Methodology in Language Learning: Different Leraning Styles

 

There is a confusing plethora of labels and style dimensions; there is a shortage of valid and reliable measurement instruments; there is a confusion in the underlying theory; and the practical implications put forward in the literature are scarce and rather mixed, and rarely helpful. So why talk about learning styles? The answer is that there is something genuinely appealing about the notion and what scholars are hoping is that the current confusion is merely due to our insufficient knowledge rather than the scientific inadequacy of the concept. The most well-known learning style construct, field dependence–independence. What is now needed is more evidence of educationally linked applications of such concepts. If such evidence is forthcoming, style concepts may become more central in SLA once again.

As is the case with a number of ID variables that turn out to be problematic under close scrutiny, learning styles can initially be defined in a seemingly straightforward and intuitively convincing manner. According to the standard definition, they refer to “an individual’s natural, habitual, and preferred way(s) of absorbing, processing, and retaining new information and skills”. In other words, the concept represents a profile of the individual’s approach to learning, a blueprint of the habitual or preferred way the individual perceives, interacts with, and responds to the learning environment. Few would question that different learners can approach the same learning task in quite different ways and it is also a logical assumption that this variation

in approach is not infinite but is characterized by systematic patterns. These patterns, then, can be rightfully called ‘learning styles.’ Learning styles are an appealing concept for educationalists because—unlike abilities and aptitudes—they do not reflect innate endowment that automatically leads to success. That is, styles are not yet another metaphor for distinguishing the gifted from the untalented but rather they refer to personal preferences. These preferences are typically bipolar, representing a continuum from one extreme to another.

One can be successful in every style position—only in a different way. Thus, ideally, the concept of learning styles offers a “value neutral approach for understanding individual differences among linguistically and culturally diverse students”. The argument that styles are stable and have a cross-situational impact sounds convincing but if we take a closer look we find that there is a definite interaction between styles. Furthermore, the stability aspect of styles has also been questioned when researchers found that early educational experiences do shape one’s individual learning styles by instilling positive attitudes toward certain sets of learning skills and, more generally, by teaching students how to learn.

Finally, how do learning styles relate to personality? This, again, is a source of controversy, because some well-known psychological constructs are sometimes referred to as learning styles and sometimes as personality dimensions. The dimension of extraversion–introversion is a good example. Indeed, learning styles appear to have very soft boundaries, making the category rather open-ended, regardless of which perspective we approach it from. Do learning styles really exist? Are they independent individual difference factors or is the term merely a convenient way of referring to certain patterns of information-processing and learning behaviors whose antecedents lie in a wide range of diverse factors, such as varying degrees of acquired abilities and skills, idiosyncratic personality traits, and different exposures to past learning experiences. We still do not know enough about the exact psychological mechanisms that make up the process that we usually conveniently refer to as ‘learning’ to be able to say that learning styles have definite neuropsychological validity and relevance to this process. The problem is that learning—and consequently the related concept of learning styles—is associated at the same time with perception, cognition, affect, and behavior, and a term that cuts across these psychologically distinct categories does not lend itself to rigorous definition.

 

©

 

University of Oxford - post gradual studies 2009 'English Language Teaching'

 

Bibliography:

1)  Blundell, Lesley and Stokes, Jackie, Task listening, Cambridge University Press, 198r.

2)  Gore, Lesley, Listening to Maggie, Longman, 1979.

3)  McClintock, John and Stern, Borje, Let's listen, Heinemann Educational Books, 1974.

4)  Maley, Alan and Moulding, Sandra, Learning to listen, CambridgeUniversity Press, 198 I.

5)  Scott, Wendy, Are you listening?, Oxford University Press, 1980.

6)  Stokes, Jacqueline StClair, Elementary task listening, CambridgeUniversity Press, 1984.

7)  Underwood, Mary and Barr, Pauline, Listeners (series), Oxford University Press, 1980.

8)  Abbs, Brian and Jones, T., Cloudsongs, Longman, 1977.

9)  Abbs, Brian and York, N., Skyhigh, Longman, 1975.

10)         Jones, Christopher, Back home, Longman, 1980.

11)         Kingsbury, Roy, and O'Shea, Patrick, Seasons and people and other songs,Oxford University Press, 1979.

12)         Wilson, Ken, Mister Monday and other songs for the teaching of English,Longman, 197r.

 

13)         Wilson, Ken and Morrow, Keith, Goodbye rainbow, Longman, 1974. 

14)         Seidl, Jennifer and McMordie, W., English idioms and how to use them, Oxford University Press, 1978.

15)         Wilson, F. P. (ed. ), Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs, Oxford University Press, 1970.

16)         Brown, Gillian, Listening to spoken English, Longman, 1977.

17)         Brown, Gillian, 'Understanding spoken language', TESOL Quarterly 12:2, 1978.

18)         Brown, Gillian and Yule, George, Teaching the spoken language, Cambridge University Press, 1983.

19)         Byrne, Donn, 'Listening comprehension', Teaching oral English, Longman, 1976.

20)         Crystal, David and Davy, Derek, Investigating English style, Longman, 1969:

21)         Curfs, Emile, 'Listening deserves better', Modern English Teacher 9:3, 1982.

22)         Geddes, Marion, 'Listening', inK. Johnson and K. Morrow (eds. ),

23)         Communication in the classroom, Longman, 1981. Geddes, Marion and White, Ron, 'The use of semi-scripted simulated authentic speech and listening comprehension', Audio-visual Language journal, 1978.

24)         Littlewood, William, Communicative language teaching, Cambridge University Press, 198 I.

25)         Maley, Alan, 'The teaching of listening comprehension skills', Modern English Teacher, 1978.

26)         Porter, Don and Roberts, Jon, 'Authentic listening activities', English Language Teaching]ournal, 1981.

27)         Richards, Jack C., 'Listening comprehension', TESOL Quarterly, 1983.

28)         Rivers, Wilga, 'Hearing and comprehending', Teaching foreign language skills (revised edn.), University of Chicago Press, 1980. Widdowson, Henry, Teaching language as communication, Oxford University Press, 1978. The teaching of listening comprehension, British Council, E.L. T. Documents Special, 1981