Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Developed for use on engineering students ◦ Correlates well with other learning-style models ◦ Tested for validity and reliability ◦ Developed by Felder and Silverman Four dimensions ◦ Active – Reflective ◦ Sensing – Intuitive ◦ Visual – Verbal ◦ Sequential – Global A disconnect ◦ Studies show most students are predominantly Active, Sensing, Visual, and Sequential learners ◦ Finance and programming courses are often lecture- based, which is more helpful for Reflective, Intuitive, Verbal, and Sequential learners
Citation preview
Amber Settle (CDM), joint work with Tom Berry (Commerce)DePaul 2009 Faculty Teaching and Learning Conference
April 17, 2009
People vary in the way that they learn and retain information
Various instruments to model and measure these differences◦ Myers-Briggs (personality types related to learning)◦ Learning Style Inventory (Kolb’s model)◦ The Index of Learning Styles (Felder-Silverman
model) Awareness of learning styles can be beneficial
◦ Purpose is not to teach in a targeted manner◦ Encourage diverse teaching/learning styles
Developed for use on engineering students◦ Correlates well with other learning-style models◦ Tested for validity and reliability◦ Developed by Felder and Silverman
Four dimensions◦ Active – Reflective◦ Sensing – Intuitive◦ Visual – Verbal◦ Sequential – Global
A disconnect◦ Studies show most students are predominantly Active,
Sensing, Visual, and Sequential learners◦ Finance and programming courses are often lecture-
based, which is more helpful for Reflective, Intuitive, Verbal, and Sequential learners
Two types of courses◦ Financial Management (FIN 310)◦ Introductory programming
Java: CSC 211/212 Python: CSC 241/242 C++: CSC 261/262
◦ Technically- and mathematically-focused◦ High withdrawal and failure rates
Two populations◦ Faculty (CDM and Commerce)◦ Students (CDM and Commerce)
Survey◦ Basic demographic information◦ ILS instrument (44 questions)
Winter 2009 Responses
◦ Commerce (solicited in person) 121 students 11 faculty
◦ CDM (solicited by e-mail and completed online) 101 students (29% response rate) 12 faculty (71% response rate)
◦ Grouped together for this presentation
All faculty◦ ACT: 3B, SNS: 1B, VIS: 1A, SEQ: 3B◦ Reflective, Intuitive, Visual, Global
All students◦ ACT: 1A, SNS: 3A, VIS: 5A, SEQ: 3A◦ Active, Sensing, Visual, Sequential
Some college-specific differences◦ Faculty
CDM (Reflective, Sensing, Verbal, Global) Commerce (Reflective, Intuitive, Visual, Global)
◦ Students CDM (Reflective, Sensing, Visual, Sequential) Commerce (Active, Sensing, Visual, Sequential)
All students◦ (Active) Study in a group to compensate for a lack
of active learning in the classroom◦ (Sensing) Ask the instructor for specific examples
and how the concepts apply in practice◦ (Sequential) Ask the instructor to fill in missing
steps and outline material in a logical order when studying
CDM students◦ (Visual) Find diagrams, schematics, or flow charts
to aid understanding of course material
The Index of Learning Styles◦ http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/
public/ILSpage.html Survey of learning styles
◦ Felder and Brent (2005), “Understanding Student Differences”, Journal of Engineering Education, 94:1.
◦ http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Understanding_Differences.pdf
More information about our study: ◦ Amber Settle: [email protected]◦ Tom Berry: [email protected]
