The learning styles of 111 children in Grades 2 to 5 were identified using the Learning Style Inventory. 63 children who indicated strong preferences for the Design Element were subsequently given a reading comprehension test in both Formal and Informal Design. On both subtests, children tested in their preferred environments achieved significantly higher scores than when tested in a mismatching one. Of particular interest were the children who preferred the Informal Design and had a higher mean score when tested in their preferred modality. These findings suggest that children who do not achieve so well may underachieve if their performance is limited by being in a classroom dissonant with their preferred learning style.
References
1.
DunnR.What is your learning style?Early Years, 1983, 13, 4–6.
DunnR.KrinskyJ. S.MurrayJ. B.QuinnP. J.Light up their lives: A review of research on the effect of lighting on children's achievement and behavior. The Reading Teacher, 1985, 21, 863–870.
6.
JenkinsJ. M.Teaching to individual student learning styles: A means to excellence for secondary schools. The Administrator, 1983, 6(1), 10–12.
7.
PriceG.Which learning style elements are stable and which tend to change?Learning Styles Network Newsletter, 1980, 3, 1.
8.
SheaT. C.An investigation of the relationship among preferences for the learning style element of design-selected instructional environments, and reading test achievement of ninth grade students to improve administrative determinations concerning effective educational facilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St. John's University, 1983.
