October 2007 Volume 10 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

of electronic documents and giving enough time to let students to absorb knowledge by online reading might also be
effective methods to improve the quality of online courses.
Future research
Data analysis of this experiment proved that students belonging to different learning style types tended to have
different online learning behaviors. It also produced the following questionable issues: Should we design online
learning modules to meet the students’ need of different learning style types? The answers to the question might be
arguable. For example, in Miller’s (2005) study, he claimed that understanding the compatibility of CBI (Computer
Based-Instruction) formats for different styles allowed us to create instructional systems that were effective for all
types of students, and CBI designers should put effort into designing systems that met the needs of all styles of
learning/thinking. However, Robothm (1995) argued that a truly proficient learner was someone who could switch
between styles and take advantage of all educational offerings and was someone who directed their own education.
He believed that course design should focus on teaching students to self-direct their learning and not force students
into a specific learning style. Taking these two different views into consideration, instructors or moderators of online
courses should provide a variety of learning modules for students and help them learn how to switch between
learning styles in order to take advantage of these choices. It was undoubtedly a challenging task, and would be a key
issue of future research in distance education.
Acknowledgments
The authors wished to acknowledge Ling-Ling Guo for her helpful assistance in the collection of the data. In
addition, we would like to thank the students and staff who participated in this study.
References
Brown, E., Cristea, A., Stewart, C., & Brailsford, T. (2005). Patterns in authoring of adaptive educational
hypermedia: a taxonomy of learning styles. Education Technology & Society, 8 (3), 77-90.
Davidson-shivers, V., Nowlin, B., & Lanouette, M. (2002). Do multimedia lesson structure and learning styles
influence undergraduate writing performance? College Student Journal, 36 (1), 20-31.
Fahy, P.J. (2005). Student learning style and asynchronous computer-mediated conferencing (CMC) interaction. The
American Journal of Distance Education, 19 (1), 5-22.
Fahy, P.J. (2002). Epistolary and expository interaction patterns in a computer conference transcript. Journal of
Distance Education, 17 (1), 20-35.
Henke, H. (2001). Learning theory: applying Kolb’s learning style inventory with computer based training, retrieved
October 15, 2007, from http://www.chartula.com/learningtheory.pdf.
Herring, S.C. (1992). Gender and participation in computer-mediated linguistic discourse. Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, January 9-12, 1992, Philadelphia, USA.
Howard, W.G., Ellis, H.H., & Rasmussen, K. (2004). From the arcade to the classroom: capitalizing on students’
sensory rich media preferences in disciplined-based learning. College Student Journal, 38 (3), 431-440.
Huang, R.H. (2003). The theories and Methods of Computer-Supported Cooperative Learning, Beijing: People’s
Education Press.
John, M.C, Pamela, A.M., & William, P.D. (1991). Factor analysis of the 1985 revision of Kolb’s Learning Style
Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51 (2), 455-462.
195