Jolly Holden, Ed.D. Philip Westfall, Ph.D. Associate Professor Director, Air Technology Network American InterContinental

1
Jolly Holden, Ed.D.
Philip Westfall,
Ph.D. Associate Professor

Director, Air Technology Network American
InterContinental University
Air University
Learning Styles and Generational Differences Do
They Matter? Evaluating the Impact and
Variability of Learning/Cognitive Styles and
Generational Differences
2
Goals

• Inform--What are learning styles, cognitive
  styles, aptitude treatment interactions,
  learning modalities, and generational
  distinctions?
• Educate--What does the research indicate?
• EnlightenSo what? What can teachers do to
  facilitate the transfer of learning?

Caution You are Entering the No Spin Zone
3
Presentation Menu

• What are Learning/Cognitive Styles?
• What are Learning Modalities?
• Whats the Difference?
• What are Aptitude Treatment Interactions?
• Review of the Research
• Generational Distinctions
• Bottom Line How to Improve Performance
• AppendixCognitive Learning Strategies
• Learning /Cognitive Style Resources

4
So What

• A recent article (Dec, 2009) in the Chronicle of
  Higher Education entitled Matching Teaching Style
  to Learning Style May Not Help Students,
  challenged the prevailing concept of learning
  styles and their affect on student performance.
• The investigators found no evidencefor
  validating the educational applications of
  learning styles into general educational
  practice. and concluded 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.

5
So What

• This is not a new debate but a continuing
  investigation into the efficacy of learning
  styles that has spanned 60 years.
• To that end, there is a strong intuitive appeal
  to the notion there are individual preferences
  and styles of learning.
• That said, were not going to solve the problem
  today, but at the end of this presentation, you
  will better understand
• The concept of learning styles and assess their
  variability and impact on learning

6
What are Learning Styles?

• Basically, learning styles refers to the concept
  that individuals differ in regard to what mode of
  instruction or study is most effective for them.
• Most often learning styles are characterized as
  multidimensional and usually not either-or
  extremes and categorized by how information is
  preferentially perceived (sensory or intuitive),
  organized (inductive or deductive), processed
  (active or reflective), and modality preference
  (visual, aural, or kinesthetic).
• The most commonly used and least understood
  model of learning styles are the visual, aural,
  and kinesthetic (VAK) models

7
What are Cognitive Styles?

• Cognitive styles are viewed as a bipolar
  dimension representing a person's typical or
  habitual mode of problem solving, thinking,
  perceiving and remembering are considered stable
  over time, and related to theoretical or academic
  research.
• Cognitive styles primarily focus on cognition and
  how information is processed in the brain.

Sowhats the difference? A learning style or
modality describes how information enters the
brain visually, aurally, or tactically, whereas
cognitive style refers to how the information is
processed once the information gets to the brain.
8
What are Learning Modalities?

• Learning, or perceptual modalities, are sensory
  based and refer to the primary way our bodies
  take in information though our senses visual
  (seeing), auditory (hearing), kinesthetic
  (moving), and tactile (touching).
• Humans are multi-sensory in that the brain can
  perform several activities at once when
  processing information (e.g., tasting and
  smelling, hearing and seeing) .
• While the brain processes wholes and part
  simultaneously, learning engages the whole body

9
Whats the Difference?

• Not surprisingly, there is substantial confusion
  between learning styles and learning modalities
  where the terms are often used interchangeably.
• One of the reasons is the complexity of how the
  human brain functions as it relates to ones
  modalities in receiving information (visual,
  aural, kinesthetic) and how the brain processes
  that information (cognition).
• Continued research into neuroscience is
  discovering how the brain processes information
  acquired through our primary learning modalities
  visual, aural, and tactile.

Note Neuroscience has estimated 85 of the human
brain is wired to process visual information, and
that 90 of what the brain processes is visual
information, so ones primary learning modality
is visual.
10
Whats the Difference?

• An important finding from that research is that
  memory is usually stored independent of any
  modality.
• You typically store memories in terms of
  meaningnot in terms of whether you saw (visual),
  heard (aural), or physically (tactile/kinesthetic)
  interacted with the information.
• To that end, our brain is constantly searching
  its memory for context based on prior
  knowledge/experience.
• Note In the absence of visual cues, our brains
  create mental pictures based upon our schema to
  add context to what is printed/spoken. Click here
  for an example.

The so what retention is improved through words
and pictures (visual media) rather than through
words alone.
11
What are Aptitude Treatment Interactions?

• Any discussion concerning individual differences
  in learning cannot be complete without addressing
  the research on aptitude treatment interaction
  (ATI).
• ATI is the concept that some instructional
  strategies (treatments) are more or less
  effective for particular individuals depending
  upon their specific abilities.
• As a theoretical framework, ATI suggests optimal
  learning results when the instruction is exactly
  matched to the aptitudes of the learner.
• The goal of ATI research is to predict
  educational outcomes from combinations of
  aptitudes and treatments.

12
Aptitude Treatment Interactions Conclusions

• The lack of attention to the social aspects of
  learning is a serious deficiency of ATI research.
  
• Design treatments should not focus on the
  individual but groups of students with particular
  aptitude patterns.
• An understanding of cognitive abilities alone
  would not be sufficient to explain individual
  differences in learning when incorporating
  aptitude treatment interactions.
• ATI critics argued that student performance was
  too dynamic to be supported by the permanence and
  pervasiveness of primarily cognitive ATI .
• Click here for more on ATI

13
What Does the Research Indicate?

• Simply stated, the research has not revealed a
  compelling argument as to the impact of learning
  styles and their effect on predicting learning
  outcomes
• Postulates learning/cognitive styles have lt5
  effect on the variability in learning.
• The majority of research does not support a
  significant statistical relationship between
  learning/ cognitive styles and learning outcomes.
  
• Low validity and reliability scores of the
  instruments used to identify specific learning
  styles raise serious doubts about their
  psychometric properties, particularly the VAK
  learning style tests

14
Given the Research, Why all the Confusion?

• It s not surprising the reference to learning
  styles is one of the most misunderstood and
  overused issues confronting educational and
  training communities.
• Part of the reason is the wide disparity in the
  definition of learning styles and their
  relationship to cognitive styles.
• Furthermore, there is continued debate as to
  whether learning styles even exist, with the only
  current evidence of their existence being the
  tests used to identify them.
• Confusion is further exacerbated in that the
  research has identified over 71 different types
  of learning styles (Table 1), summarized into
  the 13 most influential models (Table 2), and
  families (Table 3)

15
Generational DistinctionsWhat are They?

• Chronicle of Higher Educations The Millennial
  Muddle, October 2009
• The brightest bunch of do-gooders in modern
  history or self-involved knuckleheads?
• To accept generational thinking, one must find a
  way to swallow two large assumptions. That tens
  of millions of people, born over about 20 years,
  are fundamentally different from people of other
  age groupsand that those tens of millions of
  people are similar to each other in meaningful
  ways. (Palmer H Muntz director of admissions
  Lincoln Christian Univ.)

16
Generational DistinctionsWhat are They?

• Cooperative Institutional Research Program at
  UCLA (annual surveys since 1966. American
  Freshman Forty Years of Trends) show small,
  gradual changes differences are not significant
  between generations but only over multiple
  generations.
• Some disturbing trends over multiple generations
  increasing sense of entitlement, decreasing
  literacy and general factual knowledge.

17
Generational DistinctionsWhat are They?

• Myth The Digital Generation takes to
  e-learning like ducks to water
• Reality
• Greatest disappointment of our time Huge
  investments made in technology (beginning with
  Telecommunications Act of 1996) in public schools
  with negative results. Leisure-time tech skills
  dont translate to educational training use of
  technology. Fast scanning doesnt translate into
  academic reading. Reading proficiency dropped
  from 40 to 35 from 1992 to 2005. Intellectual
  habits such as deep reflection decrease with
  increase time spent on browsing, blogging, IMing,
  Twittering, and Facebook
• Online Literacy Is a Lesser Kind, Mark Bauerlein,
  Chronicle of Higher Education, Sep., 2008)

18
Generational DistinctionsWhat are They?

• Not quite students do want to be connected, but
  principally to one another they want to be
  entertained, principally by games, music, and
  movies and they want to present themselves and
  their work. E-learning at its best is seen as a
  convenience and at its worst as a distraction.
• Thwarted Innovation What Happened to e-learning
  and Why, Robert Zemsky and William F. Massy, 2004
  . The Learning Alliance at the University of
  Pennsylvania)

19
Generational DistinctionsWhat are They?

• Familiarity with, understanding of, and dexterity
  with technology varies greatly within the 18-23
  age group a few with amazing skills, a large
  number who cant deal with computers
• Playing games doesnt translate to improving
  educational outcomes
• Generational Myth, report of research on literacy
  and technology Chronicle of Higher Education,
  Sept., 2008)

20
Focusing too much on the Digital
Generation

• Chronicle of Higher Educations Generational Myth
  report of research on literacy and technology,
  Sept 2008
• Todays young peopleincluding college
  studentsare just more complicated than any
  analysis of imaginary generations can ever
  reveal.
• Must consider vast range of skills, knowledge
  experience of many segments of societyavoid
  focusing more on needs of socially or financially
  privileged and overestimate the digital skills of
  young people in general
• Thinking in generations too simplistickeeps us
  from examining ethnic, gender, and class
  distinctions too closely.

21
Focusing too much on the Digital
Generation

• Once we assume that all young people love
  certain forms of interaction and hate others, we
  forge policies and design systems and devices
  that match those predispositions. By doing so,
  we either pander to some marketing cliché or
  force otherwise diverse group of potential users
  into a one size-fits-all system that might not
  meet their needs.

22
Focusing too much onthe Digital Generation

• A comprehensive literature review in 2006
  conducted by Professor Thomas Reeves , Univ. of
  Georgia Do Generational Differences Matter in
  Instructional Design?
• Although generational differences are evident in
  workplace, not salient enough to warrant
  different instructional designs or learning
  technologies.
• Research on generational differences suffers from
  many same weaknesses found in learning styles
  researchthrows grave doubt on validity of using
  learning styles as basis for accommodating
  students of any generation.

23
Focusing too much onthe Digital Generation

• Instead of worrying about whether Boomers,
  GenXers or Millennials will learn more from
  direct instruction or virtual reality games,
  instructional design should begin by identifying
  needs of learners, design best possible prototype
  learning environments in situ, then conduct
  evaluation to optimize solution

24
Bottom Line--How to Improve Performance

• Cognitive science has revealed learners differ in
  their abilities with different modalities, but
  teaching to a learners best modality doesn't
  affect their educational achievement.
• What does matter is whether the learner is taught
  in the content's best modalitypeople learn more
  when content drives the choice of modality.
• Given a typical heterogeneous class that
  encompass a wide range of learning/cognitive
  styles
• what can you do about it?

25
Improving Performance--Adapting the Learning
Environment

• Considerations when adapting learning
  environments to meet a diverse classroom.
• Existing knowledge and skills
• Motivation
• Cognitive abilities
• Cognitive load (working memory capacity)
• Personality traits
• Interests
• Exploratory behavior
• Impulsivity

Note Research has indicated prior knowledge and
intrinsic motivation account for 70 of the
variability in learning.
26
Improving Performance--Integrating Cognitive
Learning Strategies

• Cognitive learning strategies are methods used to
  help learners link new information to prior
  knowledge in facilitating the transfer of
  learning through the systematic design of
  instruction
• Focuses on how the learner processes the
  knowledge
• Provides a structure for learning when a task
  cannot be completed through a series of steps
  (scaffolding)
• Supports the learner as s/he develops internal
  procedures that enable him/her to perform tasks
  that are complex, and can increase the efficiency
  with which the learner approaches a learning
  task.
• Tailoring instruction for different levels of
  prior knowledge

27
Improving PerformanceIntegrating Visual
Components

• Since neuroscience has revealed 90 of what the
  brain processes is visual information, ones
  primary learning modality is visual.
• Therefore, compliment text-based presentations
  with visual components/aids.
• This adds context to the written/spoken word
• Provides a structure for learning when a task
  cannot be completed through a series of steps

Bottom line Different ways of knowing and
understanding demand different ways of learning
and teaching
28
The End
29
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
30
What are Aptitude Treatment Interactions?

• Background Beginning in the early 60s, Lee
  Cronbach and Richard Snow searched fruitlessly
  for interactions of abilities by looking for
  aptitudes (characteristics that affects responses
  to the treatment) that explained how to instruct
  students one way and not another, i.e., evidence
  that showed regression slopes that differed from
  treatment to treatment. Continuing through the
  70s and mid 80s, Cronbach and Snow continued
  their research by advocating a closer scrutiny of
  cognitive processes by focusing on Aptitude
  Treatment Interactions (ATIs) (Learning
  Orientation Research, 2004).

Return to ATI Slide
31
What are Aptitude Treatment Interactions?

• Findings Cronbachs (1975) research emphasized
  the important relationship between cognitive
  aptitudes and treatment interactions. However, he
  was continually thwarted by inconsistent findings
  coming from roughly similar inquiries. Successive
  studies employing the same treatment variable
  found different outcome-on-aptitude slopes.
  Cronbach concluded the inconsistency came from
  unidentified interactions and that "an
  understanding of cognitive abilities considered
  alone would not be sufficient to explain
  learning, individual differences in learning, and
  aptitude treatment interactions (Learning
  Orientation Research, 2004).

Return to ATI Slide
32
What are Aptitude Treatment Interactions?

• Findings (cont) In the early eighties, the
  cognitive process analysis of aptitudes processes
  continued with variations focusing on individual
  differences in learning and cognition (Snow,
  1980). Although Cronbach and Snow (1977) were
  looking for a "whole-person view" of learning,
  they believed it was primarily the cognitive
  processes that should be considered in the design
  and development of adaptive instructional
  systems. Eventually the new aptitudes evolved
  into cognitive styles to represent the
  predominant modes of information processing,
  although can very within individuals as a
  function of task and situation variables (Snow,
  1989).

Return to ATI Slide
33
What are Aptitude Treatment Interactions?

• Conclusion ATI critics argued that student
  performance was too dynamic to be supported by
  the permanence and pervasiveness of primarily
  cognitive ATI and that students, e.g., without
  learner control, would become system dependent on
  prescribed solutions. However, based upon
  Cronbach and Snows pioneering research, they
  concluded that ultimately design treatments
  should not focus on the individual but groups of
  students with particular aptitude patterns.

Return to ATI Slide
34
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
35
Describing and Seeing the Constellation Orion

• The constellations are totally imaginary things
  that have been made up over the past 6,000 years
  . So how would you describe something imaginary
  to your students?
• You may begin by describing the three bright
  stars in a row that form Orions belt and the
  other stars that form his sword.
• But your students have trouble visualizing how
  the stars shape the figure of Orion. To assist
  them in creating a mental picture, you show them
  a star chart of Orion to help them visualize
  this imaginary figure.
• But they still cant quite get it, so to further
  enhance their mental image, you show them another
  detailed chart depicting Orion.
• The aha momentthey got it because they now can
  see Orion, so they conclude they must be visual
  learners.

Return to main presentation
Butare they really visual learners or did you
create the visual image for them by adding
context to the description?
36
Orion Star Chart
Return to prior slide
37
Orion Figure Outlined in a Star Chart
Return to prior slide
38
The Constellation Orion
Return to prior slide
39
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
40
Table 1 Types of Learning/Cognitive Styles

convergers vs. divergers verbalisers vs. imagers holists vs. serialists deep vs. surface learning activists vs. reflectors pragmatists vs. theorists adaptors vs. innovators assimilators vs. explorers field dependent vs. field independent globalists vs. analysts assimilators vs. accommodators imaginative vs. analytic learners intuitionists vs. analysts extroverts vs. introverts seeing vs. hearing sensing vs. intuition thinking vs. feeling non-committers vs. plungers common-sense vs. dynamic learners concrete vs. abstract learners random vs. sequential learners initiators vs. reasoners judging vs. perceiving left brainers vs. right brainers meaning-directed vs. undirected theorists vs. humanitarians activists vs. theorists pragmatists vs. reflectors organizers vs. innovators analytics/inductives/successive processors vs. globals/deductivess/simultaneous processors executive, hierarchic, conservative vs. legislative, anarchic, liberal
Return to main presentation
41
Table 2 Most Influential Models of
Learning/Cognitive Styles

Allinson and Hayes Cognitive Styles Index (CSI) Apters Motivational Style Profile (MSP) Dunn and Dunn model and instruments of learning styles Entwistles Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST) Gregorcs Mind Styles Model and Style Delineator (GSD) Herrmanns Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI) Honey and Mumfords Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ) Jacksons Learning Styles Profiler (LSP) Kolbs Learning Style Inventory (LSI) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Ridings Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA) Sternbergs Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI) Vermunts Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS)
Return to main presentation
42
Table 3 Families of Learning/Cognitive Styles

Learning styles are largely sensory based Betts (1909) Betts Inventory Bartlett (1932) Gordon (1949) Scale of Imagery Control Scheehan (1967) Shortened Betts Inventory Paivio (1971) Individual Difference Questionnaire (IDQ) Marks (1973) Marks Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire Dunn and Dunn (1975, 1979, 1992, 2003) VAK Learning Style Theory Learning Style Inventory(LSI) Building Excellence Survey (BES) Torrance (1990) Style of Learning and Thinking Riding (1991) Cognitive Style Analysis (CSA) Learning styles reflect deep-seated cognitive structure Guilford (1950) Convergent/divergent thinking Prettigrew (1958) Scale of Cognitive Style Gardner et al. (1959) Tolerant/ intolerant Broverman (1960) Kagen (1967) Matching Familiar Figures Test Messick (1976) Analytic / non-analytic conceptualizing Hunt (1978) Paragraph Completion Method Cooper (1997) Learning Styles ID Weinstein, Zimmerman, Palmer (1988) Learning and Study Strategies Inventory Learning styles reflect relatively stable personality type Witkin (1962) Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT) Myers Briggs (1962) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Apter (1998) Motivation Style Profile (MSP) Epstein-Meier (1989) Constructive Thinking Inventory (CTI) Miller (1991) Personality typology cognitive, affective, conative Harrison- Branson (1998) revised Inquiry Mode Questionnaire Jackson (2002) Learning Style Profiles (LSP) Learning styles are flexibly stable learning preferences Kolb (1976, 1985, 1999) Learning Style Inventory (LSI) Revised Learning Style Inventory (R-LSI) LSI Version 3 Schmeck (1977) Inventory of Learning Processes Honey and Mumford (1982) Learning Style Questionnaire (LSQ) Felder and Silverman (1989) Index of Learning Styles (ILS) Kaufmann (1989) The A-E Inventory Allinson and Hayes (1996) Cognitive Style Index (CSI) Herrmann (1995) Brain Dominance Instrument (BDI)
Return to main presentation
43
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
44
AppendixCognitive Learning Strategies Table of
Contents

• What is Schema?
• Types of Cognitive Learning Strategies
• Organizing Strategies
• Spatial Strategies
• Bridging Strategies

45
What are Cognitive Learning Strategies?

• Cognitive learning strategies are mental
  strategies which occur in the minds of people.
• Learning these strategies are aided by their
  incorporation into instruction.
• The utility of cognitive learning strategies can
  be employed by faculty to facilitate the
  activation and retention of prior knowledge by
  integrating active and exploratory learning
  techniques into the design process.

46
What are Cognitive Learning Strategies?

• The utility of cognitive learning strategies can
  be employed by faculty to facilitate the
  activation and retention of prior knowledge by
  focusing on knowledge construction.
• Knowledge construction is a methodological
  approach that assumes knowledge needs to be
  constructed

• Involves the opportunity to critically analyze
  information, dialogue with others about its
  meaning, reflect how the information fits within
  ones belief and value systems (schema), and
  arrive at a meaningful understanding of that
  information
• In this process, information becomes transformed
  into knowledge

47
What is Schema?

• The contents of long term memory are
  sophisticated structures that permit us to
  perceive, think, and solve problems, rather than
  a group of rote learned facts.
• These structures are known as schemas (a mental
  framework for understanding and remembering
  information) and permit us to treat multiple
  elements as a single element.
• Schemas are the cognitive structures that make up
  our knowledge base and assist us in knowledge
  construction.
• Schemas can be activated through the use of
  cognitive learning strategies

48
What is Schema Activation?

• Schema activation refers to an array of
  activities designed to activate relevant
  knowledge in students memory prior to
  encountering new, to be learned information.
• Schema activation is the process of engaging
  prior knowledge, which is organized in the brain
  in schemata .
• Schema activation is an important scaffolding
  tool where learning depends upon the activation
  of old knowledge to provide an appropriate schema
  into which new knowledge can be incorporated .

49
Types of Cognitive Learning Strategies

• Some cognitive learning strategies can be
  represented based on the information presented,
  and are used as tools to construct knowledge in
  new concepts
• Representative models include
• Organizing
• Spatial
• Bridging

50
Organizing Strategies

• Organizing strategies are not memorable
  strategies in that they must be supplemented by
  more powerful strategies, such as framing or
  concept mapping. However, chunking strategies
  are good preparation for other strategies.

51
Chunking

• Organization of information into meaningful units
• Makes it easier to use, store, and recall
  information
• Multiple chunks of information can be linked
  together
• Helps in overcoming working memory limitations

52
Spatial Strategies

• Spatial strategies are an array of information
  organized by location in space and time. They
  assist in the recall of concrete arrays of
  information by using visual displays (grids,
  matrix, framework) of substantial amounts of
  information, and provides a big picture by which
  learners can use to assimilate information.

53
Frames

• Visual display of substantial amounts of
  information
• Framework for representing knowledge
• Allows text easier to understand
• Knowledge organized around the representation in
  frames
• Allows a uniform representation of knowledge
• Main ideas are represented as slots of some
  concept that describes properties of that concept
• Matrices or grids allow for organizing large
  numbers of facts, concepts or ideas
• Driven by a general principle or statement
• Elicits personal knowledge from memory
• Relationships are recognized and understood by
  logical inference

54
Frames

• Improves comprehension
• Allows for deeper levels of processing
• Powerful beginning by providing the big picture
  or spatial learning strategy
• Helps students infer and recall prior learning
• Appropriate combinations include imagery,
  rehearsal and mnemonics
• Does not require as much supplementation as other
  cognitive strategies

55
Concept Maps

• Concept mapping is a way of graphically
  displaying concepts and relationships between or
  among concepts
• Concept mapping allows a visual aid in which to
  view thoughts and ideas
• Concept mapping can aid a student in tying ideas
  together or relationships between ideas.
• Consists of extracting concepts and their
  relationships from text or other content

56
Uses for Concept Maps

• Develop an understanding of a body of knowledge
• Explore new information and relationships
• Access prior knowledge
• Gather new knowledge and information
• Share knowledge and information generated
• Design structures or processes such as written
  documents, constructions, web sites, web search,
  multimedia presentations
• Problem solve options
• Click here for an example

57
Bridging Strategies

• Helps learners to recall what they know and to
  transfer knowledge to new topics. It should be
  brief, abstract, and introduction of the new
  material and a restatement of prior knowledge.
• Providing learners with a structure of new
  information and encourage transfer and
  application.

58
Advance Organizer
Old Knowledge
New Knowledge
A bridging strategy for metacognition in that
it provides a bridge for students to transfer
pre-existing knowledge to a new topic
59
Advance Organizer
can be used as

• A brief, abstract prose passage
• A bridge, a linking of information with something
  already know
• An introduction of a new lesson, unit or course
• An abstract outline of new information and
  re-statement of prior knowledge
• A structure for students of the new information
• An encouragement for students to transfer or
  apply what they know

60
Metaphor

• A figure of speech in which an expression is used
  to refer to something that it does not literally
  denote in order to suggest a similarity
• Types
• Comparative An implicit statement that two
  apparently dissimilar objects do have in common
  features
• Interactive Similarities in the mind of the
  student between the vehicle and topic.
• Relational Based on abstract connections of a
  logical or natural character
• Attribute Based on physical or perceptual
  similarities

61
Analogy

• Involves taking into consideration resemblances
  between objects, situations or ideas which are
  similar
• Intent is to transfer prior knowledge from a
  familiar situation to a new situation, per se,
  use of a familiar idea or concept to introduce
  or define a new idea or concept

62
Simile

• Simile is a figure of speech in which two unlike
  things are compared and share one common factor
• This form of a cognitive strategy is essential
  because its ability to influence learning and
  memory
• When using a simile the relationship is expressed
  using is like or is similar to or as

• Use of the simile will allow the learner to
• Use imagery as a bridge connecting the concept
  and the understanding
• Display better memory performance
• Evaluate their learning preference from the
  different formats the information is introduced
• Imagine the concept, store and recall the image,
  and relate it to the subject

63
For example, a student will imagine the concept
and be able to store and recall the image of a
rubber band and relate it to the flexibility and
durability of human skin.
Human Skin is as flexible as a rubber band
Imagery/memory
Skin can be bended and stretched like a rubber
band
64
Examples of Concept Maps
Return to prior slide
65
Examples of Concept Maps
66
Intentionally Left Blank
Click this button to return to the prior slide
67
Resources

• Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E.,
  Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using
  learning styles What research has to say to
  practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre,
  London. Retrieved from http//www.ttrb.ac.uk/atta
  chments/c455e462-95c4-4b0d-8308-bbc5ed1053a7.pdf
• Cognitive/Learning Styles (n.d.). Theory Into
  Practice, Retrieved from http//tip.psychology.org
  /styles.html
• Cronbach, L. (1975). Beyond the Two Disciplines
  of Scientific Psychology. "American
  Psychologist," 116-127.
• Cronbach, L. Snow, R. (1977). Aptitudes and
  Instructional Methods A Handbook for Research on
  Interactions. New York Irvington Publishers.
• Curry, L. (1990). A critique of research on
  learning styles. Educational Leadership, 56(2),
  50-56.
• DeTure, M. (2004). Cognitive Style and
  Self-Efficacy Predicting Success in Online
  Education. The American Journal of Distance
  Education, 18(1), 21-38

68
Resources

• Dumbo, Myron H., Howard, K. (2007). Advice
  about the Use of Learning Styles A Major Myth in
  Education. Journal of College Reading and
  Learning, v37 n2 p101-109 Spr 2007. Retrieved
  from http//www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/
  detailmini.jsp?_nfpbtrue_ERICExtSearch_SearchVa
  lue_0EJ767768ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0noaccno
  EJ767768
• Howles, S. (n.d.). Learning styles What the
  Research Says and How to Apply it to Designing
  E-Learning. Session TH101, University of
  Wisconsin-Madison. Retrieved from
  http//isg.urv.es/library/papers/learning20styles
  _overview.pdf
• Learning Orientation Research Individual
  Differences in Learning (2004). Retrieved from
  http//www.trainingplace.com/source/research/cronb
  ach.htm
• Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning
  A systematic and critical review. (2008).
  Learning and Skills Research Centre, Department
  for Education and Skills, UK (2004). Retrieved
  from http//www.hull.ac.uk/php/edskas/learning20s
  tyles.pdf

69
Resources

• Mayer R.E. Moreno R. (2003) Nine ways to reduce
  cognitive load in multimedia learning. In
  Web-Based Learning What Do We Know? Where Do We
  Go? (eds R. Bruning, C.A. Horn L.M.
  PytlikZillig), pp. 2344. Information Age
  Publishing, Greenwich, CT.
• Matching Teaching Style to Learning Style May Not
  Help Student. (Dec 15, 2009). Chronicle of
  Higher Education. Retrieved from
  http//chronicle.com/article/Matching-Teaching-Sty
  le-to/49497/
• Multimodal Learning Through MediaWhat the
  Research Says. (2008). Metiri Group--Commissioned
  by Cisco. Retrieved from http//www.cisco.com/web/
  strategy/docs/education/Multimodal-Learning-Throug
  h-Media.pdf
• Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., Bjork,
  R. (2008). Learning Styles Concepts and
  Evidence, Psychological Science in the Public
  Interest, Retrieved from http//www.psychological
  science.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf

70
Resources

• Reeves, T. (2006), Do Generational Differences
  Matter in Instructional Design? Retrieved from
  http//it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper104/ReevesITFor
  umJan08.pdf
• Sharp, J. G., Byrne, J., Bowker, R. (2008).
  The Trouble with VAK. Educational Futures
  Vol.1(1) August 2008. Retrieved from
  http//www.educationstudies.org.uk/materials/sharp
  _et_al_2.pdf
• Snow, R. (1980). Aptitude Processes .In R. Snow,
  P. Frederico, W.Montague (eds.), Aptitude,
  Learning and Instruction, Conative and Affective
  Process Analyses (Vol. 1, pp. 27-60). Hillsdale,
  NJ Erlbaum Associates.
• Snow, R. (1989). Aptitude-Treatment Interaction
  as a framework on individual differences in
  learning. In P. Ackermann, R.J. Sternberg, R.
  Glaser (eds.), Learning and Individual
  Differences. New York W.H. Freeman.
• Stahl, Steven A. (1999). Different Strokes for
  Different Folks A Critique of Learning Styles.
  The American Educator, Fall, 1999.
• Willingham, D. (2005). Do Visual, Auditory, and
  Kinesthetic Learners Need Visual, Auditory, and
  Kinesthetic Instruction? American Educator,
  Summer 2005