Learning Styles Activities Increase Retention Skills for Students in Sixth,

Learning Styles Activities Running head: LEARNING STYLES ACTIVITIES INCREASE

Learning Styles Activities Increase Retention Skills forStudents in Sixth,

Seventh, and Eighth Grade Spanish Classes

Charmaine Bissessar

University of Phoenix

Research Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of theRequirements

for the degree of Master of Arts in Education

University of Phoenix

2005

1

Learning Styles Activities

2

2/12/05


3


Abstract

Learning Styles Activities Increase Vocabulary Retention

Skills for Students in Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Grade

Spanish Classes at Dellwood Middle School, Bermuda, C. B.

2005: Action Research Project, University of Phoenix, Master

of Arts in Education Program in Curriculum and Technology.

This action research project investigated increases in

Spanish vocabulary retention of 84 students attending

Foreign Language in Middle school. A counter-balance for a

within-subjects design, utilizing traditional and learning

styles strategies of instruction tested vocabulary retention

levels for each strategy. A t test revealed that retention

levels were significantly higher .0001 when instruction

addressed individual learning preferences. The

administration of the Semantic Differential Scale (Pizzo,

1981) discovered more positive attitudes toward learning-

style strategies versus traditional methods of instruction.

Permission Statement

4

Learning Styles Activities As a student of the MAED Program, I do (X) do not ( ) give

permission to the University of Phoenix to distribute copies

of this action research report on request from interested

individuals.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT VERIFICATION FORM 2 ABSTRACT 3TABLE OF CONTENTS 4Chapter I: Introduction

Problem Statement 6 Purpose 6 Description of Community 7

5

Learning Styles Activities Description of Work Setting 9 Writer’s Role 10 Chapter II: Study of the Problem

Problem Description 12Problem Documentation 14Literature Review 16Causative Analysis 25Chapter III: Outcomes and Evaluation

Goals and Expectations 26Expected Outcomes 27Measurement of Outcomes 28Analysis of Results 29Chapter IV: Solution Strategy

Statement of Problem 31Discussion 32Description of Selected Solutions 38Chapter V: Results

Results 43Expected Outcome 1 43

6

Learning Styles Activities Expected Outcome 2 44Expected Outcome 3 44Expected Outcome 4 45Discussion 45 Recommendations 47Plans for Dissemination 48References 49Appendices APPENDIX A 59

Dellwood Middle School grading scheme 59

APPENDIX B 60

Figure 1 Differences in mean scores 60

Figure 2 Male and female scores after 2 weeks 60

Figure 3 Male and female scores after 6 weeks 61

Figure 4 Students obtaining 80% and above 61

Figure 5 Distribution of students’ scores 62

APPENDIX C 63

Semantic Differential Scale 63

APPENDIX D 64

7


Parental permission letter 64

APPENDIX E 66

Learning Styles Inventory 66

APPENDIX F 71

Learning Styles model 71

APPENDIX G 72

Process of Implementation 72

APPENDIX H 73

Seating during Learning Styles 73

APPENDIX I 74

Figure 6 Students’ learning preferences 74

Figure 7 Students’ preferred time of day 74

Figure 8 Students’ preferred perceptual strength 75

APPENDIX J 76

Learning Styles calendar 76

APPENDIX K 77

Traditional calendar 77

APPENDIX L 78

Table 1 Tactual and Kinesthetic research 78

Table 2 Contract Activity Package research

8


78APPENDIX M 79

Table 3 Multi-Sensory Instructional Pack research 79

APPENDIX N 80

Table 4 Programmed Learning Sequence research 80

APPENDIX O 81

Planning Matrix 81

APPENDIX P 82

Oral Presentation rubric 82

APPENDIX Q 83

Self-evaluation form 83

Learning Styles activities increase retention skills for

students in sixth, seventh, and eighth grade Spanish classes

Chapter I: Introduction

Problem Statement

The problem was that for the past three years Dellwood

Middle School students in sixth, seventh, and eighth grade

Spanish received failing grades on assignments and tests

9

Learning Styles Activities when instruction was delivered in the traditional manner.

Students’ grades in sixth, seventh, and eighth grade Spanish

classes for the academic year 2003-2004 were examined and it

had been proven that there was a problem. Out of 84 students

40 received failing grades and 20 out of the 40 received

grades ranging from 44%-57% in Spanish. The problem seemed

to be that students exhibited poor retention skills when the

traditional approach was implemented.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the

traditional approach was not meeting the students’ retention

needs and whether a strategy implementing learning styles

could prove to be a panacea for this retention problem. In

order to counter-balance for a within-subjects design, one

unit was taught using the traditional approach and another

was taught using learning styles in the form of changes in

the environment, the emotional, the sociological,

physiological, and psychological as well as implementing a

Contract Activity Package, a Programmed Learning Sequence,

and the Multi-Sensory Instructional Pack. Students were

10

Learning Styles Activities tested after two weeks and six weeks in both units taught so

that their long-term and short-term retention could be

determined and whether a particular teaching approach was

favored.

Description of the Community

Bermuda enjoyed one of the highest per capita incomes

in the world, with its economy primarily based on providing

financial services for international business and luxury

facilities for tourists (CIA-World Fact book). In order to

meet the demands of an international clientele, Spanish

language was taught at all Middle schools in Bermuda from

grades six to eight.

The community was experiencing a rapid transition from

menial, unskilled labor to an advanced, technological,

highly skilled, and specialized community. This was

reflected in the total job count from 1998 to 2002, which

rose by 2,492 (Bermuda Job Market: Employment Briefs, 2003,

p. 1). The motto of the Bermuda Public Service also

exemplified its desire to deliver quality services:

11


We are committed to providing accurate information and

advice to Government to assist in the formulation of

social and economic policies and to providing services

that protect and enhance the welfare of the community.

We pledge to be a motivated and accountable workforce

that will deliver these services in an effective,

efficient and equitable way. (Bermuda Ministry of

Education Building, on July 28th, 2004).

Within the last decade the population has increased

from 60,000 to 65,000. This was significant considering that

it took over 300 years to reach 60,000 (Bermuda Digest of

Statistics, 2002, p. 2). Of this amount 34,011 were Blacks,

21,134 were Whites, 3,976 were of mixed descent and 2,670

were other races (Report on the 2000 Census of Population

and Housing, p. 31). Community demographic information

identified imported high and low skilled labor as a

contributing factor to its rapid growth in tourism,

international business and light manufacturing industries

(Bermuda Job Market: Employment Briefs, 2003, pp. 4-5).

12


The school district had experienced growth

proportionate to that of the community (Bermuda Digest of

Statistics, 2000, p. 18). The school district was comprised

of five elementary schools, one middle school and four high

schools; two of which were private schools. These two high

schools were the only two public high schools in the island

and were responsible for educating students from the five

middle schools. The student population was approximately

6,284 children that required a staff of approximately 880

teachers and administrators to effectively manage the

Bermuda schools. The Ministry of Education was committed to

enhancing student learning by using established and evolving

technologies to increase productivity, facilitate

communication, manage information, inspire creativity,

enhance achievement, and promote life-long learning

throughout the community (XL Education Initiative, 2002).

The mission statement of the Bermuda Ministry of

Education read, “The mission of Bermuda Public School System

is to be the first choice in education by providing rigorous

and stimulating learning experiences in safe and responsive

13

Learning Styles Activities environment from which our students emerge confident and

prepared to compete and contribute locally and globally”

(Bermuda Ministry of Education Building, 28th July, 2004).

With this in mind, programs were designed to meet the

needs of a multi-culturally diverse society. All

stakeholders encourage community involvement in education as

it was imperative that each public school be affiliated with

a business. The Ministry of Education of Bermuda believed in

excellence for all and in so doing life-long learning skills

was emphasized. This was witnessed in the increase of the

Bermudian labor force with 4,684 professionals employed (The

Bermuda Labor Force, 2004, p. 9).

Description of Work Setting

The research project took place at Dellwood Middle

School, Bermuda, which is located in an urban community

within the capital, Hamilton. The school’s mission statement

read, “Our mission at Dellwood Middle School is to promote

the academic, social, emotional, physical, and spiritual

development of students in a safe and productive environment

14

Learning Styles Activities as we strive for excellence” (Dellwood Middle School, 24th

June, 2004).

This statement obviously took into consideration the

student population that was approximately 270 low achievers

who belonged to the lower socio-economic strata. The

cultural make-up of the school was 90% African Bermudian, 8%

Portuguese Bermudian and the remaining 2% a mixture of

Pilipino, East Indian, Europeans, Americans, and Canadians

(Ministry of Education, Bermuda Pupil Enrolment Data, 2003-

2004). Fifty teachers served the students and were

predominantly Bermudian. There were two teachers from the

United Kingdom, two Canadians, six Americans, and two West

Indians in this melting pot. There were 13 para-educators,

two of which were interpreters for the hearing impaired.

Knowledge of a second language was given prominence by

parents, the community, the school, teachers, and the

government. The school had been teaching Spanish since its

inception in 1998 on a rotational basis with each student

being exposed to one semester of Spanish per year. The

semesters were from September to February and February to

15

Learning Styles Activities June. All students were expected to attend Spanish classes

except for special education students.

At school, departmental, and governmental levels

Spanish was encouraged. There was an annual school trip to

a Spanish speaking country, which was partially funded by

parents, the business community, and the community at large.

Nationally, there were exchange programs, such as the

Bermuda Rotary, whereby students could attend school for one

year in a Spanish speaking country.

The Spanish teacher and the learning support

coordinator were participants in this research project. They

had both been at the school for a period of three years and

were familiar with the learning style method of teaching for

all of those three years. Although, the administration has

changed three times in the past three years, there had been

a strong drive on the part of past and current

administrators to search for improved methods of meeting and

satisfying its clienteles’ needs. Numerous staff development

workshops had been conducted using learning styles and

dealing with the implementation of technology in the

16

Learning Styles Activities classroom. The implementation of technology in the classroom

was one of the priorities of the Bermuda Government for they

have equipped each middle school with a mobile lap top cart

consisting of 18 computers which was in addition to the two

computer labs which could be found in each of the Bermudian

middle schools.

Writer’s Roles

The writer had been teaching Spanish for the past 15

years and had been teaching middle school Spanish for the

past three years. She commenced her neophyte teaching career

in Trinidad where she taught grades seventh and eighth for

eight years. She was a Spanish oral examiner for the

Caribbean Examination Council for 10 years and corrected the

Spanish regional examination in Barbados for four years. She

later taught grades six to eight for an additional four

years. She attended foreign language workshops and was

avidly willing to improve her pedagogy for the betterment of

her students. She attended foreign language conferences in

Trinidad and sought to improve her skills in both French and

Spanish by taking annual trips to Venezuela and Martinique.

17


She was the sole Spanish teacher at Dellwood Middle

School, Bermuda and had been teaching at that school since

September 2001. The writer was responsible for teaching

Spanish at grades six, seven, and eight. Additionally, she

was responsible for modifying the level of the subject

taught. The classes were grouped heterogeneously consisting

of varying abilities and learning style preferences.

Moreover, the writer was responsible for planning the annual

school trip to a Spanish speaking country. She was a member

of the Technology and Science Fair Committees and helped out

in whatever capacity expected. The writer normally created

programs, flyers and booklets for school events and had

conducted staff development workshops on using kinesthetic

floor games in the classroom. Additionally, she conducted

staff development workshops on the integration of technology

in the curriculum.

The writer was also expected to attend monthly meetings

with the other four middle school teachers and their

curriculum officer for Modern Languages. At these meetings

resources and ideas for teaching Spanish were exchanged as

18

Learning Styles Activities teachers support each other. Additionally, the last

agrarian year this writer attended two conferences in New

York. Earlier last year she attended the Northeastern

Foreign Language Conference in April and in July of this

year she attended the 27th Annual Learning Styles Workshop.

These workshops were invaluable and enhanced her teaching

repertoire.

The 27th Annual Learning Style Workshop was extremely

helpful to this author. The wealth of information garnered

throughout this workshop added to the literature review and

the appendix and made this action research project richer in

content. The highlight of this conference was actually being

able to speak to the pioneers of the learning styles

theories, Ken and Rita Dunn. The writer was always

interested in growing professionally by searching for

innovative and creative methods of enhancing her teaching

repertoire. Always cognizant of her students’ academic needs

she strived in whatever capacity possible to fulfill these

needs.

Chapter II: Study of the Problem

19

Learning Styles Activities Problem Description

Students in sixth, seventh, and eighth grade Spanish

classes received failing grades on assignments and tests and

it would appear that poor retention skills related to how

material was taught can be attributed to low scores. The

school population cannot be termed gifted and belongs to the

low socio-economic group in Bermuda, Thompson (2004)

indicated that “gifted achievers are self-motivated and more

persistent (Cody, 1983; Kroon, 1985; Milgram, 1986) also

postulated that there are specific methods that gifted

students use to teach themselves and work with their peers

to achieve improved academic success. This would suggest

that when instruction is conducted in a manner that does not

take low achievers into consideration very little success is

obtained.


classes received failing grades on assignments and tests and

their learning styles were not taken into consideration. The

vast majority of failures among these students were males

which further emphasized the point that male and female

20

Learning Styles Activities students learn differently and male students are more

kinesthetic and tactual (Thompson, 2004; Oberer, 1999;

Honingsfield & Lister, 2003; Bascome, 2004). This would

explain why for the academic year 2002-2003 more males

failed Spanish than females. In fact, “students who are

unsuccessful or underachievers in school learn best through

tactual (hands on) and kinesthetic (active) resources and

their strongest perceptual strength is neither auditory or

visual” (Drew, Dunn, Quinn, Sinatra & Spiridakis,1994). It

would appear that students whose dominant preferences of

learning was active and hands on would not perform in the

traditional classroom where there is the “incorporation of

lectures, discussions and visual resources” (Leftkowitz,

n.d.).


classes received failing grades on assignments and tests

when instruction was not differentiated. Bascome (2004)

quoted Gremli, Hill, and Roberts who indicated that all

students learn differently and no one approach is suitable

for everyone. Geiser (1998) advocated that multiple patterns

21

Learning Styles Activities of learning styles exist between and within groups (Bascome,

2004). Teaching instruction using traditional lectures,

chalk and talk and relying purely on visual and auditory

stimulation can only lead to failures and poor performances

if one is to believe that students only remember 10% of what

they read, 20% of what they heard, 30% of what they saw, 50%

of what they heard and saw, 70% of what they said and 90% of

what they heard, said and did (Tenedero, 2004). Indeed this

was further accentuated by Dunn, Holtschnieder, Klavas and

Miles (2000) when they postulated that “conventional

teaching practices continue to be unresponsive to the needs

of tactual and kinesthetic learners who tend to process and

remember new and difficult information or skills when they

use manipulative materials” (p. 14).

Problem Documentation

This teacher and 84 students from 12 classes reported

failing grades on daily assignments and report cards. When

interviewed, classroom teacher and students report that

22

Learning Styles Activities students’ learning styles were not taken into consideration.

The teacher needed to test the students using the Dunn and

Burke (Assessing the Learning Styles of Children in grades

5-8: LS: CY, 2002) to determine their preferred perceptual

strength as well as their secondary preference and cater to

them in order to increase performance in the classroom.

When interviewed, the Spanish teacher indicated that not

enough modification was implemented. There was evidence of

modification but it was done visually and orally which

helped the visual and auditory learner but did not take into

consideration the tactual and kinesthetic learner. Braio,

Dunn, Beasley, Quinn and Buchanan (1997) posited “each

individual has a learning style that is uniquely his or her

own and it will differ significantly from other individuals

(Dunn, Holtschnieder, Klavas & Miles, 2000). The stronger

the preference the more important it is to provide

compatible instructional strategies” (p. 14). Since

instruction was not differentiated students’ needs were not

being met and this resulted in poor grades.

23


A review of students’ report cards and progress reports

indicated 40 of the 84 Spanish middle one, two, and three

students failed Spanish class. Of that 40 the majority were

low-achieving males who had poor, reading, writing, and

auditory skills. Felder (1995) implied that when there is

serious mismatch between students’ learning styles and

teacher’s teaching style “the students tend to be bored and

inattentive in class and do poorly on tests, get

discouraged” (p. 21). This was precisely what was taking

place in this Spanish class as the results of the Semantic

Differential Scale revealed. Students completed the bi-polar

Semantic Differential Scale (Pizzo, 1981, Appendix C) after

traditional instruction was completed and after teaching

using Contract Activity Package, Programmed Learning

Sequences, and Multi-Sensory Instructional Pack and it was

revealed that students’ attitudes were more positive when

their learning styles were catered to.

Moreover, Tenedero (2004) advocated that information is

remembered when there is intense sensory, personal

significance, it is acquired in an emotional context, and it

24

Learning Styles Activities is necessary for survival. With Tenedero’s (2004) ideas in

mind one can understand why the writer’s reports indicated

that 20 out of the 40 students received grade F (marks

ranging from 44%-57%) in Spanish and had difficulty

learning, remembering, and pronouncing the Spanish words

when they were taught traditionally and the students’

dominant preferred perceptual strength was not being catered

to. The remaining ten students out of the 20 who were

failing received grade D (marks ranging from 64%-69%). The

pass mark at the school was 70% (Appendix A). All ten

students who were failing were receiving learning support in

Mathematics and English. There was no extra learning

support person available during Spanish class since students

attended Spanish during the para-professionals’ preparatory

time. One student out of the 10 students who were failing

spoke English as his second language. Ten students out of

all 84 spoke English as their second language and there were

two native Spanish speakers. All students spoke the

Bermudian dialect. The writer’s survey indicated that

25

Learning Styles Activities Spanish was not being taught in a manner that was conducive

to students’ varying needs.

Literature Review

The need to define learning style and whether it should

be acknowledged as “process-based” (Klob, date; Entwistle,

date; Biggs, date); “preference-based” (Price; Dunn;

Riechman-Grashna) or “cognitive-skills based” (Reinert;

Letteri ; Keefe) was discussed by Cano-Garcia and Hewitt

(2000, p. 415). Cano-Garcia and Hewitt (2000) further

expatiated “it is necessary to think in order to learn, and

if this is true we can conclude that learning styles and

thinking styles should be interrelated” (p. 417).

On the other hand, Dunn and Dunn (1991-1999) indicated

that there were different measurements to be used for every

grade level and age group. The Dunn and Dunn learning-style

model is the most widely used approach to learning style

developed by Rita and Kenneth Dunn. The Dunns described

learning style as the ways in which five basic stimuli

26

Learning Styles Activities affect individuals’ ability to master new and difficult

academic information and skills. Each of the five stimuli

includes smaller components called elements (K. Dunn & R.

Dunn, 1972-1999). Learning style is the way learners begin

to concentrate on, process, internalize, and retain new and

difficult information (K. Dunn & R. Dunn, 1992, 1993, 1999)

(Dunn & Burke, 2002). K. Dunn and R. Dunn (1993) defined

learning style as “a biological and developmental set of

personal characteristics that make the identical instruction

effective for some students and ineffective for others” (p.

5).

The importance of knowledge of students’ learning style

and their achievement was underscored by Smith and Renzulli

(1984); Corbett and Smith (1984); Peacock (2001) and Lujan-

Ortega (2000). Corbett and Smith (1984) concluded “a

significant relationship must also exist between real or

postulated parameters of learning style and student

performance in the classroom” (p. 212). Peacock (2001) cited

Reid (1996) who suggested “matching teaching style with

learning style gives all learners an equal chance in the

27

Learning Styles Activities classroom and builds self-awareness” (p. 4). Prescott (2001)

affirmed “once students prove learning their awareness of

both their dominant intelligences and their preferential

styles is easier to articulate and remember, their self-

sufficiency increases, they are able to learn more

efficiently on their own” (p. 328). Similarly, Dunn,

Holtschneider, Klavas and Miles (2000) exhorted “when the

appropriate instructional method is matched with students’

tactual and kinesthetic strengths, higher achievement gains

and more positive attitudes resulted than with traditional

instruction” (p. 14). Further augmenting previous studies,

Favre (2003) postulated “that urban, poor, minority children

demonstrate statistically higher achievement, better

behavior, and improved attitudes towards school when they

are instructed through their learning-style strengths” (p.

84). Moreover, Dunn, Griggs, Olsen, Beasely and Gorman

(2000) concurred “students with strong learning-style

preferences showed greater academic gains as a result of

congruent instructional interventions” (p. 10). Dunn (2000)

reiterated “when students were introduced to new material

28

Learning Styles Activities through their perceptual strength, and reinforced through

their secondary or tertiary strength, they achieved

significantly higher grades” (Kroon, 1985; Wheeler, 1980 p.

46).

After conducting a study on the impact of learning

styles strategies on middle school students, Sagan (2003)

concluded “middle school students achieved statistically

higher-test scores and experienced improved attitudes toward

learning when their learning styles were accommodated (p.

91). Earlier, Dunn, and Shea (1991) echoed that “research in

learning styles provides clear directions for either how to

teach individuals through their style or how to teach them

to teach themselves by capitalizing on their personal

strengths” (p. 95). Likewise, Prescott (2001) ascertained

“high intrapersonal intelligence is evident in learners who

understand their own strengths, weaknesses, moods, desires,

goals, and objectives” (p. 329). This is exactly how

students who are able to discern their own learning style

are able to function. Dunn (1999) underscored the importance

of the teacher in the classroom and the pivotal role the

29

Learning Styles Activities teacher plays in the instrumentation of learning styles

“once teachers learn how their students learn, they can

match individuals’ learning styles with the method most

responsive to that style.” Dunn and Andrews (2000)

interviewed students who were in classes where learning

styles were being implemented and quoted one student as

saying “I don’t know why learning styles can’t be in every

school all over the world! It has helped me a lot, and

children everywhere would really appreciate learning in

comfortable ways” (p. 42).

De Paula (2003) discovered in her study of Brazilian

adolescents “learning styles should be considered of

paramount relevance” (p. 133). Similarly, in his study of

Bruneian adolescents, Pengiran-Jadid (2003) noted that the

teachers needed to alter their style of teaching to

accommodate the students’ learning styles. The teachers used

traditional instruction to teach students who were

kinesthetic and tactual. In examining the learning styles of

Hungarian adolescents, Honigsfeld (2003) posited “ younger

Hungarian adolescents attending junior-high school revealed

30

Learning Styles Activities more distinct learning style characteristics than the other

age groups at the high school level” (p. 149). In their

study of learning styles of New Zealand adolescents,

Honigsfeld and Cooper (2003) garnered that there is a “need

to treat adolescents as individuals and to be learner-

centered rather than either teacher-or subject-centered” (p.

153). Further cementing the need for learning styles to be

implemented in the classroom, Lister and Honigsfeld (2003)

espoused, younger Bermudian students are “more peer-oriented

and more tactual than their older schoolmates” ( p. 127).

Even at the adult level it is vital that learning

styles become an important part of the teaching process as

is advocated by Honigsfeld and Schiering (2004)

“understanding one’s own learning and teaching styles, and

examining and incorporating learning styles into all

learning experiences are vital to keep teachers going” (p.

505). O’Hare (2002) conducted similar studies and deduced

“that the learning styles based groups (of nurses), who were

involved in self-paced instruction by using Contract

Activity Packages achieved significantly higher examination

31

Learning Styles Activities scores and more positive attitudes toward learning than

students who experienced traditional instruction” (O’Hare &

Griggs, 2003, p. 172). This result is reiterated by

Lefkowitz (n. d.) who discovered that achievement tests

results were higher and more beneficial for the students who

were instructed using CAPS than those who were instructed

using traditional instruction. Boyle (2003) discovered

comparable results when he conducted research of law

students and the impact of learning styles on their on their

test scores. They were more positively influenced by the use

of styles which accommodated their learning style as the

method of instruction. Ingham (2003) conducted a parallel

study among engineering students and realized that they were

more positively affected by instruction which was geared to

their particular learning style. Hamlin (2003) obtained

analogous results when she studied the impact of learning

style strategies on adults in the human services. Moreover,

Mangino and Griggs (2003) concluded “implementing learning-

styles based instruction in institutions of higher education

resulted in significant gains in academic achievement and

32

Learning Styles Activities improved attitudes toward learning in comparison with

traditional lectures, discussions and readings” (p. 188).

Ogden (2003) emphasized that at university level there

is a need to cater to the students’ varying learning style.

Much earlier, Corbett and Smith (1984) resonated “the

purpose of learning-style analysis is to identify student

strategies for learning and to wed them with materials and

methods which foster a high rate of return” (p. 212).

Correspondingly, in her study of the discipline issues

associated with Bermudian students who have dropped out of

the system, Thompson (2004) advocated that students need to

be aware of how they learn and how they are better able to

retain information. Underscoring the importance of learning

styles, Bascome (2004) posited that the efficacy levels

after Bermudian middle school students were instructed using

learning styles were much higher as opposed to when they

were instructed using the traditional approach. He conducted

a study to determine whether students’ short-term and long-

term memory were better after vocabulary was taught using

Contract Activity Packages, Programmed Learning Sequences,

33

Learning Styles Activities and Multi-Sensory Instructional Pack and he concluded that

students’ retention level were significantly higher when

they were taught using learning styles as opposed to using

traditional instruction. Similarly, in her study using

mental models on the retention and use of new vocabulary

words, Moore (2003) found that students who were a part of

her study made a “significant improvement in their

vocabulary scores” (p. 7). They were also more motivated to

learn additional vocabulary after the study had concluded.

In a similar vein, Ali (2000) concluded that students who

were involved in their learning of new vocabulary were

motivated to learn and took ownership for their learning.

Alternately, students and teachers who are forced to

perform for extended periods in environments that are

inconsistent with their learning styles become frustrated

and stressed (Smith & Renzulli, 1984, p.45; Peacock, 2001,

p. 2). Smith and Renzulli (1984) contend that it would be a

misconception and a disservice to use self-pacing as the

sole characteristic that makes students unique. They stated

“one of the major assumptions underlying our work is that a

34

Learning Styles Activities well-rounded individualized effort must take into account

how the child would like to pursue a particular activity”

(p. 45). Gayle (1994) revealed that the teacher’s style of

teaching should not be dictated by the students’ preferred

style. Gayle (1994); Peacock (2001) and Delaho Ussaye (2002)

thought that the teacher’s teaching style and the learners’

style should be independent entities that are complementary.

Lujan-Ortega (2000) remarked that “individual differences

predict strategy use” (p.281). Roberts (2003) suggested “not

only is a one-shoe-size-fits-all philosophy prevalent among

our teachers, but also administrators ignore unscientific

approach to instruction and refrain from requiring a

matching of teaching and learning styles” (p. 27).

Henry (2003) in her action research project in which

her teaching strategies were altered to meet her students’

learning style needs, she concluded that her study was

invaluable in that it allowed “a more open atmosphere that

made some students feel they could respond, risk asking

questions, get help and consequently improve (p. 6). Felder

(1995) reiterated this idea when he concluded “studies show

35

Learning Styles Activities that matching teaching styles to learning styles can

significantly enhance academic achievement, student

attitudes, and school level” (Griggs & Dunn, 1984; Smith &

Renzulli, 1984, p. 28). Cafferty (1980) posited “the closer

the match between the teacher’s teaching style and the

student’s learning style, the higher the student’s grade

point average” (Dunn & Buchanan 2000, p. 35). Andrews,

Brunner and Majewski, Elliot, Harp and Orsak, Perrin, Stone,

Sykes, and Jones and Phillips stated empirically “when

instruction delivery system is altered to respond to

individuals’ learning-style strengths, improved achievement

and attitude test scores and fewer discipline problems

result” (Dunn, Griggs, Geisert, Gemake and Zenhausern, 2000,

p. 59).

There were disadvantages cited to the use of learning

style to differentiate instruction in the classroom. Ehrman

(1996) impugned “while some learners can switch styles

others cannot” (Peacock, 2001, p. 3) whilst Gayle (1994)

viewed it as an “unbalanced shift towards the student” (p.

2). In its defense, Reid (1996) insisted that “matching

36

Learning Styles Activities teaching styles with learning styles gives all learners an

equal chance in the classroom and builds student self-

awareness” (Peacock, 2001, p. 4). In response to Peacock’s

(2001) suggestion that more work into student style can be

conducted through the use of diaries and interviews, Carson

and Longhini (2002) conducted such a study and concluded

that there are constraints in this strategy such as memory,

unconscious editing, subjectivity and only some subsets are

within the learner’s perceived experience. Reynolds (1997)

“warns against seeing learning styles as ‘stable states’

decontextualised from cultural and social milieu and he

summarized some research which reported moderate reliability

and very little support for the underlying structure of LSI”

(Cano-Garcia & Hewitt, 2000, p. 416). Dunn, Griggs, Olson,

Beasely and Gorman (2000) indicate that the learning-style

movement has been criticized for having too “many diverse

definitions and models” (Curry, 1990, p. 5). De Bello (1990)

insisted “certain models elaborate on only one or two

variables on a bipolar continuum rather than on a

comprehensive construct” (Dunn, Griggs, Olsen, Beasely &

37

Learning Styles Activities Gorman, 2000, p. 5). Curry (1990) and De Bello (1990)

advocated that there “is an imbalance in the research

available among the existing models” (Dunn, Griggs, Olsen,

Beasely & Gorman, 2000, p. 5). Snider (1990) reported “two

or more decades ago, disappointing results were reported

with strategies designed to focus exclusively on remediating

students’ weaknesses” (Dunn, Griggs, Olsen, Beasely &

Gorman, 2000, p. 5). Kampwirth and Bates, Kavale and

Forness, Snider, and Ysseldyke argued that the “studies that

addressed special education populations’ auditory and visual

modalities revealed little improvement” (Dunn, Griggs,

Olsen, Beasely & Gorman, 2000, p. 5). Felder (1995) warned

“the prospect of tailoring language instruction to somehow

accommodate different learning styles might be forbidding to

instructors” (p. 28).

When learning another language students are initially

motivated and enthusiastic but this interest quickly

attenuates which is reflected in their fluctuating grades.

Nieman and Smith (1984) divulged that this was very much the

case at the university level as well, when they conducted a

38

Learning Styles Activities study of university students in a beginner’s Spanish class.

Benmaman, Moore, Morgan and Rowe (1982) compared the

cognitive effectiveness of individualization with

traditional classroom instruction and disclosed that

students with the individualized learning program scored

higher than those immersed in traditional learning

situations.

Boers (2000) concluded that the “language learner can

facilitate her or his retention of novel figurative

expressions through enhanced metaphor awareness” (p. 569).

Grace (2000) conducted a study highlighting gender

differences in vocabulary retention and determined “a

pattern of differences in performance between genders on the

vocabulary retention that seems to depend on whether the

lesson provides translations in first language” (p. 220).

Cornu (1979) proclaimed that “the way presentation is done

should be as close as possible to the way words are

organized within memory” (p. 264). She offered the caveat

against teaching vocabulary as “assimilated lists of words”

(p. 272). The whole concept of viewing differentiated

39

Learning Styles Activities instruction as self-pacing or individualized instruction was

discussed by Niedzielski (1984) who stated that “self-pacing

is not synonymous with individualized instruction (p.361).

This study implemented the Programmed Learning

Sequence, Contract Activity Package, and the Multi-Sensory

Instructional Pack as well as the students’ dominant and

secondary learning styles as a means of instruction. Fine,

Lovelace and Griggs (2003) cited Mitchell (1999) who

reported “statistically improved grammar achievement only

after instruction was matched with students’ auditory

preferences” (p. 191). This is further reiterated by Roberts

(1999) who taught social studies units with and without

kinesthetic and tactual activities and realized that there

were “improved attitudes, as well as statistically higher

short- and long-term achievement test gains” (Fine, Lovelace

& Griggs, 2003, p. 191). Similar results were reported by

Searson (1999) and O’Connell-MacManus (2000). Searson (1999)

taught lessons traditionally and using learning styles and

ascertained “once again students evidenced significantly

improved attitudes and increased achievement on both simple

40

Learning Styles Activities and higher-level cognitive science” (Fine, Lovelace and

Griggs, 2003, p. 191). O’Connell Manus (2000) “studied the

effects of traditional instruction versus instruction based

on teacher-constructed and student-constructed tactual and

kinesthetic resources” (Fine, Lovelace & Griggs, 2003,

p.191; Appendix L, Table 1). He determined that the

“increases in achievement were greater when students

developed materials for themselves” (p. 191).

Using Contract Activity Packages to teach college

students Lefkowitz (2003) experienced significant success

and insisted that “it is imperative that today’s educators

identify the learning style strengths of each student and

then customize how they teach through the methods that most

respond to each learner’s strength” (p. 196). Using

Programmed Learning Sequences and Contract Activity Packages

to teach legal writing at the college level, Boyle (2003)

maintained “experimental research has demonstrated that PLSs

and CAPs are effective instructional strategies for teaching

legal research to law students” (p. 199; Appendix L, Table

2).

41


Burke (2003) indicated that Dunn (1971) experienced

success using the Multi-Sensory Packages and since then

Taylor (1999); Schiering and Taylor (1999); Taylor, Dunn,

R., Dunn, K., Klavas and Montgomery (1999-2000) and Roberts

(1999) have all experienced significant success implementing

MIPs (Appendix M, Table 3). Ming (2003) stated “the Dunns

posited that PLSs increased the knowledge and word

recognition ability of visual and tactual students in need

of Structure by responding to their learning style

strengths” (p. 204). The importance of PLS in the classroom

is undeniable as Ming (2003) underscored “a PLS is an

effective instructional strategy for many students who

require active student involvement in the learning process”

(p. 208; Appendix N, Table 4).

Causative Analysis

There were a number of causes leading to this problem

such as students did not complete assignments within the

necessary time frame. Grades sixth, seventh, and eighth

Spanish students became frustrated when the volume of work

was increased. Grades sixth, seventh, and eighth Spanish

42

Learning Styles Activities students lacked the study and retention skills necessary for

success in Spanish. Grades sixth, seventh, and eighth

Spanish students displayed no desire to study Spanish and

pass their tests and assignments. The writer did not modify

the curriculum to meet students’ individual needs. Spanish

phrases were taught but little attempt was made to modify

subject matter to meet students’ needs. The writer taught

traditionally and did not employ enough tactual and

kinesthetic activities which would have allowed the learner

to remember what was being taught.

Chapter III: Outcomes and Evaluation

Goals and Expectations

Using a Contract Activity Package (CAP), a Programmed

Learning Sequence (PLS), and a Multi-Sensory Instructional

Pack (MIP) to increase students’ vocabulary retention it

will be determined whether students’ achievement levels have

increased and whether students’ attitudes are more positive.

The 21 stimuli and response variables purported by Dunn and

Dunn (1991, 1999) will be introduced to students and

examined to determine whether there was a significant enough

43

Learning Styles Activities change in the students’ performance. See Appendix F for a

diagram of the different stimuli, Appendix G for the

implementation of the Learning Style Model, and Appendix H

for the actual re-design of the classroom area as proposed

by Burke and Dunn (2002).

Students’ dominant and secondary learning preference

will be determined using “Assessing the Learning Styles of

Children Grades 5-8: LS: CY Instrumentation (Appendix E).

After this has been ascertained, students will then be

expected to participate in activities which reinforce

learning using the dominant and secondary learning styles to

retain vocabulary on the objects in the classroom.

In order to counter-balance for a within-subjects

design another unit will be taught using visuals, lectures

and discussions to aid students in the retention of

vocabulary dealing with the body parts. Students will be

tested in both units two weeks after introduction to the

vocabulary and six weeks after introduction of the

vocabulary. An unpaired, two-tailed t test will be conducted

44

Learning Styles Activities to determine the significant difference between the two

types of instruction on retention.

Expected Outcomes

Several specific outcomes will be achieved by sixth,

seventh, and eighth grade Spanish students. Eighty-four

middle school students will display improvement in

vocabulary retention when completing written tests after

they have been taught using their preferred learning style

through the use of Contract Activity Package, Programmed

Learning Sequence, and Multi-Sensory Instructional Pack.

Eighty-four middle school students will display improved

attitudes and achievement when taught one unit using

learning styles as opposed to being taught using lectures,

visuals, paper and pen in the traditional manner.

Sixty of the 84 grades sixth, seventh, and eighth

middle school students will attain 80% and above when

completing a written test based on vocabulary retention

taught using learning styles (Appendix O).

When testing for long-term retention is administered

six weeks after vocabulary has been taught traditionally and

45

Learning Styles Activities using learning styles, students will display greater

retention skills for the vocabulary taught when instruction

is taught implementing learning style strategies. After a

period of two weeks when vocabulary have been introduced

using learning styles and traditional approach, students

taught using learning styles will display greater recall

skills. Males will show a significant increase in vocabulary

retention for vocabulary taught using learning style

techniques.

Measurement of Outcomes

Grades of one unit taught using traditional approach

to language teaching were collected two weeks after

introduction of vocabulary and six weeks after introduction

of vocabulary.

Grades of one unit taught using learning styles

approach to teaching were collected two weeks after

introduction of vocabulary and six weeks after introduction

of vocabulary (Appendix B, Figures 1, 2, and 3).

A comparison of the results was conducted using an

unpaired t test and it was determined that after two weeks

46

Learning Styles Activities the two-tailed p value was less than .0001 which was

considered to be extremely statistically significant. After

conducting t tests on the entire sample group, it was

determined that after six weeks the two-tailed p value was

less than .0001 which was considered statistically

significant. There was a 95% confidence interval of the

difference in mean of both scores. Dunn and Burke (2002)

Learning Style Inventory LS: CY Instrumentation was

administered and each student had a profile of his/her

particular learning preference. The distribution of

students’ preferred learning environment and dominant

learning style can be found in Appendix I, Figure 6.

Semantic Differential Scale (Pizzo, 1981) was

administered to each participant immediately following the

implementation of the unit using the traditional approach

and after the unit using the learning styles approach in

order to counter-balance for a within-subject design. Each

student completed two Semantic Differential Scale

assessments composed of 12 bi-polar word-pairs to assess

his/her attitudes towards the instructional methods

47

Learning Styles Activities (Appendix C). The Kudar-Richardson Formula 21 was employed

to assess the reliability coefficient of the Semantic

Differential Scale. For the traditional approach, the KR21

coefficient has a tested reliability of .98 and for the

learning styles approach the KR21 coefficient tested

reliability of .99 (Ingham, 2003). In this study the KR 21

coefficient yielded a tested reliability of .91 for

traditional approach and .97 for the learning style

approach.

Analysis of Results

T tests were used to determine the significance of the

study and what it meant if the students scored higher in the

learning style approach. A t test was conducted on the mean

score of all students and a two-tailed p value of less

than .001 was obtained (Appendix B, Figure 1). The

confidence level of the difference in mean was 95% with a

stand error of difference of .538. This is considered to be

statistically significant and revealed that the study was

successful in achieving its goals. The mean score after six

weeks achieved an unpaired two-tailed p value less

48

Learning Styles Activities than .0001 which was statistically significant and the

confidence interval of the difference in mean was 95% with a

standard error of .647 (Appendix B, Figure 2). When t tests

were conducted using data after two weeks for males and

females and after six weeks, it was discovered that the two-

tailed p value was less than .0001 which made this study

statistically significant and ultimately indicated that the

students’ retention levels were improved after instruction

implementing learning styles. More importantly, it indicated

that males’ retention levels increased when instruction

matched their individual learning styles.

The unpaired t test results indicated that among males

the two-tailed p value was less than .0001 which was

statistically significant after memory test was performed

after two weeks. The mean difference was a 95% confidence

level (Appendix B, Figure 2). It would appear that males

scored considerably higher when instruction catered to their

preferred learning style than when instruction was

traditional. Females also scored considerably higher when

instruction was taught using the learning styles approach as

49

Learning Styles Activities opposed to the traditional approach. This indicated that

using activities which foster learning through one’s

individual style did enhance retention skills in both males

and females. It not only enhanced short-term memory but also

long-term memory (Appendix B, Figure 3). After two weeks

the number of students gaining above 80% in short-term

memory test after the traditional approach was implemented

were 16 students. There were 32 students who attained scores

above 80% when the learning style approach was implemented.

Sixty-two students obtained scores of over 80% when the

learning style approach was used and after completion of

long-term memory test six weeks later. Only 41 students

obtained scores above 80% when the traditional approach was

used and after memory test was conducted six weeks later

(Appendix B, Figure 4).

The Semantic Differential Scale (SDS) was used to

determine the changes in attitude from one teaching approach

to the other (Appendix C). The SDS isolated four main

factors: (a) evaluative, (b) activity, (c) potency and (d)

stability. Each of the four factors included bipolar

50

Learning Styles Activities adjective pairs. The 12 pairs used in this study were (a)

evaluative (confused-clear-minded, bad-good, successful-

unsuccessful); (b) activity (energetic-tired, shaky-steady,

tense-relaxed); (c) potency (strong-weak, confident-

uncertain, dull-sharp); (d) stability (nervous-calm,

peaceful-frustrated, wonderful-terrible). On a scale of one

to five, students rated their feelings toward a particular

teaching strategy using the 12 pairs of words. Number 1 on

the SDS corresponded to a negative word, for example “bad”

and indicated a very negative attitude toward that

particular teaching strategy. Number 5 corresponded to a

positive word, for example “good” and represented a very

sanguine attitude toward a particular teaching strategy.

The KR21 formula was used to tabulate the difference in

attitude after the traditional approach was used as opposed

to the learning style approach and a coefficient reliability

of .91 was obtained for students’ attitude towards

traditional approach as opposed to .97 coefficient

reliability for students who favored the learning styles

approach.

51


Twelve classes participated in this study, four of each

grade level. Grade six students’ scores improved

significantly after memory test was conducted when

instruction was conducted using learning styles. Grade seven

students’ scores also improved when instruction was

conducted using learning styles. Grade eight students’

scores improved after instruction was completed implementing

learning styles. It would appear that the efficacy of the

learning style approach worked well for long-term and short-

term memory (Appendix B, Figure 5).

Chapter IV: Solution Strategy

Statement of Problem


Middle School students in sixth, seventh, and eighth

grade Spanish classes received failing grades on assignments

and tests when instruction was delivered in the traditional

manner. Grades sixth, seventh, and eighth students’ grades

for the academic year 2003-2004 were examined and it was

proven that there was a problem. Out of 84 students 40

received failing grades and 20 out of the 40 received grades

52

Learning Styles Activities ranging from 44%-57% in Spanish. The problem seemed to be

that students’ exhibited poor retention skills when the

traditional approach was implemented.

Discussion

A number of solutions were gleaned from the literature

on vocabulary retention. Ali (2000) opined that learner-

centered vocabulary building practice “gives learners the

much needed boost and propels them to take responsibility

for their learning” (p.1). Benmaman, Moore, Morgan and Rowe

(1982) compared the cognitive effectiveness of

individualization with traditional classroom infrastructure

and found that students with the individualized learning

program scored higher than those immersed in traditional

learning solutions.

Congruently, Ogden (2003) suggested that even at

university level there is a need to cater to the students’

varying learning style. Earlier, Corbett and Smith (1984)

stated “the purpose of learning-style analysis is to

identify student strategies for learning and to wed them

with materials and methods which foster a high rate of

53

Learning Styles Activities return” (p. 212). Further accentuating the importance of

learning style strategies, in her study of the discipline

issues associated with Bermudian students who have dropped

out of the system, Thompson (2004) advocated that students

need to be aware of how they learn and how they are better

able to retain information. Following a natural segue,

Bascome (2004) determined that the efficacy levels after

middle school students were instructed using learning styles

were much higher as opposed to when they were instructed

using the traditional approach. He conducted a study to

determine whether students’ short-term and long-term memory

were better after vocabulary was taught using Contract

Activity Packages, Programmed Learning Sequences, and Multi-

Sensory Instructional Packages and he concluded that

students’ retention level were significantly higher when

they were taught using learning styles as opposed to using

traditional instruction. Similarly, in her study using

mental models on the retention and use of new vocabulary

words, Moore (2003) discovered that students who use mental

models made a “significant improvement in their vocabulary

54

Learning Styles Activities scores” (p. 7). They were also more motivated to learn

additional vocabulary after the study concluded. In a

similar vein, Ali (2000) underscored the fact that students

who were involved in their learning of new vocabulary were

motivated to learn and took ownership for their learning.

Boers (2000) expatiated that the use of metaphor awareness

in vocabulary retention is an effective tool. Likewise,

Grace (2000) conducted a similar study highlighting gender

differences in vocabulary retention and discovered “a

pattern of differences in performance between genders on the

vocabulary retention that seems to depend on whether the

lesson provides translations in first language” (p. 220).

Prior to this, Cornu (1979) suggested that “the way

presentation is done should be as close as possible to the

way words are organized within memory” (p. 264). She warns

against teaching vocabulary as “assimilated lists of words”

(p. 272).

After conducting a study on the impact of learning

styles strategies on middle school students, Sagan (2003)

concluded “middle school students achieved statistically

55

Learning Styles Activities higher-test scores and experienced improved attitudes toward

learning when their learning styles were accommodated (p.

91). Previously, Dunn and Shea (1991) found that “research

in learning styles provides clear directions for either how

to teach individuals through their style or how to teach

them to teach themselves by capitalizing on their personal

strengths” (p. 95). Later, Prescott (2001) indicated “high

intrapersonal intelligence is evident in learners who


goals and objectives” (p.329). This is exactly how students

who are able to discern their own learning style are able to

function. Dunn (1999) reiterated the importance of the

teacher in the classroom and the pivotal role the teacher

plays in the instrumentation of learning styles “once

teachers learn how their students learn, they can match

individuals’ learning styles with the method most responsive

to that style.”

De Paula (2003) discovered in her study of Brazilian

adolescents “learning styles should be considered of

paramount relevance” (p. 133). In his study of Bruneian

56

Learning Styles Activities adolescents, Pengiran-Jadid (2003) concluded that the

teachers needed to alter their style of teaching to

accommodate the students’ learning styles. The teachers used

traditional instruction to teach students who were

kinesthetic and tactual. In examining the learning styles of

Hungarian adolescents, Honigsfeld (2003) found posited “

younger Hungarian adolescents attending junior-high school

revealed more distinct learning style characteristic than

the other to age groups at the high school level” (p. 149).

In their study of learning styles of New Zealand

adolescents, Honigsfeld and Cooper (2003) garnered that

there is a “need to treat adolescents as individuals and to

be learner-centered rather than either teacher-or subject-

centered” (p.153). Further cementing the need for learning

style strategies to be implemented in the classroom, Lister

and Honigsfeld (2003) espoused that younger Bermudian

students are “more peer-oriented and more tactual than their

older schoolmates” (p. 127).

Henry (2003) suggested that in modifying teaching

strategies to better meet student learning styles an open

57

Learning Styles Activities atmosphere is created as students react positively to any

interest in how they learn. Ogden (2003) postulated that

even at university level there is a need to cater to the

students’ varying learning style. Even at the adult level it

is important for learning styles to be an important part of

the teaching process as is advocated by Honigsfeld and

Schiering (2004) “understanding one’s own learning and

teaching styles, and examining and incorporating learning

styles into all learning experiences are vital to “keep

teachers going”” (p. 505). Moreover, O’Hare (2002) affirmed

“that the learning styles based groups (of nurses), who were

involved in self-paced instruction by using Contract

Activity Packages achieved significantly higher examination

scores and more positive attitudes toward learning than

students who experienced traditional instruction” (O’Hare &

Griggs, 2003, p. 172). This result is reiterated by

Lefkowitz (n. d.) who discovered that achievements tests

results were higher and more beneficial for the students who

were instructed using CAPS than those who were instructed

using traditional instruction. Boyle (2003) found congruent

58

Learning Styles Activities results when he conducted research of law students and the

impact of learning styles on their test scores. They were

more positively influenced by the use of strategies which

accommodated their learning style as the method of

instruction. Ingham (2003) conducted a similar study among

engineering students and realized that they were more

positively affected by instruction which was geared to their

particular learning style. Equally important is the study

by Hamlin (2003) who obtained similar results when she

studied the impact of learning style strategies on adults in

the human services. Furthermore, Mangino and Griggs (2003)

concluded “implementing learning-styles based instruction in

institutions of higher education resulted in significant

gains in academic achievement and improved attitudes toward

learning in comparison with traditional lectures,

discussions and readings” (p. 188).

Alternately, Gayle (1994); Peacock (20001) and Delaho

Ussaye (2002) thought that the teacher’s teaching style and

the learners’ style should be independent entities that are

complementary. Lujan-Ortega (2000) remarked that “individual

59

Learning Styles Activities differences predict strategy use” (p.281). Dunn and Shea

(1991) found that “research in learning styles provides

clear directions for either how to teach individuals through

their style or how to teach them to teach themselves by

capitalizing on their personal strengths” (p. 95). “High

intrapersonal intelligence is evident in learners who


goals and objectives” (Prescott, 2001, p.329). This is

exactly how students who are able to discern their own

learning style are able to function. Additionally, Corbett

and Smith (1984) stated “the purpose of learning-style

analysis is to identify student strategies for learning and

to wed them with materials and methods which foster a high

rate of return” (p. 212).

Ehrman (1996) suggested that “while some learners can

switch styles others cannot” (Peacock, 2001, p. 3) which

implies that implementing learning styles can have some

disadvantages. Gayle (1994) viewed it as an “unbalanced

shift towards the student” (p. 2). In its defense, Reid

(1996) insisted that “matching teaching styles with

60

Learning Styles Activities learning styles gives all learners an equal chance in the

classroom and builds student self-awareness” (Peacock, 2001,

p. 4). The whole concept of viewing differentiated

instruction as self-pacing or individualized instruction was

discussed by Niedzielski (1984) who viewed them as not being

synonymous. Smith and Renzuilli (1984) contend that it would

be a misconception and a disservice to use self-pacing as

the sole characteristic that makes a student unique.

This study used the Programmed Learning Sequence,

Contract Activity Package, and the Multi-Sensory

Instructional Pack as well as the students’ dominant and

secondary learning styles as a means of instruction. Fine,

Lovelace and Griggs (2003) cited Mitchell (1999) who

reported “statistically improved grammar achievement only

after instruction was matched with students’ auditory

preferences” (p. 191). This is reiterated by Roberts (1999)

who taught social studies units with and without kinesthetic

and tactual activities and realized that there were

“improved attitudes, as well as statistically higher short-

and long-term achievement test gains” (Fine, Lovelace &

61

Learning Styles Activities Griggs, 2003, p. 191). Similar results were reported by

Searson (1999) and O’Connell-MacManus (2000). Searson (1999)

taught lessons traditionally and using learning styles and

discovered “once again students evidenced significantly

improved attitudes and increased achievement on both simple

and higher-level cognitive science” (Fine, Lovelace &

Griggs, 2003, p. 191). O’Connell Manus (2000) “studied the

effects of traditional instruction versus instruction based

on teacher-constructed and student-constructed tactual and

kinesthetic resources” (Fine, Lovelace & Griggs, 2003,

p.191; Appendix L, Table 1). He found that the “increases in

achievement were greater when students developed materials

for themselves” (p. 191).

Using Contract Activity Packages to teach college

students Lefkowitz (2003) experienced significant success

and insisted that “it is imperative that today’s educators

identify the learning style strengths of each student and

then customize how they teach through the methods that most

respond to each learner’s strength” (p. 196). Using

Programmed Learning Sequences and Contract Activity Packages

62

Learning Styles Activities to teach legal writing at the college level, Boyle (2003)

postulated “experimental research has demonstrated that PLSs

and CAPs are effective instructional strategies for teaching

legal research to law students (p. 199; Table L2).

Burke (2003) indicated that Dunn (1971) experienced

success using the Multi-Sensory Packages and since then

Taylor (1999); Schiering and Taylor (1999); Taylor, Dunn,

R., Dunn, K., Klavas and Montgomery (1999-2000) and Roberts

(1999) have all experienced significant success implementing

MIPs (Appendix M, Table 3). Ming (2003) states “the Dunns

posited that PLSs increased the knowledge and word

recognition ability of visual and tactual students in need

of structure by responding to their learning style

strengths” (p. 204). The importance of PLS in the classroom

is undeniable as Ming (2003) underscored “a PLS is an

effective instructional strategy for many students who

require active student involvement in the learning process”

(p. 208; Appendix N, Table 4).

Description of Selected Solutions

63


Several approaches to increasing vocabulary retention

skills among 84 grades sixth, seventh, and eighth middle

school students could be realistically implemented. Eighty-

four grades sixth, seventh, and eighth middle school

students were instructed as to how to use their dominant

learning style to achieve maximum success in Spanish.

Instruction was differentiated based on students’ preferred

and secondary learning styles. Consideration was given to

students who needed modification; learning support students

and enrichment students (gifted students).

The Dunn and Dunn learning styles inventory (LS: CY)

was administered to each of the 84 grades sixth, seventh,

and eighth students individually by this writer. The results

of this survey are illustrated in Figure I. A graph

depicting the number of students who are visual, tactile,

kinesthetic, and auditory is provided in the Figure I and

was displayed in the classroom. It should be noted that

there were 22 students’ whose dominant learning preference

was kinesthetic. There were 38 students whose dominant

learning preference was tactile and only 18 visual students

64

Learning Styles Activities and six auditory. Based on the information received from the

Learning Style Inventory, the writer incorporated CAPs, PLS

and MIPs to suit classes needs during the UOP assigned 3-

month implementation phase.

Students were not necessarily grouped according to

their preferred learning style but they had to participate

fully in all activities in order to bolster their weaker

learning preference. The 21 learning style elements were

taken into consideration and the three stages of

implementation were adhered to (Appendices F, G, and H).

First the environment was rearranged so that there was less

light for students who wished to have less light. Students

who wished to have sound while they work were allowed to

listen to subdued music. Design proved to be worthwhile and

invaluable for this writer. Throw cushions were placed on

the floor on a spot close to the wall where a wall chart

activity was displayed. It was interesting to note that the

behavioral and attention deficit students lay on the

cushions and quite calmly did their assignments. It was so

marked that the educational therapist paid a visit to

65

Learning Styles Activities enquire as to why students were not being sent to him to be

disciplined. Another incident noteworthy of mention was that

of an eighth grader who is a chronic analytic and actually

moved the furniture, which was grouped into fours and turned

in different directions, and turned it facing the whiteboard

in the traditional manner.

There were immediate changes in the motivational levels

of the sixth, seventh and eighth graders involved in this

learning styles study at the onset. They enjoyed creating

task cards on the computer and searching for pictures

related to the vocabulary given. The analytics completed the

assignments with time to spare whilst the global students

needed more time. The Contract Activity Package allowed

students to work along or with others. The low-achievers or

rather the students with the most behavioral problems were

the ones who were quite happy to work with their peers. The

high-achievers were willing to work alone and created some

fantastic ideas for board games and even some topical ideas

using marbles (Appendix J).

66


Grade eight students attended Spanish classes from

9:00-10:20. They were allowed mobility during the learning

style teaching period but were not allowed mobility and

intake during the traditional teaching time. This was

difficult for students to come to terms with. Grade seven

students attended Spanish classes from 10:20-11:40 and were

allowed a fruit break at this time. Grade six students

attended Spanish classes from 1:00 to 2:15. They were

allowed mobility through the use of kinesthetic and tactual

activities involved in the Multi-Sensory Instructional

Package, Contract Activity Packs, and the Programmed

Learning Sequence and this proved to be a gold mine of

sorts. Males who could not sit still in class were allowed

to roam, constructively and sit on the floor or wherever

they were comfortable and this was an effective discipline

activity. Students became engrossed in the activities and

forgot where they were. The team efforts and individual work

were commendable. It is important to note that majority of

students indicated that their preferred learning time was 6

p.m. to midnight (Appendix I, Figure 7). The impact of time

67

Learning Styles Activities of day on the study was minimal since the study attained its

objectives.

The traditional approach was taught using lectures and

the objectives for each class were presented. Students were

told exactly what they would be learning in the unit.

Students repeated target vocabulary and they practiced words

by writing them out and studying them. Paper and pen

activities were implemented to practice and matching

activities were conducted in a similar manner. Students sat

in the traditional manner, single file facing the white

board, and were not allowed to move around. There was little

interaction between students. Students were tested two weeks

after vocabulary was presented and six weeks after to

determine the extent of short-term and long-term memory and

in order to counter-balance for a within-subjects design

(Appendix K).

Permission was granted for this study to be conducted

on the first week of September and students received letters

requesting parental permission on September, 13th 2004

(Appendix D). Grade six students were introduced to

68

Learning Styles Activities vocabulary items on greetings in Spanish, grade seven were

introduced to vocabulary dealing with objects in the

classroom and grade eight students were introduced to

vocabulary dealing with personal description. Week two of

the traditional approach found students drawing and labeling

the various objects or creating posters of greetings in the

target language. Students completed listening comprehension

exercises and translation worksheets.

In week three students engaged in role-playing for each

of the eighty-minute classes. During the week of October

4th, 2004 students completed a test for short-term memory.

In week four each student was given a blank piece of paper

and told to write the 15 words learned so far. Teaching

centered on drill and practice for weeks four, five, six and

on week seven rote learning. Students completed the Semantic

Differential Scale in week eight and also tested for long-

term memory.

The Learning Styles Inventory (Appendix E) was

completed during the week of November 1st, 2004 and students

were informed as to their individual perceptual strength.

69

Learning Styles Activities Grade six students were introduced to 15 vocabulary items on

the objects in the classroom in Spanish. Grade seven

students were introduced to dialogue and 15 vocabulary items

dealing with shopping in a stationery store. Grade eight

students were introduced to 15 vocabulary items on food in

Spanish. In week 2 students created task cards on the 15

vocabulary items and printed them. Seating was rearranged so

that it was more informal and collaborative in week two. In

weeks three and four students worked on pronunciation and

played Charades and Tag. In week four throw cushions were

added to the classroom setting and lighting was altered at

the back of the room to facilitate those who preferred

softer lights. Students also completed a short-term memory

test. In weeks five and six students were allowed to work

collaboratively on the Contract Activity Package, the Multi-

Sensory Instructional Package, and the Programmed Learning

Sequence. In week six, students were allowed constructive

mobility and intake. In week seven, sixth and seventh grade

students reviewed vocabulary by creating Power Point

presentations. Grade eighth students created web pages. In

70

Learning Styles Activities week eight, students completed long-term memory test and

completed the Semantic Differential Scale (Appendix C).

Chapter V: Results

Results


Middle School grades sixth, seventh, and eighth Spanish

students received failing grades on assignments and tests

when instruction was delivered in the traditional manner.

Grades sixth, seventh, and eighth students’ scores for the

academic year 2003-2004 were examined and it was proven that

there was a problem. Out 84 students 40 received failing

grades and 21 of the 40 received grades ranging from 44%-57%

in Spanish. The problem seemed to be that students’

exhibited poor retention skills when the traditional

approach was implemented.

The following were the expected outcomes of this

project and their final results:

71

Learning Styles Activities Expected Outcome 1

Eighty-four middle school students will display

improvement in vocabulary retention when completing written

tests after they have been taught using their preferred

learning style through the use of Contract Activity Package,

Programmed Learning Sequence, and Multi-Sensory

Instructional Pack.

Results

The results of the t tests indicated that all students

displayed increased vocabulary retention after tests

conducted for short-term and long-term memory, two and six

weeks after instruction in CAPs, PLS, and MIPs. An unpaired

two-tailed t test was conducted on the mean score of all

students and it yielded a p value of less than .001

(Appendix B, Figure 1). The confidence level of the

difference in mean was 95% with a stand error of difference

of .538. This is considered to be statistically significant

and indicated that the study has been successful in

achieving this goal.

Expected Outcome 2

72


Eighty-four middle school students will display

improved attitudes and achievement when taught one unit

using learning styles as strategies versus being taught

using lectures, visuals, paper and pen in the traditional

manner.

Results

The KR21 formula was implemented to tabulate the

difference in attitude after the traditional approach was

used as opposed to the learning style approach and a

coefficient reliability of .91 was obtained for students’

attitude towards traditional approach as opposed to .97

coefficient reliability for students who favored the

learning styles approach. This indicated that students were

positively affected by the learning styles strategies.

Expected Outcome 3

Sixty of the 84 grades sixth, seventh, and eighth

middle school students will attain 80% and above when

completing a written test based on vocabulary taught using

learning styles after two weeks and after six weeks.

Results

73


After two weeks the number of students gaining above

80% in short-term memory test after the traditional approach

was implemented were 16 students. There were 32 students who

attained scores above 80% when the learning style approach

was used. Sixty-two students obtained scores of over 80%

when the learning style approach was used and after

completion of long-term memory test six weeks later. Only 41

students obtained scores above 80% when the traditional

approach was used and after memory test was conducted six

weeks later (Appendix B, Figure 4).

Expected Outcome 4

Males will show a significant increase in vocabulary

retention for vocabulary taught using learning style

techniques.

Results

When t tests were conducted using test scores after two

weeks for males and females and after six weeks and it was

discovered that the unpaired two-tailed p value was less

than .0001 which made this study statistically significant

and ultimately indicated that the students’ retention levels

74

Learning Styles Activities were improved after instruction implementing learning

styles. More importantly, it indicated that males’ retention

level increased when instruction matched their individual

learning styles.

The unpaired t test results indicated that among males

the two-tailed p value was less than .0001 which was

statistically significant after memory test was performed

after two weeks. The mean difference was a 95% confidence

level (Appendix B, Figure 2). It would appear that males

scored considerably higher when instruction catered to their

preferred learning style than when instruction was

traditional. Females also scored considerably higher when

instruction was taught using the learning styles approach as

opposed to the traditional approach.

Discussion

Prior to the actual implementation of this study, it

was reported by Bascome (2004) that the efficacy of the

learning styles approach worked after four days, two weeks

and six months. This study was able to augment the study

conducted by Bascome (2004) in that it supported his

75

Learning Styles Activities findings that the learning styles approach improved

retention among middle school students in Bermuda.

Prescott (2001) indicated “once students prove learning

their awareness of both their dominant intelligences and

their preferential styles is easier to articulate and

remember their self-sufficiency increases, they are able to

learn more efficiently on their own” (p. 328). Indeed, the

Contract Activity Pack, the Multi-Sensory Instructional

Pack, and the Programmed Learning Sequence allow students to

take ownership for their learning and enjoy the activities.

Students in this study became totally engrossed in the

activities and even offered the sentiment that they did not

feel as if they were in a classroom setting.

Dunn, Holtschneider, Klavas and Miles (2000) reiterated

“when the appropriate instructional method is matched with

students’ tactual and kinesthetic strengths, higher

achievement gains and more positive attitudes resulted than

with traditional instruction” (p. 14). The findings of this

study support these declarations. Further augmenting

previous studies, Favre (2003) discovered “that urban, poor,

76

Learning Styles Activities minority children demonstrate statistically higher

achievement, better behavior, and improved attitudes towards

school when they are instructed through their learning-style

strengths” (p. 84). Indeed, the students in this survey

displayed marked improvement in attitude as indicated in the

.91 achieved for traditional approach and .97 in favor of

the learning style approach. Dunn, Griggs, Olsen, Beasely

and Gorman (2000) affirmed “students with strong learning-

style preferences showed greater academic gains as a result

of congruent instructional interventions” (p. 10). This

writer found these statements to be quite applicable to this

study as well and agrees with Dunn (2000) who stated “when

students were introduced to new material through their

perceptual strength, and reinforced through their secondary

or tertiary strength, they achieved significantly higher

grades” (Kroon, 1985; Wheeler, 1980 p. 46).

Recommendations

Recommendations for other researchers are as follows:

1. One full year of instruction in traditional method of

teaching should be conducted and compared with that of

77


aptitude level after one year of instruction involving

the use of Contract Activity Package, Programmed

Learning Sequence and Multi-Sensory Pack.

Rationale

One whole year of instruction would really ensure that

students are able to become totally immersed in that

particular teaching method. This will further validate

the conclusions of this study.

2. Conduct instruction in mainly tactile and kinesthetic

activities and compare impact between males and

females.

Rationale

Kinesthetic and tactile activities are mainly male

dominated but this study reported a high percentage of

female tactile learners who benefited from the tactile and

kinesthetic activities. It would be motivating to see

whether males outperform females in aptitude and attitude

when instruction is geared toward kinesthetic and tactile

learners.

78


3. Compare the effect of learning style instruction and

traditional approach on grade level and determine which

middle grade is most positively affected by the

learning styles approach by their aptitude and

attitude. Determine how this relates to the emotional,

psychological and physiological development of the

adolescent.

Rationale

It would be stimulating to see whether learning styles

are more appropriate for a particular age group or whether

it helps motivate the young adolescent to learn.

4. Cultural diversity and how it impacts students’

preferred perceptual strengths.

Rationale

Cultural diversity may play an important role in which

perceptual strength students prefer which would be useful in

a culturally diverse classroom environment.

Plans for Dissemination

The writer plans to share these findings with the

learning support staff at Dellwood Middle School with the

79

Learning Styles Activities use of a Power Point presentation and a question and answer

segment. After, the presentation, the audience will be asked

to evaluate the session based on a rubric given (Appendix

P). The writer will also share these findings with the

Middle School Spanish teachers and the Encore Team. At

present there are no plans to publish these results or

present them at a conference.

References

Ali, S. Y. (2000). Learner-centered vocabulary building

practice. The Internet TESL Journal. V(12). Retrieved on

80


October 23, 2003 from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Ali-

Vocabulary.html

Bascome, G. (2004). Effects of learning-style instructional resources on

vocabulary retention and attitudes. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation. St. John’s University, New York

Benmaman,V. Moore, S., Morgan, G., & Rowe, P. (1982).

Individualized Spanish at an undergraduate institution:

Implementation and evaluation. Modern Language Journal. 66,

150-154. Retrieved on May 20, 2003 from EBSCO Host

database.

Bermuda Census Office. (2000). Report on the 2000 Census of

population and housing. Bermuda: Bermuda Press Limited.

Bermuda Government. Department of Statistics. (June, 2003).

The Bermuda job market: Employment briefs. Bermuda:

Department of Statistics.

Bermuda Government. Department of Statistics. (May, 2004).

The Bermuda Labor Force. Trends. 1-16. Bermuda:

Department of Statistics

81

http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Ali-Vocabulary.html

http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Ali-Vocabulary.html

Learning Styles Activities Boers, F. (2000). Metaphor awareness and vocabulary

retention. Applied Linguistics. 21(4), 553-571. Retrieved on

October 20, 2003 from EBSCO Host database.

Boyle, R. (2003). Impact of learning-styles on law school

teaching. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of

the Dunn and Dunn learning-style model research: Who,

what, when, where, and so what? (pp. 165-168).

Jamaica, NY: St. John’s University.

Boyle, R. (2003). Research on learning style and legal

writing. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of



Jamaica, NY: St. John’s University

Burke, K. & Dunn, R. (2002). Learning Style Power Point

Presentations. [Computer Software].

Burke, K. (2003). Research on multi-sensory packages. In

Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of the Dunn and

Dunn learning-style model research: Who, what, when,

where, and so what? (pp. 201-202). Jamaica, NY: St.

John’s University

82

Learning Styles Activities Cano-Garcia, F. & Hewitt, E. (2000). Learning and thinking

styles: An analysis of their

interrelationship and influence on academic

achievement. Educational Psychology. 20(4), 413-436.

Retrieved on June 9, 2003, from EBSCO Host database.

Carson, J. G. (2002). Focusing on learning styles and

strategies: A diary study in an Immersion Setting.

Language Learning. 52(2), 401-439. Retrieved on June 9,

2003, from EBSCO Host database.

CIA-The World Fact book-Bermuda. Bermuda. Retrieved October

20, 2003 from

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/bd.ht

ml

Corbett, S. & Smith, F. (1984). Identifying student learning

styles: Proceed with caution!

Modern Language Journal.68(3), 212-221. Retrieved on June

8, 2003, from EBSCO Host database.

Cornu, A. (1979). The first step in vocabulary teaching.

Modern Language Journal. 63(5/6), 262-271. Retrieved on

October 20, 2003 from EBSCO Host database.

83

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/bd.html

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/bd.html

Learning Styles Activities DelahoUssaye, M. (2002). The Perfect Learner. Training.39(5),

28-36. Retrieved on May 20, 2003, from EBSCO Host

database.

Department of Statistics. The Cabinet Office. (2002).

Bermuda digest of statistics 2002. Bermuda: Bermuda

Engravers Limited

De Paula, R. (2003). Learning-styles of Brazilian

adolescents. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis

of the Dunn and Dunn learning-style model research:

Who, what, when, where, and so what? (pp. 131-134).


Dunn, R. (1999). How do we teach them if we don’t know how

they learn? Located at www.TeachingK-8.com 29(7).

Dunn, R. (2004, July). How learning style change over time:

Looking into your future. Paper presented at the 27th

annual leadership certification institute conference,

Manhattan, New York.

Dunn, R. & Andrews, R. (2000). Students’ perspectives of

learning styles instruction. Inter-Ed. (Special Edition), 41-

43.

84

http://www.TeachingK-8.com/

Learning Styles Activities Dunn, R. & Buchanan, K. (2000). Teaching style, learning

style: How to match the two. Inter-Ed. (Special Edition), 35-

36.

Dunn, R. & Dunn, K. (1993). Teaching secondary students

through their individual learning styles practical

approaches for grades 7-12. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn

and Bacon.

Dunn, R. Griggs, S., Olsen, J., Beasely, M. & Gorman, B.

(2000). A meta-analytic validation of the Dunn and Dunn

model of learning-style preference. Inter-Ed. (Special

Edition), 5-11.

Dunn, R. Holtschneider, D., Klavas, A., Miles, B. & Quinn,

P. (2000). Effects of tactual kinesthetic instructional

resources on the social studies achievement and

attitude test scores and short- and long-term memory of

suburban fourth-grade students. National Forum Of Special

Education Journal. 9E, 13-22. Retrieved on August 6, 2004

from EBSCO Host database.

85

Learning Styles Activities Dunn, R. & Shea, T. (1991). Learning styles and equal

protection: The next frontier. Clearing House. 65(2), 93-

96. Retrieved on May 20, 2003 from EBSCO Host database.

Favre, L. (2003). Effects of learning-style strategies on

urban, poverty, minority students: Debunking the city

kid myth. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of


what, when, where, and so what? (pp. 81-84). Jamaica,

NY: St. John’s University

Felder, R. (1995). Learning and teaching styles in foreign

language and second language education. Foreign Language

Annals. 28(1), 21-31. Retrieved on August 6, 2004 from

EBSCO Host database.

Fine, D., Lovelace, M. & Griggs, S. (2003). Research on

tactual and kinesthetic instructional resources. In

Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of the Dunn and

Dunn learning-style model research: Who, what, when,

where, and so what? (pp. 189-192). Jamaica, NY: St.

John’s University

86

Learning Styles Activities Gayle, G. M. H. (1995). A new paradigm for heuristic

research in teaching styles. Religious Education. 89(1), 9-

42. Retrieved on June 29, 2003, from EBSCO Host

database.

Grace, C. A. (2000). Gender differences: Vocabulary

retention and access to translations for beginning

language learners in CALL. Modern Language Journal. 84(ii),

214-224. Retrieved on October 20, 2003 from EBSCO Host

database.

Hamlin, T. (2003). Impact of learning-style strategies on

adults in human services. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S.

(Eds.). Synthesis of the Dunn and Dunn learning-style

model research: Who, what, when, where, and so what?

(pp. 181-184). Jamaica, NY: St. John’s University

Hartley, K. & Bendixen, L. D. (2001). Educational research

in the internet age: Examining the role of individual

characteristics. Educational Researcher. 30(9), 22-30.

Retrieved on June 8, 2003, from

http://www.apollolibrary.com/srp/login.asp

87

http://www.apollolibrary.com/srp/login.asp

Learning Styles Activities Henry, J. (2003). Learning to modify teaching strategies to

better meets needs of student learning styles.

Unpublished action research project, Shawnee Mission

Board of Education. Retrieved on October 20, 2003 from

http://www.smsd.org/custom/curriculum/ActionResearch200

3/Henry.htm

Hlawaty, H. (2003). Learning-styles of German adolescents.

In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of the Dunn

and Dunn learning-style model research: Who, what,

when, where, and so what? (pp. 141-144). Jamaica, NY:

St. John’s University

Honigsfeld, A. (2003). Learning-styles of Hungarian





Honigsfeld, A. & Cooper, C. (2003). Learning-styles of New

Zealand adolescents. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.).

Synthesis of the Dunn and Dunn learning-style model

88

http://www.smsd.org/custom/curriculum/ActionResearch2003/Henry.htm

http://www.smsd.org/custom/curriculum/ActionResearch2003/Henry.htm


research: Who, what, when, where, and so what? (pp.

151-154). Jamaica, NY: St. John’s University

Honigsfeld, A. & Lister, D. (2003). Learning-styles of

Bermudian adolescents. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.).




Honigsfeld, A. & Schiering, M. (2004). Diverse approaches to

the diversity of learning styles in teacher education.

Educational Psychology. 24(4), 487-507.

Ingham, J. (2003). Impact of learning-style on engineering

students. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of




Klavas, A., Dunn, R., Griggs, S., Geisert, G., Gmake, J. &

Zenhausern, R. (2000). Factors that facilitated or

impeded implementation of the Dunn and Dunn learning

style model. Inter-Ed. (Special Edition), 59-62.

89

Learning Styles Activities Lefkowitz, R. (2003). Impact of learning-style on allied

health students. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.).




Lefkowitz, R. (2003). Research on contract activity

packages. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of




Lefkowitz, R. (n. d.). Effects of traditional versus

learning-style presentation of course content in

medical/legal issues in health care on the achievement

and attitudes of college students. Retrieved on August

6, 2003 from http://www.pdkintl.org/edres/ddwind6.htm

Lovelace, M. (2004). A meta-analysis of experimental

research studies based on the Dunn and Dunn learning-

style model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St.

John’s University, New York.

90

http://www.pdkintl.org/edres/ddwind6.htm

Learning Styles Activities Lujan-Ortega, V. (2000). Strategic performance and

achievement in second language learners of Spanish.

Studia Linguistia. 54(2), 280-288. Retrieved on June 29,

2003 from EBSCO Host database.

Mangino, C. & Griggs, S. (2003). Learning-styles in higher

education. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis




Ming, C. (2003). Research on programmed learning sequence.

In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of the Dunn

and Dunn learning-style model research: Who, what,

when, where, and so what? (pp. 203-208). Jamaica, NY:

St. John’s University

Ministry of Education. Bermuda. Pupil Enrollment Data 2003-

2004. Unpublished paper. Bermuda 2003.

Moore, L (2003). The impact of using mental models on the

retention and use of new vocabulary words. Unpublished

action research project, Shawnee Mission Board of

Education. Retrieved on October 20, 2003 from

91


http://www.smsd.org/custom/curriculum/ActionResearch200

3/Moore.htm

Niedzielski, H. (1984). Rationalizing individualized

instruction. Modern Language Journal. 68(3), 361-366.


Nieman, L. L. & Smith, W. F. (1984). Individualized

Instruction: Its Effects upon achievement and interest

in Beginning College Spanish. Modern Language

Journal.68(3), 212-221. Retrieved on June 8, 2003, from

EBSCO Host database.

Ogden, W. R. (2003). Reaching all students: The feedback

lecture. Journal of Instructional Pschology.30(1), 22-28.

Retrieved on May 20, 2003 from EBSCO Host database.

.

O’Hare & Griggs (2003). Impact of learning-style on the

nursing profession. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.).




92

http://www.smsd.org/custom/curriculum/ActionResearch2003/Moore.htm

http://www.smsd.org/custom/curriculum/ActionResearch2003/Moore.htm

Learning Styles Activities Peacock, M. (2001). Match or mismatch? Learning styles and

teaching styles in EFL.

International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 11(1), 1-20.


Pengiram-Jadid, P. (2003). Learning-styles of Bruneian





Pizzo, J. (1981). An investigation of the relationship

between selected acoustic environments and sound, an

element of learning styles, as they affect sixth-grade

students’ reading achievement and attitudes (Doctoral

dissertation, St. John’s University, 1981). Dissertation

Abstracts International, 42(06), 2475A.

Prescott, H. M. (2001). Helping students say how they know

what they know. Clearing House. 74(6), 327-342. Retrieved

on May 22, 2003 from EBSCO Host database.

Roberts, A. (2003). Part2: Perceptual Strengths of K-12

students. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S. (Eds.). Synthesis of

93



what, when, where, and so what? (pp. 87-91). Jamaica,

NY: St. John’s University

Sagan, L. (2003). Impact of learning styles strategies on

middle school students. In Dunn, R. & Griggs, S.

(Eds.). Synthesis of the Dunn and Dunn learning-style

model research: Who, what, when, where, and so what?

(pp. 87-91). Jamaica, NY: St. John’s University.

Salend, S. J. & Dorney, J. A. (1997). The roles of

bilingual educatiors in creating inclusive classrooms.

Remedial and Special Education. 18(1), p. 1-16. Retrieved on

June 28, 2003, from EBSCO Host database.

Smith, L., & Renzulli, J. (1984). Learning style

preferences: A practical approach for classroom

Teachers. Theory Into Practice.23(1), 44-51. Retrieved on

June 9, 2003, from EBSCO Host database.

Tenedero, H. (2004, July). Super teacher, excellent

classroom! A hands on presentation. Paper presented at

the 27th annual leadership certification institute

conference, Manhattan, New York.

94

Learning Styles Activities Thompson, S. (2004). Discipline with style. Unpublished

doctoral dissertation, St. John’s University, New York.

XL Education initiative (2002). XL initiative summary.

Retrieved on October 19, 2003 from

http://www.xlinitiative.org/OverView/Summary.html

XL Education initiative (2002). XL initiative summary.

Retrieved on October 19, 2003 from

http://www.xlinitiative.org/PartnersInProgress/Ministry

.html

95

http://www.xlinitiative.org/PartnersInProgress/Ministry.html

http://www.xlinitiative.org/PartnersInProgress/Ministry.html

http://www.xlinitiative.org/OverView/Summary.html


Appendix A

Dellwood Middle School’s Grading Scheme for the year 2004-2005.

Grades

Letter Grades Percentages

A 90-100

B 80-89

C 70-79

D 60-69

E 50-59

F Under 50

96


Appendix B

Figure B. Comparison of Units taught using traditional approach and learning style.

Differences in M ean

0

5

10

15

2 weeks six weeks

TraditionalLS

Figure2. Comparison of male and female memory test scores after two weeks.

M ean Difference

0

5

10

15

Traditional LS

2 W eeks M ales

2 W eeksFem ales

97


Figure 3. Comparison of mean score for males and females aftermemory test six weeks later.

M ean Differences

0

5

10

15

Traditional LS

6 W eeks M ales

6 W eeksFem ales

Figure 4. Comparison of the number of students obtaining 80% and above after memory test.

98


Num ber of Students Obtaining 80% and above

020406080

Traditional LS

80% and above2 weeks80% and above6 weeks

Figure 5. Comparison of students’ scores by grade level.

Distribution of Students' scores

05101520

2Wee

ks6W

eeks

2Wee

ks6

Wee

ks2

Wee

ks6

Wee

ks

Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

TraditionalLS

99


100


Appendix C

Semantic Differential Scale (SDS) (Pizzo, 1981)

My reactions to: Learning Styles/Traditional Approach

Directions: Make a check list of the five spaces in between the pairs of opposite meaning words. Choose that space closest to the word that indicates your reaction to learningstyles/traditional approach. A check in the middle space indicates a neutral reaction.

1. Confused _______: _______: _______:_______: _____Clear-minded

2. Energetic _______: _______: _______:_______: _____Tired

3. Nervous _______: _______: _______:_______: _____ Calm

4. Strong _______: _______: _______:_______: _____Weak

5. Tense _______: _______: _______:_______: _____

Relaxed

6. Wonderful _______: _______: _______:_______: _____Terrible

7. Shaky _______: _______: _______:_______: _____

Steady

8. Confident _______: _______: _______:_______: _____Uncertain

9. Bad _______: _______: _______:_______: _____

Good

101


10. Peaceful _______: _______: _______:_______: _____ Frustrated

11. Dull _______: _______: _______:_______:

_____ Sharp

12. Successful _______: _______: _______:_______: _____ Unsuccessful

(Taken from a hand out given by R. Dunn August 4, 2004, at the 27th Learning Style Conference).

Appendix D

September 13th, 2004.

Dear Parent or Guardian:

I am the Spanish teacher at Dellwood Middle School. I am conducting a research project on how catering to students’

102

Learning Styles Activities varying learning styles enhances vocabulary retention. I request permission for your child to participate.

The study consists of two units taught. In one unit I will be using the Learning Style approach to teach and in the second unitI will be using the traditional approach. The project will be explained in terms that your child can understand, and your childwill participate only if he or she is willing to do so. Only I and Mrs. Dorann Simmons, the learning support administrator will have access to information from your child. At the conclusion of the study, children’s responses will be reported as group resultsonly.

Participation in this study is voluntary. Your decision whether or not to allow your child to participate will not affect your child’s performance in Spanish in any way. Your child’s participation in this study will not lead to the loss of any benefits to which he or she is otherwise entitled. Even if you give your permission for your child to participate, your child isfree to refuse to participate. If your child agrees to participate, he or she is free to end participation at any time. You and your child are not waiving any legal claims or rights because of your child’s participation in this research study.

Should you have any questions or desire further information, please call me or email me at 295-7404 or [email protected]. Keep this letter after tearing off the bottom portion and signing it and return that portion to me at your earliest convenience.

Sincerely,

Charmaine BissessarSpanish Teacher ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please indicate whether or not you wish to allow your child to participate in this project by checking one of the statements

103

Learning Styles Activities below, signing your name and return it to me. Sign both copies and keep one for your records.

_____ I grant permission for my child to participate in Miss Bissessar’s study on learning styles.

_____ I do not grant permission for my child to participate in Miss Bissessar’s study on learning styles.

_____________________________________________________________

Signature of Parent/Guardian Printed Parent/Guardian Name

_____________________________________________________________

Printed Name of Child Date

104


Appendix E

105


106


107


108


109


Appendix F

Learning-Style Model

110

R. Dunn and K. Dunn,1993, p. 4.


Appendix G

Process of Implementation

Taken from Learning Styles Power Point Presentations (Burke& Dunn (2002)

111


Appendix HDiagram illustrating seating in a learning styles environment.

Dunn & Burke, 2000

Taken from Learning Styles Power-Point Presentations (Burkeand Dunn, 2002).

112


Appendix I

Figure6. Distribution of students’ preferred learning styles.

Distribution of students' learning preferences

020406080

Series1

Figure 7. Comparison of students’ preferred time of day.

Distribution of Students' Preferred Tim e of Day

01020304050

6-9:30 10-noon 1-5 p.m . 6 p.m .-m id

Series1

113


Figure 8. Comparison of students’ preferred learning style.

Distribution of Students' Preferred Learning Style

AuditoryVisualTactileKinesthetic

114


Appendix J

Calendar for learning styles grades 6-8

Week 1November

1st,2004.

Week 2November 15th,2004

Week 3November 22nd, 2004.

Week 4December 29th, 2004.

Week 5December 6th, 2004.

Week 6December13th, 2004

Week 7January 4th,2005.

Week 8January10th, 2005.

Students are introduced to 15 vocabulary items.

Students create task cards with the 15 vocabulary items on the computer

Students work on pronunciation of vocabularyand connectingthe vocabularyto anobject.

Students start doing tactual, auditory, visualand kinesthetic activities.Students complete short-term memorytest.

students startworking onCAPS/MIP &PLS

Studentscontinueworking on objectives for CAPS

Students reviewvocabulary by creating Power Point presentations and Web Pages.

Students complete long-term memory test

LSI Completed

Students printthe task cards

Throw cushions areadded to theclassroom.

Studentsare allowed productive mobility

Students complete Semantic Differential

115


Scale.Seatingarrangement has been changedfrom traditional tocollaborative

Lighting hasbeen altered to suit students’ varying needs.

Studentsare allowed intake

Appendix K

Calendar for traditional teaching grades 6-8

Week 1September13th, 2004

Week 2September20th,2004

Week 3September 27th,2004.

Week 4October 4th , 2004.

Week 5October 11th, 2004.



Week 8November 1st, 2005.

15 vocabulary items introduced. Students write words andmeaning.

Students draw and label vocabulary.

Students perform role-play

Students complete short-term memorytest.

Students practice pronunciation and vocabularydrills.

Studentscontinuerevisionof vocabulary through rote learningand drill practice

Students continue vocabulary exercises

Students complete long-term memory test

116


exercises.

Letters sent hometo Parents

Students listen to tapeand complete translation exercise and worksheet.

Students complete Semantic Differential Scale.

Permission alreadyobtained from administration

Appendix L

Table 1: Research on Tactual and Kinesthetic Methodologies

117

Learning Styles Activities Researcher,Date

Sample Subject Outcome

Bauer, 1995 Junior HighSchool

Mathematics

Students Achieved Best with Tactual/Visual Resources

Fine, 2001 Special Education High School

Science Significantly Higher Achievementwith T/K Materials

Mitchell,1999 LD, Junior High School

Literature/Grammar

Greatest Improvement with T/K Resources

Mitchell, Dunn, et al., 2003

LD, Junior High School

Writing Significantly Higher Grades withT/K Resources

O’ConnellMacManus, 2000

10th Graders

Science Significant Achievement Gains with T/K Resources

Roberts, 1999 4th Graders Social Studies

Best Performances with T/K Resources

Searson, 1999; Searson, Dunn, Denig, et al., 2001

3rd Graders Science Improved Achievement and Attitudes with T/KResources

Fine, Lovelace & Griggs (2003, p. 192).

Table 2. Contract Activity Packages Researchers and Findings

Researcher

Date

Population Discipline

Findings

Dunn 1971

Kindergarteners

Social Studies

Achievement

Gremli 1999

Junior-HighSchool

Music Achievement/Attitude

Lefkowitz

2001

College Allied Health

Achievement/Attitude

118

Learning Styles Activities O’Hare 200

1College Nursing Achieveme

nt/Attitude

Russo 2002

College Law Achievement/Attitude item: Energizing

Santano 1999

Elementary Social Studies

Achievement

Lefkowitz (2003, p. 196).

Appendix M

Table 3. Selected Experimental Research Conducted with Multi-Sensory Instructional Packages

Researcher,Year

Sample SubjectExamined

AspectExamined

Significantly HigherAchievement

Dunn, 1971 Kindergarteners

Social Studies

Effects on Achievement


Gardiner, 1986

Underachieving4th gradeStudents

Social Studies

Effects on Achievement and Attitude


Roberts, 1999,2001

Middle SchoolStudents

Science Effects on Achievement and Attitude


Schiering, 1999,

5th GradeStudents

Science Effects on Metacognitio

Significantly Higher

119

Learning Styles Activities Schiering and Dunn, 2001

n,Achievement,andAttitude

Achievement

Taylor, 1999, Taylor Dunn, et al., 1999

Teachers Knowledgeof Learning Styles

Effects on Knowledge Gains and Attitude


Taken from Burke (2003, p. 202)

Appendix N

Table 4. Research on Programmed Learning Sequences

Researcher,Year

Implementation Results

Skinner, Introduced the Development of

120

Learning Styles Activities 1958 Teaching Machine-

Programmer’s ability to teach or tutor Students through Linear Programming. Linear programming

provided: (a)Immediate reinforcement; (b) active learnerEngagement; (c) self-pacing; logical step-By-step sequencing; and (d) fading or gradual withdrawal of stimulus support.

programmed texts thatfurther enhancedprogrammed learning

Hankins, 1973

Developed the concept of IntrinsicProgramming-Short discussions followedby multiple-choice questions

Included larger instructional steps thatAnticipated errors, and provided remedial support.

Keller, 1968

Introduced a personalized System of Instruction at the college level.

Included large chunks of information, less frequent responses as reflected on a unit quiz, and reinforcements by peer proctors who checked quizzes.

Thirty-six studiesindicated significantly morelearning for students using programmed learning than for students using traditional instruction.

Dunn and Dunn, 1978

Added manipulative games to the PLS to tactually reinforce

Significantly higher test scoresand improved

121


information. Integrated a short,

global introduction to attract simultaneous processors.

Added a tape of the text to enable reluctant or poor readers to master grade-level content.

attitudes were evidenced.

Taken from Ming (2003, p. 20)Appendix O

Planning Matrix

ProblemGrades six, seven and eight middle school Spanish students are receiving failing grades on assignments and tests.

GoalGrades six, seven and eight middle school Spanish students will receive passing grades on assignments and tests.

122


Evidence1. Out of eighty-four

students forty are receiving failing grades on tests and assignments.

2. Sixty (60) of the 84 grades six, seven and eight middle school students will attain 80% and above when completinga written test based on vocabulary retention taught using learning styles.

3. Eighty-four middle schoolstudents will display improved attitudes and achievement.

4. Males will show a significant increase in vocabulary retention for vocabulary taught using learning style techniques.

Outcomes1. Eighty-four middle school

students will display improvement in vocabularyretention

2. Sixty-two (62) students obtained scores of over 80 % when the learning style approach was used and after completion of long-term memory test sixweeks later.

3. Eighty-four middle school students displayedimproved attitudes and achievement.

4. Males displayed increasedretention levels when instruction matched theirindividual learning styles.

Causes

1. Grades six, seven and eight Spanish students appear to become frustrated when the volume of work is too much.

2. Grades six, seven and eight Spanish students appear to lack study and retention skills necessary for success in Spanish.

Solutions

1. Using a Contract Activity Package (CAP), a Programmed Learning Sequence (PLS) and a Multi-Sensory Pack (MIP) to increase students’ vocabularyretention.

2. The writer will modify instruction to suit the

123


3. Grades six, seven and eight Spanish students appear to lack any desireto study Spanish and passtheir tests and assignments.

students’ needs.3. Task cards will be

created so that students can learn vocabulary at their pace.

Appendix PDellwood Middle School

Presentation Rubric

Presenter: C. Bissessar Date of Presentation: Monday 24th January, 2005.

Criteria Points

1 2 3 4

Organization

Audience cannotunderstandpresentationbecause thereis no sequenceof information.

Audience hasdifficultyfollowing

presentationbecausepresenterjumpsaround.

Information is presentedin logical sequence which audience canfollow.

Informationis presentedin logical,interestingsequencewhich

audience canfollow.

____

ContentKnowledge

Presenter doesnot have graspof information;student cannot

answerquestions about

subject.

Presenter isuncomfortabl

e withinformationand is ableto answer

onlyrudimentaryquestions.

Presenter isat ease withcontent, butfails toelaborate.

Presenterdemonstrates

fullknowledge(more thanrequired)

withexplanations

and

____

124


elaboration.

Visuals Presenter usedno visuals.

Presenteroccasionallyused visualsthat rarelysupport text

andpresentation

.

Visualsrelated totext and

presentation.

Presenterused visualsto reinforcescreen text

andpresentation

.

____

Mechanics

Thepresentationhad four ormore spellingerrors and/orgrammaticalerrors.

Presentationhad three

misspellingsand/or

grammaticalerrors.

Presentationhas no morethan two

misspellingsand/or

grammaticalerrors.

Presentationhas no

misspellingsor

grammaticalerrors.

____

Delivery

Presentermumbles,

incorrectlypronouncesterms, andspeaks tooquietly foraudience to

hear.

Presenterincorrectlypronouncesterms.Audience

members havedifficultyhearing

presentation.

Presenter'svoice isclear.Student

pronouncesmost wordscorrectly.

Presenterused a clearvoice andcorrect,precise

pronunciation of terms.

____

Total----> ____

Audience Comments:

Appendix Q

Self-Evaluation Form

Criteria Excellent

AboveAverag

e

Average

BelowAverag

e

Poor

1.Title page uses appropriate format

X

2.Content flows, X

125

Learning Styles Activities effectively using transitions3.Introduction is appropriate and appealing, giving necessary background information

X

4. Thesis statement is clear, precise and accurate.

X

5. Topic is appropriatefor assignment.

X

6. Body of work thoroughly supports topic/thesis.

X

7. Topic is addressed critically; prior learning and common knowledge are synthesized appropriately; examination and explanation of thought processes are logical.

X

8. Examples are used effectively and appropriately.

X

9. Content is appropriate for a wide range of audience whilewriting style remains appropriate for graduate-level work.

X

10. Literature review used is appropriate andsupports writer’s position.

X

11. Examples from similar settings used

X

126

Learning Styles Activities appropriately and described effectively.12. Paper appropriatelyand effectively reviewsand incorporates best practices in literature.

X

13. Conclusion is appropriate, accurate and corroborated.

X

14. Citations are accurate and current.

X

15. Reviewed literatureis appropriate for graduate-level work.

X

16. References and citations utilize APA format.

X

17. References and citations correspond with one another.

X

18. Appropriate number of references used (3-5minimum).

X

19. Tables are used correctly and effectively (correct titles, incorporated into body of paper).

X

20. Text correctly and appropriately refers toappendices, to be foundafter the reference section.

X

21. Figures are used correctly, appropriately, and effectively, promoting understanding of the

X

127

Learning Styles Activities study.22. Paper is presented in a professional manner.

X

23. Paper lacks spelling and grammar errors.

X

24. Writing style is appropriate for graduate level work.

X

128

Learning Styles Activities Increase Retention Skills for Students in Sixth,

Documents

Transcript of Learning Styles Activities Increase Retention Skills for Students in Sixth,