learning-styles
learning-styles
learning-styles
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
LSRC reference Section 6<br />
page 82/83<br />
Table 28<br />
Illustrative occupational<br />
group norms<br />
Source:<br />
Herrmann (1996)<br />
Profile type<br />
A<br />
Descriptor<br />
Rational<br />
Occupational group<br />
Chemical engineer; actuary<br />
B<br />
Safe-keeping<br />
Assembly-line processor; bank clerk<br />
C<br />
Feeling<br />
Nurse; primary school teacher<br />
D<br />
Experimental<br />
Artist; entrepreneur<br />
AB<br />
Left brained<br />
Production engineer; bank manager<br />
CD<br />
Right brained<br />
Minister of religion; psychologist<br />
AD<br />
Cerebral<br />
Physicist; forestry manager<br />
BC<br />
Limbic<br />
Secretary; homemaker<br />
Multi-dominant<br />
Balanced<br />
Director; customer service manager<br />
However, major differences have been found between<br />
typical profiles in different occupations. These are<br />
summarised by Herrmann (1996) in the form of the<br />
average profile patterns drawn from a database of over<br />
113,000 returns – certainly sufficient to demonstrate<br />
that the differences are real. Some examples are given<br />
in Table 28.<br />
The visual presentation used by Herrmann permits<br />
only an eyeball analysis of the size of the differences<br />
summarised in Table 28, but they appear to be very<br />
substantial. It would be good to see further statistical<br />
analyses of occupational differences broken down<br />
by age, gender and social class.<br />
Implications for teaching and <strong>learning</strong><br />
Like many other theorists, Herrmann (1996, 151)<br />
makes the reasonable assumption that ‘every<br />
classroom represents a complete spectrum of <strong>learning</strong><br />
style preferences’. Both in educational and in business<br />
settings, he claims that there is up to 50% wastage<br />
because of a lack of alignment between learners and<br />
courses. His recommended solution is ‘whole brain<br />
teaching and <strong>learning</strong>’, whereby each key <strong>learning</strong> point<br />
is taught in three or four different ways, while peripheral<br />
matter is removed. He describes an application of this<br />
approach in teaching creative thinking, in which the<br />
use of metaphor plays a central part. After an initial<br />
interest in the subject has been established, the<br />
phases of preparation, verification, incubation and<br />
illumination correspond to the A, B, C and D quadrants<br />
of experience, with didactic and experiential<br />
approaches complementing each other. As well<br />
as providing a wide range of creative materials and<br />
individual and group activities to encourage people<br />
to move beyond their comfort zones, the leaders<br />
set up problem-solving activities, first in groups<br />
of homogeneous <strong>learning</strong> style, then in heterogeneous<br />
pairs, and eventually in heterogeneous communities<br />
of six, so that participants can encounter ‘both the<br />
enhancements and challenges of having different<br />
mental modes at work in the same group’ (1989, 234).<br />
Herrmann does not speculate on the implications<br />
for teaching and <strong>learning</strong> of the very substantial gender<br />
differences revealed by the HBDI, other than to point<br />
out the advantages of working in gender-balanced<br />
(and therefore more stylistically balanced) teams.<br />
This is clearly an area where further investigation<br />
is needed, especially in areas of educational practice<br />
traditionally dominated by one gender or the other.<br />
The main thrust of the Herrmann Group’s work<br />
with business organisations is to help them make<br />
better use of their creative potential, and at the same<br />
time, to achieve greater synergy between all stylistic<br />
approaches. Herrmann (1996) presents a four-quadrant<br />
classification of 77 creative thinking processes.<br />
Again, he argues for diversity in approach, to increase<br />
the overall level of learner engagement and chances<br />
of success. For example, attribute listing, the Delphi<br />
method, interactive brainstorming and creative<br />
dramatics each appeal to different <strong>styles</strong> of thinking,<br />
and if four creative methods of problem solving<br />
(or even all 77) are made available, individuals and<br />
groups will gravitate to the processes which they<br />
understand and which work for them.