learning-styles
learning-styles
learning-styles
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Figure 1<br />
Selection of literature<br />
for review<br />
Total number of references identified: 3800<br />
Texts reviewed and logged in the database: 838<br />
Texts in the references: 631<br />
Texts referring directly to the 13 major theorists: 351<br />
Approaches to the literature review<br />
Selecting the literature<br />
The brief for this research was twofold: first, to assess<br />
the theoretical basis of claims made for <strong>learning</strong> <strong>styles</strong><br />
and their importance for pedagogy; second, to map<br />
the field of <strong>learning</strong> <strong>styles</strong> and to gain an understanding<br />
of the variety of models produced, their history<br />
and pedagogical relevance. For this reason, it was<br />
not practical to follow the stringent, limiting criteria<br />
of, for example, the reviews produced by the Evidence<br />
for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating<br />
Centre (EPPI-Centre), since the second aspect<br />
of the project would have been neglected. However,<br />
we adopted some of the processes of a systematic<br />
literature review, based on the research questions<br />
outlined above. These processes included: identifying<br />
literature and search terms; and locating the<br />
literature through materials already in our possession,<br />
by following up citations, interrogating databases,<br />
searching websites, and making use of personal<br />
contacts. We developed a reference management<br />
system using Endnote software and this enabled us<br />
to define and hone our criteria (see below), both for<br />
selecting literature initially and then for closer analysis.<br />
The category ‘texts in the references’ covers both this<br />
report and Coffield et al. 2004.<br />
In the literature review, we used a range of search<br />
terms (see Appendix 2) which revealed the titles<br />
of thousands of books, journal articles, theses,<br />
magazine articles, websites, conference papers<br />
and unpublished ‘grey’ literature. Our criteria have<br />
been relatively flexible compared with those used<br />
in EPPI-Centre reviews, since we have had to take into<br />
account the need to sample at least some of the large<br />
number of articles in professional magazines designed<br />
to promote particular models of <strong>learning</strong> <strong>styles</strong>, even<br />
though these articles tend not to engage critically<br />
with the instrument either theoretically or empirically.<br />
We have accumulated a database containing over 800<br />
references and papers relating to the field of post-16<br />
<strong>learning</strong> <strong>styles</strong>. The majority are scholarly articles<br />
in journals or books, written by academics for other<br />
academics. We have developed the following structure<br />
to impose some order on a large, complex and confusing<br />
literature, and to evaluate all reports and papers<br />
critically. Our evaluation criteria, therefore, take account<br />
of both the scholarly quality of an article and its impact<br />
on a particular professional or academic audience.<br />
The criteria for selecting particular theorists or research<br />
studies to examine in depth were as follows.<br />
The texts chosen were widely quoted and regarded<br />
as central to the field as a whole.<br />
The <strong>learning</strong> <strong>styles</strong> model was based on an<br />
explicit theory.<br />
The publications were representative of the<br />
literature and of the total range of models available<br />
(eg experiential, cognitive and brain dominance).<br />
The theory has proved to be productive – that is,<br />
leading to further research by others.<br />
The instrument/questionnaire/inventory has<br />
been widely used by practitioners – teachers, tutors<br />
or managers.