below 60%. This shows that a moderate learning style-teaching mode mismatch is not harmful for learning.