Learning Styles and Distance Education

by Evelyn Beck

ATTENTION TO THE way students learn is just as important
in on-line classes as it is in the traditional classroom.
Yet while most of us regularly design face-to-face activities
that involve visual and audio components, group work, and
physical movement, we still rely heavily on the written word
when delivering courses through the Web.

Learning-styles theory suggests that individuals process
information differently and that instructors can help more
students become successful by varying the way course material
is presented. Measurements of learning styles often make distinctions
between minds that process abstract versus concrete data effectively
and between individuals who best learn in sequence versus
those who more easily comprehend information in chunks. Howard
Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences identifies eight
kinds of learners, including those who benefit most from personal
interaction, those who prefer quiet reflection, and those
who need physical activity for optimal learning.

John Buerck, who directs the computer science program at
Saint Louis University, conducted a study in which he compared
the learning styles of students enrolled in two sections of
the same computer science class (Programming Logic and Design)
taught by the same instructor with the same course requirements.
But one of the classes was taught on campus, while the other
was offered on-line. After completing Kolb’s Learning Style
Inventory and a short questionnaire, all students were classified
as one of four types of learners: Converger, Diverger, Assimilator,
Accommodator.

What Buerck found was that students tended to choose the
method of course delivery according to their own learning
styles. Those who preferred the traditional face-to-face course
were mostly Assimilators (comfortable with theory and abstract
ideas), while those who preferred the Web-based course were
Convergers (skilled at solving problems and identifying practical
applications of knowledge). No Internet students were identified
as Divergers (good at understanding multiple viewpoints and
generating new ideas), and smaller but comparable numbers
of students were identified as Accommodators (skilled at carrying
out plans and tasks and undertaking new experiences). The
study concluded that we must pay attention to learning styles
when incorporating Internet technology into our curriculums,
and it provides further evidence that we should help guide
students toward the kind of classroom that best suits the
way they learn.

Of course, the reality is that students are generally free
to choose on-line courses without any required screening.
But many learning style inventories are available and can
easily be added to a course Web site so that students are
at least aware of how they learn best. And we can make on-line
courses more appealing for all kinds of learners by varying
the presentation of course material.

“The most common mistake of those new to on-line learning
is to underestimate the need for interaction and engagement
with their learners,” says Ray Schroeder, the director of
technology-enhanced learning at the University of Illinois
at Springfield. “As regards presenting on-line materials,
this is manifested by a failure to include interaction, discussion,
or feedback into every on-line assignment. The capabilities
of on-line learning are significantly different than ‘correspondence’
classes of decades ago. Among the enhancements are a wide
array of opportunities to engage the student. These must not
be overlooked.”

In addition to encouraging student interaction, Schroeder
presents his courses with attention to the multiple ways that
students take in information. For example, for every unit,
he provides a trio of alternatives: a PowerPoint outline,
transcripts of his lectures, and the lectures themselves,
streamed using RealPresenter (or Microsoft Media Player).

“Perhaps my years in radio convinced me that people like
to hear the human voice,” he says. “They make judgments about
sincerity and character by hearing a voice. It helps to make
a better communication link between learner and teacher.”

In contrast, he suggests, inundating students with print
materials is “boring and overwhelming.” Richard Felder, who
teaches chemical engineering at North Carolina State University
and who writes regularly about distance education in his field,
presented a scenario in a recent article that showed the possible
ways in which an on-line course could engage a learner in
multiple ways.

In the example, the student reviews a multimedia tutorial
that includes photos and diagrams and poses critical thinking
questions, watches a video of the course instructor giving
a lecture, retrieves information from a database to build
an equation, exchanges e-mail with the instructor, and participates
in a chat room with the other members of her group to discuss
a joint project.

However, Morten Flate Paulsen cautions that all these options
don’t necessarily have to be available on-line. The director
of development for The NKI Internet College in Bekkestua,
Norway, Paulsen says, “Even though both text and video can
be presented on-line, paper is often a better medium for text,
and television is better for presenting video. Still, there
is a tendency among on-line educators to substitute excellent
textbooks with mediocre Web material and superb videocassettes
with a tiny, degenerated PC-version of the video. My point
is that we should combine the best from each medium and not
present everything on the Internet.” Whatever methods instructors
use to tap into their students’ learning styles, the key is
to offer multiple possibilities for understanding.

“Every sense you can tickle, you’re better off,” says Buerck.