CHANGES IN LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES OF POSTGRADUATES AFTER ENTERING A NEW LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
AbstractBackground: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the learning style preferences of post-graduate medical students change with time when they enter a new learning environment. The learning styles of post-graduate medical students from Pakistan were assessed on Kolb’s Learning style inventory and prospectively monitored for any change when the students entered a degree program at the University of Glasgow. Methods: Medical doctors from Pakistan who joined post graduate program in Evidence Based Medicine and Health Professions Education participated in the study. Kolb’s learning style inventory was used to evaluate the learning preferences. Learning styles were evaluated twice in the study, in the first term of the course and then at the end, with a time span of 7 months. Results: The predominant learning style preferences of students were ‘Assimilating’ type, both at the beginning and at follow up. Some change in the learning style preferences of students was noted as 2/10 students moved to a different learning grid at follow-up. These results were assessed against gender, clinical and teaching experience using linear regression however no significant correlation was found. Conclusion: There was not enough evidence to suggest that learning style preferences of students change in a meaningful way after coming to a new learning environment. This study however, leads to a suggestion that further large sized longitudinal study should be done with enough statistical power to accept or reject the null hypothesis.Keywords: Learning Styles; Learning Style Inventory; Kolb, Experiential Learning Theory; Medical Education
Dunn R, Giannitti MC, Murray JB, Rossi I, Geisert G, Quinn P. Grouping students for instruction: effects of learning style on achievement and attitudes. J Soc Psychol 1990;130(4):485–94.
Entwistle N. Reconstituting approaches to learning: A response to Webb. High Educ 1997;33(2):213–8.
Marton F, Saljo R. On qualitative differences in learning-1: Outcome and Process. Br J Educ Psychol 1976;46:4–11.
Mezirow J. A Critical Theory of Adult Learning and Education. Adult Educ 1981;32(1):3–24.
Garner I. Problems and Inconsistencies with Kolb's Learning Styles. Educ Psychol 2010;20(3):341–8.
Kolb AY. The Kolb Learning Style Inventory–Version 3.1 2005 Technical Specifications. Boston MA Hay Resour Direct 2005;200:72.
Gurpinar E, Bati H, Tetik C. Learning styles of medical students change in relation to time. Adv Physiol Educ 2011;35(3):307–11.
Khan AK, Khan KR, Bashir Z, Hanif A. Learning style preferences among students of medical and dental colleges. Adv Health Prof Educ 2015;1(1):13–6.
Baker CM, Pesut DJ, McDaniel AM, Fisher ML. Evaluating the Impact of Problem-Based Learning on Learning Styles of Master's Students in Nursing Administration. J Prof Nurs 2007;23(4):214–9.
Coffield F, Moseley D, Hall E, Ecclestone K. Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review. London: Learning & Skills Research Centre; 2004.
Hosseini SM, Amery H, Emadzadeh A, Babazadeh S. Dental Students' Educational Achievement in Relation to Their Learning Styles: A Cross-Sectional Study in Iran. Glob J Health Sci 2015;7(5):152–8.
Al-Qahtani DA, Al-Gahtani SM. Assessing Learning Styles of Saudi Dental Students Using Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory. J Dent Educ 2014;78(6):927–33.
Donche V, Van Petegem P. The development of learning patterns of student teachers: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. High Educ 2009;57(4):463–75.
Gurpinar E, Alimoglu MK, Mamakli S, Aktekin M. Can learning style predict student satisfaction with different instruction methods and academic achievement in medical education? Adv Physiol Educ 2010;34(4):192–6.
Laeeq K, Weatherly RA, Carrott A, Pandian V, Cummings CW, Bhatti NI. Learning styles in two otolaryngology residency programs. Laryngoscope 2009;119(12):2360–5.
Engels PT, de Gara C. Learning styles of medical students, general surgery residents, and general surgeons: implications for surgical education. BMC Med Educ 2010;10:51.
Marriott P. A longitudinal study of undergraduate accounting students' learning style preferences at two UK universities. Account Educ 2002;11(1):43–62.
Geiger MA, Pinto JK. Changes in learning style preference during a three-year longitudinal study. Psychol Rep 1991;69(3 Pt 1):755–62.
Koob JJ, Funk J. Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory: Issues of Reliability and Validity. Res Soc Work Pract 2002;12(2):293–308.
Sheehan M, Kearns D. Using Kolb: implementation and evaluation of facilitation skills. Ind Commer Train 1995;27(6):8–14.
Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad is an OPEN ACCESS JOURNAL which means that all content is FREELY available without charge to all users whether registered with the journal or not. The work published by J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad is licensed and distributed under the creative commons License CC BY ND Attribution-NoDerivs. Material printed in this journal is OPEN to access, and are FREE for use in academic and research work with proper citation. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad accepts only original material for publication with the understanding that except for abstracts, no part of the data has been published or will be submitted for publication elsewhere before appearing in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. The Editorial Board of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad makes every effort to ensure the accuracy and authenticity of material printed in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. However, conclusions and statements expressed are views of the authors and do not reflect the opinion/policy of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad or the Editorial Board.
USERS are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.
AUTHORS retain the rights of free downloading/unlimited e-print of full text and sharing/disseminating the article without any restriction, by any means including twitter, scholarly collaboration networks such as ResearchGate, Academia.eu, and social media sites such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Scholar and any other professional or academic networking site.