Author :
DOI : 10.14225/Joh1329
Year-Number: 2018-XXXV
Language : null
Konu : Eğitim Bilimleri
Abstract
Keywords
Abstract
Keywords
- Learning style term is based on experiential learning model proposed by Kolb (2005). Kolb has been working on experiential learning since the 1960s. The writer, who explains in a certain period of time, draws attention to the successful disclosure of the individual, the natural consequence of the circle in which the individual lives and reflects these experiences in different ways (Gencel, 2007). The concept of learning style is defined as the way learners prefer to use different stages of the experiential learning model and individual differences in learning (Kolb-Kolb, 2009). Learning Styles Inventory developed by Kolb based on experiential learning theory in 1971 is accepted as one of the most effective and most used tools for measuring individual learning preferences (Kayes, 1999; Kolb-Kolb, 2005).
- Kolb argues that people learn from their experiences and the results of these experiences can be evaluated in a reliable way. According to Kolb, new knowledge, skills and attitudes can be gained in four different stages of experiential learning. Students need four different skills in order to be active learners. These skills are; concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation (Köksal & Atalay, 2015). In a similar way, Barsch explores learning styles perceptually visual, auditory, tactile, and motion(Washington, Janosky ve Ann, 1990; 716-717). However, these skills do not identify the learning styles on their own. The learning style of each individual is the component of the four learning skills. In experiential learning model, different learning approaches are identified for each learning style. The best learning ways for concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation are determined as feeling, observation, thinking and doing, respectively (Genç & Kocaarslan, 2013 from Kolb, 1984).
- Therefore, various conditions are combined and placed in a learning style. The total scores of the individuals are used in determining the most appropriate learning style of the individuals. These learning styles are defined as Accomodator, Assimilator, Diverger and Converger (Aşkar & Akkoyunlu, 1993; McCarty, 2010) and are detailed in the following part.
- The Purpose of the Study Institute during 2015-2016 academic years. Within this scope, the following questions are proposed for this study: 1) What are the learning styles of pre-service teachers taking pedagogic formation education at Selcuk University according to Kolb’s learning style model? 2) Do the learning styles of pre-service teachers differentiate according to gender in terms of Kolb’s learning styles? 3) Do the learning styles of pre-service teachers differentiate according to department factor?
- A “Learning Style Questionnaire” developed by David. A. Kolb (1985) and adapted to Turkish by making reliability and validity analyses by Aşkar and Akkoyunlu (1993) was used to determine the learning styles of the prospective teachers. The questionnaire consisted of 12 Likert-type questions. This scale was used to respond to statements from a four-item Likert range. Each option of the questions in the questionnaire represents a learning style. The total points of the questions vary between 12 and 48 (Aşkar & Akkoyunlu, 1993). After this scoring, compound scoring points were calculated. Compound scoring points were obtained as Abstract Conceptualization (AC) - Concrete Experience (CE) and Active Experimentation (AE) - Reflective Observation (RO). The scores obtained from this process vary between -36 and +36. The positive points obtained from AC - CE shows that learning is abstract while negative points show that learning is concrete. Similarly, the points obtained from AE - RO indicate that the learning is active or reflective (Aşkar & Akkoyunlu, 1993; Genç & Kocaarslan, 2013). The intersection point of the two scores shows the best learning style for the individual.
- After collecting the completed questionnaires, all the data were analyzed through the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS 2.0). Firstly, frequencies, means, and standard deviations of the learning styles of prospective teachers are given in Tables. Secondly, chi-square independence test, one of the non-parametric tests, was conducted to find an answer for the second sub-question of the study. However, crosstabs technique was used for the third sub-question of the study instead of significance analysis as proposed by Büyüköztürk (2014) since more than 20% of the observation frequency of the two categorical variables was found to be lower than 5 and the tables are interpreted according to given frequency and percentage values.
- In a study which is studied by Çelik & Şahin, (2011) it was determined that most of the prospective teachers of Physical Education and Sports Teaching have the learning style of "Assimilator" and at least "Accomodator". According to the research, there was no significant difference in the learning styles and components of the Physical Education and Sport Teacher Teacher candidates compared to the grade level and grade level of the students (Çelik & Şahin, 2011). As a result of the research done on Ankara University Faculty of Education Sciences Computer and Instructional Technologies department students, it was ound that 46.8% had a Divergent Learning Style and that there was a significant difference between learning styles according to their age. There was no significant relationship between the students' genders, the high school graduation they graduated and the learning styles according to the high school branches they graduated (Numanoğlu & Şen, 2007). In another study it was found that 54.7% of the teacher candidates had an assimilator, 28.3% had a divergent learning style, 13.2% had converger, and 3.8% had accommodator learning styles. According to the findings obtained, the learning styles of the individuals do not differ according to the gender and the registered teacher education program. In addition, as a result of research, the Internet is the most often preferred ways of accessing information among teacher candidates in different learning styles, and the ways in which individuals in different learning styles prefer to access information are similar (Genç & Kocaarslan, 2013). In a study on Elementary Education Classroom Teacher candidates studied by Hasırcı Kaf (2006), findings revealed that nearly half of the students (41.1%) were assimilated and 33.2% preferred the classifying learning style. It turns out that dominant learning styles do not differ at the class level.
- McCarty, M. (2010). Experiental Learning Theory: From Theory To Practice. Journal Of Business &Economics Research, 8(5), 131-139.
- Numanoğlu, G., & Şen, B. (2007). Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Eğitimi Bölümü Öğrencilerinin Öğrenme Stilleri. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD), 8(2), 129–148.
- Washington, N.D., E. Janosky ve F.Ann (1990). Learning style preferences and the satisfaciton and performances of student groups. Academic Medicine, 65, 14:716720.
