Relationships between Learning Styles and Solutions Based on Analogies or Background Knowledge

1995 ◽  
Vol 77 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1115-1120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Wautier ◽  
Alida S. Westman
Keyword(s):  
Learning Styles ◽  
Concept Formation ◽  
Background Knowledge ◽  
Medical Problem ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
Elaborative Processing

100 students completed Schmeck's Inventory of Learning Processes and tried to solve a medical problem after reading one or two analogies, first before and again after a hint to consider the stories just read. Two analogies made it more likely that those emphasizing Deep Processing (concept formation) would apply the analogies, but two analogies were usually not enough for those emphasizing Elaborative Processing (association) or Fact Retention. The hint helped, especially after two analogies. Students who used more Deep or Elaborative Processing also were more likely to devise solutions from their background knowledge and indicate interest in learning a greater variety of information than those relying on retention of fact.

Learning Processes and Academic Achievement of United Arab Emirates College Students

1994 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 739-746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed A. Albaili
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
High School ◽  
Academic Achievement ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Grade Point Average ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
Grade Point ◽  
Elaborative Processing

The purpose of the present investigation was to examine the relationships between scores on the learning processes assessed by the Inventory of Learning Processes and academic achievement assessed by high school average (HSA) and grade point average (GPA) for 124 undergraduate college students. Multivariate analysis of variance indicated that students with high HSAs tended to score higher on Deep Processing and Fact Retention scales than students with low HSAs. Students with high GPAs appeared to score higher on both Deep Processing and Elaborative Processing scales than students with low GPAs. Subsequent path analysis suggested that both Deep Processing and Elaborative Processing scales have direct associations with GPA.

Epistemological Exploration: Generalization of Learning Styles and Analytical Skills between Academic and Religious Materials

2004 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 1083-1088 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alida S. Westman ◽  
Nicholas A. Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Learning Styles ◽  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Learning Style ◽  
Conceptual Understanding ◽  
Cognitive Skills ◽  
Religious Affiliation ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
Elaborative Processing ◽  
Analytical Skills

Among 139 students (mean age 21.8, SD = 3.5), use of Schmeck's Deep Processing learning style (looking for conceptual understanding) on academic materials correlated modestly with its use on religious materials. The same was true for Elaborative Processing (looking for associations and applications). Both Deep and Elaborative Processing of academic materials correlated with better Analytical Skills. Only Elaborative Processing of religious materials correlated with Religiousness. Religiousness correlated with poorer Analytical Skills on academic materials and with a more Concrete Divine Concept; however, specific religious affiliation made a difference. Our understanding of the role of contents of materials and characteristics of learners on the types of learning strategies used and competence with cognitive skills is still very limited.

PERSONALITY AND LEARNING STYLE: EVIDENCE FOR BIG FIVE TRAITS

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (24) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keka Varadwaj
Keyword(s):  
Learning Styles ◽  
Learning Style ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Reflective Learning ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Elaborative Processing ◽  
Big Five Traits

The study examined the relationships between Big Five traits and learning styles of college students. Participants were 360 undergraduate students who completed the NEO-FF) and the Inventory of Learning Processes (ILP). While FFI measured the Big Five personality traits, the ILP measured student’s adoption of the four learning styles; Synthesis-analysis and Elaborative processing for reflective learning, and Methodical study and Fact retention for agentic learning. The data were analyzed by correlation and multiple regressions. The findings of the study were: (i) conscientiousness was positively and neuroticism was negatively associated with all four learning styles; (ii) both agreeableness and openness were positively associated with reflective learning styles; and (iii) extraversion is associated positively only with elaborative processing. The results of multiple regression analyses showed that respectively 37%, 26%, 35% and 9% of the variances of Synthesis-analysis, Elaborative processing, Methodical study and Fact retention were explained by the Big Five traits. The findings of study have implications for teachers in planning their instructions to the appropriateness of students’ personality trait.

Differences in use of Learning Strategies and Relation to Grades among Undergraduate Students

1993 ◽  
Vol 73 (3_part_1) ◽  
pp. 787-793 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Jakoubek ◽  
Robyn R. Swenson
Keyword(s):  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Elaborative Processing

Differences in learning strategies within a cross-sectional sample of 929 undergraduate students were assessed on the Inventory of Learning Processes. Higher scores were found for students with more years of college on three scales, Deep Processing, Elaborative Processing, and Methodical Study. Differences were found between the freshman and sophomore groups for Deep Processing scores and Methodical Study scores and between the freshman and senior groups for Elaborative Processing scores. No differences were found between groups on the Fact Retention scale. Correlations between inventory scales and grades were low ( r = .02 to .24), replicating previous research.

Learning Styles are Content Specific and Probably Influenced by Content Areas Studied

1993 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 512-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alida S. Westman
Keyword(s):  
Learning Styles ◽  
Learning Style ◽  
Content Area ◽  
Foreign Languages ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
California Psychological Inventory ◽  
Content Areas ◽  
Elaborative Processing ◽  
Psychological Inventory

To investigate whether use of a learning style depends on content area, 67 seniors in college were given Schmeck's Deep and Elaborative Processing scales, the Repression-Sensitization Scale, and the Flexibility scale of the California Psychological Inventory. Scores on both the Deep and Elaborative Processing scales correlated with those on the Repression-Sensitization Scale and not with those on the Flexibility scale. Learning style depends on content area. Study of foreign languages correlated with Deep Processing, and this suggests that further study of development and change in learning styles might concentrate on this and possibly other content areas.

scholarly journals Comparative study of learning styles of college students

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
María Cristina CEPEDA-GONZÁLEZ ◽  
Blanca Margarita VILLARREAL-SOTO ◽  
Lilia SÁNCHEZ-RIVERA ◽  
Samantha Sarahí LUNA-ESPERICUETA
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Learning Styles ◽  
University Students ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Academic Growth ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
Elaborative Processing ◽  
Academic Study

The research approach of this article was to observe which were the main differences of opinions between the groups and their learning styles, the methodology used was quantitative, observational, descriptive and comparative. A standardized ILP-R instrument was used, evaluates four complementary dimensions related to learning styles and processes in academic study that we will comment on later: (Deep Processing, Methodical Study, Retention of Facts and Elaborative Processing).with a sample of 1412 university students; the statistical analyzes that were carried out were descriptive and comparative. The main conclusion of the study is that students with an average of 90 percent develop an interest in continuing to learn and discover not only academically but personally, they are more expressive to people, they tend to make minimum mistakes because they have confidence in everything they do, Likewise, if the student works while studies , that provides an ability to relate to others, but dedicating solely to study allows more space to enjoy daily learning and full dedication to academic growth.

Predicting Students as Deep and Shallow Processors of Information

1997 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 875-881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette M. Gadzella ◽  
Dean W. Ginther ◽  
William G. Masten ◽  
Debra Guthrie
Keyword(s):  
Life Stress ◽  
Function Analysis ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Correct Classification ◽  
Student Life ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
Total Stress ◽  
Elaborative Processing ◽  
Stress Inventory

This study predicted the classification of subjects into deep and shallow processors of information. Subjects were 38 deep processors (who scored in the top 25% on the Deep Processing subscale of the Inventory of Learning Processes) and 39 shallow processors (who scored in the bottom 25% on the subscale). The five scores were Chance (from the Internality, Powerful Others, and Chance Locus of Control), Total Stress (from Student-life Stress Inventory), Elaborative Processing and Methodical Study (from the Inventory of Learning Processes), and Inference (from Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal). Discriminant function analysis showed 71.1% correct classification of the deep processors and 79.5% of the shallow processors.

Study Skills, Learning Processes and Academic Achievement

1987 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette M. Gadzella ◽  
Dean W. Ginther ◽  
J. David Williamson
Keyword(s):  
Academic Achievement ◽  
Study Skills ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
Processing Styles ◽  
Shallow Processing ◽  
Skills Learning

Correlations between scores on the Deep Processing Scale of the Inventory of Learning Processes, the CAI Study Skills Test scales and academic achievement as GPA were assessed. Also, differences between deep and shallow processors on study skills were examined for 132 undergraduates from psychology classes. Knowledge of certain study skills is related to a student's facility in deep processing, while knowledge of other study-skills strategies is largely unrelated to deep or shallow processing styles of learning. Deep and shallow processors did not differ significantly on study skills, although mean scores for deep processors were consistently higher.

Prediction of Performance in an Academic Course by Scores on Measures of Learning Style and Critical Thinking

1997 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 595-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette M. Gadzella ◽  
Dean W. Ginther ◽  
G. Wendell Bryant
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Learning Style ◽  
Test Scores ◽  
Function Analysis ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Critical Thinking Skills ◽  
Deep Processing ◽  
Psychology Courses ◽  
Undergraduate Psychology

Three scores were used to predict how 38 students who received A grades and 25 students who received C grades in introductory psychology courses differed in learning style and critical thinking skills. The subjects were 63 students enrolled in undergraduate psychology classes with one instructor. Students were given course outlines, test schedules, and scores on their tests and reports and computed their own course standing throughout the semester. At the beginning of the semester, students responded to the Inventory of Learning Processes and Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. Ten scores on the two inventories were analyzed by discriminant function analysis which showed that the combination of the three test scores: Deep Processing and Methodical Study (from the Inventory of Learning Processes) and the Total Critical Thinking (from the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal) correctly classified 84.2% of the students with A grades and 68.0% of the students with C grades.

scholarly journals Effects of Activating Background Knowledge in Listening Skill and How to Improve IELTS Listening

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 13-25
Author(s):  
Nguyen Nu Nhu Linh
Keyword(s):  
Learning Styles ◽  
Background Knowledge ◽  
The Other ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Listening Skill ◽  
The World ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
First Time ◽  
International English

Among the well-known international English tests, IELTS has been seen as one of the most well-trusted and popular to EFL learners throughout the world. In Vietnam, most of the universities require their EFL students to have an IELTS score of 6.5 or 7.0 to fulfil their bachelor degree program, which is not quite an easy job. The paper emphasizes the role of background knowledge in improving IELTS Listening scores for EFL students at Saigon University. The research was done by observing two groups of students learning Listening Module 3 at the institution. They were required to do the same test; however, while a group was constructed with pre-listening activities, the other simply listened and completed the task without preparation. The result showed little difference between the two groups in terms of efficiency, but most of the students in the first group were able to complete their test in the first time listening while some members of the latter group needed a second time. They were then required to complete a survey, including learning styles and attitudes. The results also tell us that EFL students pay much attention to pre-listening activities, and they believe such tasks can help them do their listening test better.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document