Learning styles in language learning

in random vari fitation modalitys in talking to scholarshipChapter 2 Literature ReviewIn this chapter, the author briefly reviewed the literature tie in to this teach. notion of larn courses including definition of the key footing, categories of instruction panaches, and Oxfords theory on address larn moods were commencement exercise reviewed. Then the author examined the sex and exotic address education theories related to training styles. Finally, the author reviewed previous studies that retain been made on the relationship between training styles and second or foreign address acquisition both(prenominal) abroad and home.2.1 Theories Related to schooling StylesThis section acknowledges definitions of polar terms of reading styles, categories of acquisition styles and Oxfords theory of lyric poem culture styles.2.1.1 Different Terms Regarding larn StylesThe definitions of styles and knowledge styles atomic number 18 first reviewed, and then cognit ive styles and cultivation styles argon differentiated in this part.2.1.1.1 Definitions of Styles and encyclopaedism StylesStylesBefore reviewing the literature of learning styles, it is necessary to know the definition of styles. The imagination of styles was first put forward by cognitive psychologists. brownness (2002 104) defines style as a term that refers to consistent and rather enduring be givenencies or discernments within an case-by-case. Therefore, styles be those cosmopolitan characteristics of intellectual go (and mostbodyality typecast, as swell) that especially pertain to nonpareil as an one-on-one, that differentiate one from person else. skill StylesRegarding studies of learning styles, the just nearly serious chore is the confusion of its definitions. In the past both decades, the learning styles has been employ in various and some cartridge holders confvictimization slip bearing in the literature. It is very common to hear different opini ons on its definitions establish on different findings in this comparatively brisk investigate bowl of learning styles, for distrisolelyively memorize defines it from point perspectives. However, in that respect is not an agree-upon definition of learning styles. Learning styles tin be be in the pursual ways. Keefe (1979, cited in Brown, 200210) defines learning styles as the characteristic cognitive, emotive and physio consistent demeanours that serve as relatively stable indicators of how students perceive, interact with and reply to the learning environment.Dunn et al. (197811) defines learning styles as the way in which each person absorbs and retains entropy and/or skills c ar slight(prenominal)(predicate) of how that process is expound, it is dramatically different for each person.Sims Sims (1990, cited in Reid, 2002) put forward that learning styles be typical ways a person be swallows, feels, and processes information in learning situations. Therefore, lea rning style is demonst assessd in that pattern of behavior and performance by which an individual approaches educational experience. Oxford et al. (1991) briefly defines the learning style as the general approaches students used to learn a new subject or tackle a new problem.Claxton and Murrell (1987, cited in Eliason, 2002 19-20) use an onion metaphor in which the layers of the onion represent layers of learning styles staple fibre character characteristics form the nitty-gritty information- touch characteristics form the second layer social interaction characteristics form a trio layer instructional picks form the fourth and outermost layer. Claxton and Murrell postulate that the core of the onion represents the most stable characteristics, with each successive layer cosmos progressively to a prominenter extent than(prenominal)(prenominal) amenable to change. topaz Dingliang (1995 12) defines learning styles as the way that a savant lots adopts in the learning process, which intromits the learning strategies that have been stabilized within a scholarly person, the preference of some determineing stimuli and learning tendency.Reid (1995) summarizes definitions of learning styles as internally based characteristics of individuals for the intake or savvy of new information. Essentially learning styles ar based upon how a person perceives and processes information to facilitate learning. Among these definitions, Kinsella definition of learning styles is widely accepted (Reid, 2002). Kinsella (1994, cited in Reid, 2002) concludes that learning style is an individuals natural, habitual, and preferred way(s) of absorbing, bear upon, and retaining new information and skills which persist regardless of teaching methods or content area. Kinsella also emphasizes that everyone has a learning style, however each persons is as unique as a feeling. Each signature appears to be determined by both nature and nurture it is a biological and developmental s et of characteristics. (1994, cited in Reid, 2002 171)2.1.1.2 Cognitive Styles and Learning StylesThe second problem virtually the study on learning styles is the confusion of the meanings of the terms of learning styles and cognitive styles as they are often used interchangeably in research. The clarification of the two terms pull up stakes be helpful to ameliorate understand learning styles.Messicks (1984) definition of cognitive styles has been widely cited. He defines cognitive styles as consistent individual differences in preferred ways of organizing and processing information and experience. Cognitive styles are characteristic self-consistent way of life of functioning which individual understands in their perceptual and intellectual activities (Stern, 983 373). According to Tan Dingliang (1995) and Kang Shumin (2003), cognitive styles chief(prenominal)ly refer to the ways of information processing, that is, individuals typical ways of processing perception, memory and thinking.Brown (2002 104) suggests that the way we learn things in general and the particular attack we hurl on a problem thinkm to hinge on a rather amorphous link between personality and cognition this link is referred to as cognitive style. According to Brown (2002), when cognitive styles are specially related to an educational consideration, where affectional and physiological factors are intermingled, they are usually to a greater extent generally referred to as learning styles. on that pointfore from this perspective, learning styles are regarded as a subset of cognitive styles. Meanwhile, cognitive styles sight sometimes be seen as a subset of learning styles. Keefe (1986) reports that learning styles include not only cognitive processes, but also integrate emotional and physiological behaviors that assist savants to perceive, interact with, and resolve to the learning environment.Renzulli David Yun Dai (2001) differentiate the two terms in detail cognitive style s are mainly touch in psychological body politic, while learning styles are mainly proposed by researchers of educational issue researchers of cognitive styles adopt a more than(prenominal) compulsive approach, whereas researchers of learning styles focus on a more phenomenological perspective. Regarding the methodology, performance-based measure is usually used by cognitive styles researchers, while self-report is the measure that learning styles researchers generally use.2.1.2 Categories of Learning StylesConfusion also exists in the literature on categories of learning styles for many same or similar factors researched under the same name. Reid (1995) divides learning-style research into three major categories cognitive styles, centripetal learning styles, and personality learning styles.2.1.2.1 Cognitive Learning StylesCognitive learning styles which include study-independent/field-dependent, analytic/ foundation(a), pensive/impulsive learning styles, and Kolb existe ntial learning representative, belong to the aspects of psychology. Among them researches on field -independent/field-dependent (FI/FD) attract the most caution of SLA domain (Ellis, 1994).According to Reid (1995), field-independent pupils learn more in effect step by step, or sequentially, beginning with analyzing facts and proceeding to ideas. They see the trees instead of the forest whereas field-dependent (field-sensitive) scholarly persons learn more efficaciously in contexts, holistically, intuitively, and are especially sensitive to human relationships and interactions. They see the forest instead of the trees. Chapelle (1995) explains that FI/FD refers to how commonwealth perceive and memorize information. Reid (1995) defines that analytic learners learn more effectively apiece prefer setting own goals, and respond to a sequential, linear, step-by-step insertion of frame movements whereas world-wide (relational) learners learn more effectively done concrete exper ience, and by interactions with early(a)s.According to Reid (1995), if learners can learn more effectively given time to consider options before responding, they are reflective learners and they are often more accurate language learners whereas if learners can learn more effectively cosmos able to respond immediately and to take risks, they are impulsive learners and they are often more fluent language learners.Kolb (1984) categorizes his experiential learning model of perception (concrete experiences and abstract conceptualization) and process (reflective observation and active experimentation) into four learner types which are converger, diverger, assimilator, and accommodator. Converger (common sense learner) learns more effectively when she or he is able to perceive abstractly and to process actively. Diverger (innovative learner) learns more effectively when she or he is able to perceive concretely and to process reflectively. Assimilator (analytic learner) learns more effect ively when she or he is able to perceive abstractly and to process reflectively. accommodator (dynamic learner) learns more effectively when she or he is able to perceive concretely and to process actively.2.1.2.2 centripetal Learning StylesAccording to Reid (1995), sensory learning styles include two dimensions Perceptual learning styles and environmental learning styles. Perceptual learning styles contain four types of learning styles which are auditive, visual, tactile and kinesthetic styles. auditory learners learn more effectively through the ears visual learners learn more effectively through the eyes (seeing) tactile learners learn more effectively through touch (hands-on) kinesthetic learners learn more effective through concrete complete body experiences (whole-body movement). Physical and sociological styles belong to the environmental learning styles. Physical learners learn more effectively when much(prenominal) variables as temperature, sound, light, food, mobility , time, and ground levelroom/study arrangement are considered. Sociological learners learn more effectively when such variables as sort, individual, yoke and team work, or levels of instructor authority are considered.2.1.2.3 Affective/ disposition Learning StylesLearning styles of this type are based on affect, personality, tolerance of ambiguity and judgment cerebral hemisphere. Myer and Briggs (1987, cited in Reid, 1995) report that affective and personality factors influence learners learning styles a great deal. Mayer-Briggs team tested four dichotomous styles of functioning in their Mayer and Briggs Temperament Styles (MBTI) which include extraversion-introversion, sensing-perception, thinking-feeling, and judging-perceiving. According to Reid (1995), extrovert and draw in styles belong to extraversion-introversion. Extroverted learner learns more effectively through concrete experience, contract with the outside world, and relationships with others whereas retract le arner learns more effectively in individual, independent situations that are more mingled with ideas and concepts. Sensing-perception contains sensing and perception styles. Sensing learner learns more effectively from reports of observable facts and happenings prefers physical, sense-based input. Conversely, perception learner learns more effectively from meaningful experiences and from relationships with others. In thinking-feeling styles, thinking learner learns more effectively from impersonal quite a little and logical consequence whereas feeling learner learns more effectively from personalized circumstances and social values. And in judging-perceiving styles, judging learner learns more effectively by reflection, and analysis, and processes that involve closure conversely, perceiving learner learns more effectively through negotiation, feeling, and inductive processes that postpone closure.Reid (1995) suggests that tolerance of ambiguity styles also belong to the affective / personality learning styles. Ambiguity-tolerant learner learns more effectively when opportunities for experiment and risk, as well as interaction, are present whereas ambiguity-intolerant learners learns more effectively when in less flexible, less risky, more integrated situations.Reid (1995) also cl set outs that whether the learner is leave- fountainheaded or make up- headered will influence learners learning styles. Left- witticismed learners tend toward visual, analytic, reflective, self-reliant learning conversely, right- senseed learners tend toward auditory, global/relational, impulsive, interactive learning.2.1.3 Oxfords words Learning Styles TheoryOxford and Burry-stock (1995) put forward the most significant styles for ESL/EFL learning which include global/analytic, field-independent/field-dependent, feeling/thinking, impulsive/reflective, intuitive-random/concrete-sequential, closure-oriented/ unre answerd, extroverted/introverted, and visual/auditory/hands-on style s. They suggest that each style preference offers significant benefits for learning and that the important thing for learners is to identify the style preferences and to obligate them whenever possible.Oxford (1991, cited in Kang Shumin, 2003) groups all the above learning styles into three categories sensory learning styles (visual, auditory, and hands-on), cognitive learning styles (intuitive-random and concrete-sequential, closure-oriented/open and global/analytic), and personality learning styles (extroverted and introverted).2.1.3.1 Sensory Learning StylesVisual stylesVisual students enjoy reading and they prefer material in a classroom environment to be presented in a visual format such as books, board work, and handouts. audile stylesAuditory students enjoy lectures, confabulations and vocal directions. They prefer material in a classroom environment that is presented as auditory input such as radio, oral instruction, oral communication and audiotape.Hands-on stylesHands-o n students like lots of movement and enjoy working with collages, flashcards, and tangible objects. They prefer to be physically involved with tasks, tending to prefer activities such as Total physical response (TPR) and role-play.Oxford et al (1992) find that sensory preferences (visual, auditory, and hands-on) are very important in the multicultural ESL/EFL classroom. Reid (1987) also argues that ESL/EFL students from different cultures parti-color significantly in their sensory preferences. Those with Asian cultural backgrounds, for instance, are often highly visual, while Hispanics tend to be auditory. Students from non- westerlyern cultures where hands-on experiences are valued often prefer a corresponding learning style.2.1.3.2 Cognitive Learning StylesIntuitive-random/concrete-sequential stylesIntuitive-random ESL/EFL students prefer to develop a mental picture of the second language in an abstract, random manner in search of the underlying language system. In the absence o f wide knowledge of the target language, intuitive-random style learners typically employ speculative and prognosticative strategies.Concrete-sequential ESL/EFL students prefer rigidly performed, strictly planned and adhered to sequential classes. They like language learning materials and techniques that involve combinations of sound, movement, sight, and touch, and that can be applied in a concrete, sequential, linear manner.Closure-Oriented/Open-oriented stylesClosure-oriented ESL/EFL students perform more effectively if presented with structured activities and more time. Typically, they elevate carefully planned and completed tasks, as opposed to ambiguity and perplexity in a classroom environment.Open-oriented ESL/EFL students favor a more open and flexible schedule, demonstrating a high degree of tolerance towards ambiguity in the classroom. Typically, they approach a language assignment or a class activity as though it were an entertaining game, and they do not engage abou t not comprehending everything, and do no feel the need to go to rapid conclusions about the topic.Global/Analytic StylesThe global style ESL/EFL students typically employ a holistic view early in the learning process, into which they fit more detailed information as learning progresses. They typically look at some(prenominal) aspects of the topic at the same time, always making corrections between the theoretical aspects and practical applications as they learn, and make substantial use of analogies. Moreover this type of learner employs holistic strategies to solve problems including guessing and paraphrasing, favoring a search for the general idea rather than for accuracy. Ellis (1989) argues that global learners prefer experiential learning and learning through communication.The analytic style ESL/EFL students have no trouble picking out significant lucubrate from a welter of background items. They typically focus their attention more narrowly on pieces of information, how i n the hierarchical structure, preferring detail rather than the boilers suit picture. They are orientated towards rules tending to focus on step-by-step insertion of material. Typically, theoretical and practical aspects are learned separately. Moreover, this type of learner employs language strategies that favor exact wording rather than guessing or paraphrasing-in their aim of achieving accuracy. Ellis (1989) suggests that analytic learners prefer stiff, individual learning in a classroom environment.2.1.3.3 Personality Learning StylesExtroversion/IntroversionThe dimension of styles particularly influences classroom management, especially grouping of students. Extroverted students perform most productively in a group environment, enjoying activities that involve other students, such as role-play, conversation and other interaction favoring social goals as opposed to impersonal rewards. Conversely, introverted students are stimulated most by their own inner world of ideas and fe elings. They like working alone or else in a pair with someone they know well. They dislike lots of continuous group work in the ESL/EFL classroom. This contrast is somewhat similar to the categories of group/individual style made by Reid (1987).2.2 Gender Differences in Language Learning Styles galore(postnominal) investigations show that males and females learn differently. Where do the gender differences come from? Several sources can be postulated for gender differences in language learning styles. Among these are sensation hemisphericity and socialization.2.2.1 Gender Differences in Brain HemisphericityAccording to Oxford (2002), head teacher hemisphericity or lateralisation (right, left and integrated) is a feature of many learning style surveys. seek on the two cerebral hemispheres indicates that each hemisphere may be responsible for a particular mode of thinking. The left hemisphere is associated with logical, uninflected thought, with mathematical and linear processin g of information. The right hemisphere perceives and remembers visual, tactile and auditory images and it is more efficient in processing holistic, integrative and emotional information (Brown, 1994). Each hemisphere deals with language differently. According to uncoerced (1988, cited in Oxford, 2002), right-hemisphere-dominant individualsthose whose right side of the brain typically dominates their thinking processestend to be more field dependent (less able to separate the details from a confusing background), global, and emotion-oriented. Willing (1988) and Leaver (1986) (cited in Oxford, 2002) claim that left-hemisphere-dominant peoplethose whose dominant brain hemisphere is the leftare more field-independent, analytic, and logical-oriented.Some researchers such as Spring Deutsch (1989) and Elias (1992) (cited in Oxford, 2002) find several sources of gender differences in brain dominanceIn men, the left hemisphere capability be more lateralized (specialized) for verbal activi ty and the right hemisphere may be more lateralized for abstract or spatial processing.Women might use both the left and the right hemispheres for both verbal and spatial activity, thus showing more integrated brain functioning and less hemispheric differentiation.In women as compared to men, part of the corpus callosum (the bundle of brain fibers linking the left and right hemispheres) is bigger in relation to overall brain weight, allowing more information to be exchanged between the two hemispheres.establish on such research findings, Oxford (2002) postulates that males might usually process language learning information more readily through the left-hemispheric, analytic mode, but females might more often process language learning entropy through an integration of left-and right-hemispheric modes. However, other researchers (e.g., Fausto-Sterling, 1985, cited in Oxford, 2002) oppose the idea that brain hemispheres are more integrated in females than in males or that brain hemis pheric differences can make a significant difference. The prevailing opinion seems to be that there are indeed gender differences in brain hemisphericity that deserve consideration and further exploration. And our understanding of language learning stylefor both ESL and foreign languageswould benefit if these differences were explored. (Oxford, 2002)2.2.2 Gender Differences in SocializationAccording to Tan (1995), the difference between males and females is a result of both nature and nurture. The chronicle of gender differences that ignore sociological factors is incomplete. Oxford (2002) claims that socialization which is the way we bring up our young and integrate them into society through a vast interlocking of social roles might also be a great influence on gender differences in language learning styles. Through gender socialization, different behaviors and attitudes are fosterd and discouraged in men and women. Parents respond differently to boy babies and girl babies from t he first hour of life, and after that teach their children sex-appropriate behaviors (Bern, 1974, cited in Oxford, 2002). Socialization process takes place not only within family, but also within school. School exercises much influence on the creation of gendered attitudes and behaviors. In school, teachers support the previous socialization patterns, paying more attention to aggressive, disruptive boys than to girls with identical behavior, and responding to passive and dependent girlsalthough teachers prefer the behavior of girls (Serbin OLeary, 1975, cited in Oxford, 2002). In school, curriculum materials, teachers expectations, educational tracking, and peer relations encourage girls and boys to learn gender-related skills and self-concepts.2.3 Relationship between Learning Styles and Foreign Language LearningEllis (1994) points out that all learners analyze input and store information about the L2 in much the same way. However, he also admits that it is true that learners vary enormously in both the way they set about magnetic inclination an L2 and also in what they actually succeed in learning. Therefore, he regards the study of individual learner differences (IDs) as an important area of work in second language acquisition (SLA) research. He (1994473) sets up a basic framework for investigating individual learner differences to guide the examinations of IDs.2.3.1 Framework for study Individual Learner DifferencesIn his framework for investigating individual learner differences, Ellis (1994 473) identifies three sets of interrelating variables (see Figure 2.1). The first set consists of IDs, which are of three main types beliefs about language learning, affective states and general factors. General factors include age, language aptitude, learning style, motivation and personality. The second set of variables consists of the different strategies that a learner employs to learn and use the L2. The learner strategies encompass learning strategies and us e strategies. The troika set concerns language learning outcomes which can be considered in terms of overall L2 proficiency, achievement with regard to L2 performance on a particular task, and rate of acquisition. The inner part of the triangle is learning processes and mechanisms, so positioned for they are largely hidden.These three sets of variables are interrelated. ID research until now has concentrated on investigating the effects of different ID variables on learner proficiency, achievement, or rate of progress, measured in terms of performance on some soft of language test (Ellis, 1994). The general factors constitute major areas of influences on learning and can be ranged along a continuum according to how mutable they are (Ellis, 1994 472). According to Liu Runqing (1995) and Ellis (1994) the main general factors that have received the most attention in SLA research are age, language aptitude, learning style, motivation and personality. Learners beliefs and affective sta tes are likely to have a direct effect on L2 learning, but they themselves may be influenced by a number of general factors relating to learners ability and desire to learn and the way they choose to go about learning (Ellis, 1994).Individual learner differences-beliefs about language learning-affective states -general factors Learning processes N and mechanisms(2)(3) Learner strategies , Language learning outcomes-on proficiency-on achievement-on rate of acquisition2.3.2 The Role of Learning Styles in Foreign Language LearningReid (1995) provides some fundamentals of learning styles. She claims that learning styles in the ESL/EFL classrooms is based on 6 hypotheses (1) Every person, students and teachers alike, has a learning style and learning strengths and weaknesses (2) Learning styles are often described as opposite, but actually they exist on wide continuum (3) Learning styles are value-neutral that is, no one style is better than others (but it is true that there are student s with some learning styles work better than those with some other learning styles) (4) Students must be encouraged to stretch their learning styles so that they will be more empowered in a human body of learning situations (5) Students strategies are often linked to their learning styles (6) Teachers should allow their students to experience aware of their learning strengths and weaknesses.McCarthy (1980) claims that the learning styles theory impacts education in the following three aspects instruction, curriculum and assessment.(1) InstructionTeachers should design their instruction methods to connect with students learning styles, using various combinations of experience, reflection, conceptualization, and experimentation. Instructors can introduce a wide variety of experiential elements into the classroom, such as sound, music, visuals, movement, experience, and even talking.(2) CurriculumEducators must place emphasis on intuition, feeling, sensing, and imagination, in additi on to the traditional skills of analysis, reason, and sequential problem solving.(3) AssessmentTeachers should employ a variety of assessment techniques, focusing on the development of whole brain capacity and each of the different learning styles.Ellis (1994) concludes that learners clearly differ enormously in their preferred approach to L2 learning, but it is impossible to say which learning style works best. And quite possibly it is learners who display flexibility who are most successful, but there is no real evidence still for such a conclusion.2.4 Previous Researches on Learning Styles and Foreign Language Learning Abroad and Home2.4.1 Previous Researches Done in the WestWhen learning styles were initially introduced, the distinction between field independence (FI) and field dependence (FD) has attracted the most attention in SLA research (Ellis, 1994). The results of many studies show that people tend to be dominant in one mode of Fl/FD or the other. According to Ellis (198 9), both FI/FD learners can gain language success in SLA and the embedded-figures tests have little or no relationships with the language achievement. Brown (2002) provides an explanation that FI may be important to both classroom learning and performance on paper-and-pencil tests and he believes that FI/FD is considered to be contextualized and variable within one person. In other words, the utilization of FI or FD of individual learners depends on the context of learning. Nevertheless, no evidence has been found to prove such consideration.Meanwhile, many researchers study individual learning style preferences from other dimensions. The following are some of the most representative ones.Dunn (1975, cited in Tan Dingliang, 1995 19-20) develops the Learning Style Inventory. The learning style elements identified in the SLI are 1) Environmental stimulant drug which includes the individual learners preference toward a quiet or noisy environment, a formal or casual seating design, and the preference of light and temperature. 2) Emotional stimulus. This domain mainly concerns whether individual learner possesses a high degree of motivation, assiduity and responsibility as well as whether he prefers highly structured learning materials. 3) Sociological stimulus. This category contains factors such as whether individual learner prefers to study as a member of a team and whether he depends on authority to confirm his judgment and whether he likes to study in routines. 4) Physiological stimulus. This sort contains the perceptual preferences of individual learner, i.e., his tendency to auditory, visual, tactile or kinesthetic patterns and his mobility while learning and his tendency to the time of learning such as morning and afternoon. According to Kinsella (1994, cited in Reid, 2002), Dunn and Dunn add the psychological stimulus in 1979. This category contains the individual learners preference toward right or left hemisphere learning style which includes factors s uch as analytical/global, reflective/impulsive learning styles, etc. The Dunns model is very important for it representing the complexness of variables which potentially influence students distinct approaches to learning comprehensively. Many researchers developed their studies based on Dunns model.Reid (1987) classifies learners into six different types in accordance of their style differences, namely, visual, auditory, kinesthetic, tactile, group and individual types. Based on her own theory, Reid conducts a study in 1987 to investigate the preferred learning styles of students with different language backgrounds. The research reports that learners preferences often differ significantly from those of native speakers of US. They show a general preference for kinesthetic and tactile learning styles (with the exception of the Japanese), and they view group learning style as a negative one. Proficiency level is hostile to learning style preferences. However, no matter which backgroun d a learner comes from, the longer he stays in the US, the more his learning styles fit the native speakers. Melton (1990) uses Reids Perceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire to examine the six learning styles of 331 Chines