HOW I TAUGHT LAW AND ECONOMICS - The University of ...



LEARNING STYLES AND INTRODUCTORY ECONOMICS: A MATTER OF TRANSLATION

Mary R. Hedges

Department of Economics

The University of Auckland

E-mail: m.hedges@auckland.ac.nz

ABSTRACT

Many students struggle with first year economics. Students with no previous experience of economics often find it overwhelming. Even those with previous experience often find the university focus on the mathematical expression difficult. They then interpret these difficulties as an inability to do economics and leave their first year programme with a negative perception of economics as a 'hard' subject.

This paper argues that often it is not that students find the economics difficult but have difficulty translating ideas when they are expressed in different languages - in economics these languages are English (words), pictures (graphs) and numbers (algebraic expression). Therefore their difficulty is one of translation, not of understanding. This paper explores this idea and uses two case studies to illustrate the positive changes that can be brought about through considering these problems as a language acquisition problem instead of an economics problem. For students who are unilingual in this context some strategies for improvement are then suggested. Finally it concludes by identifying further avenues for work in this area.

Keywords:

JEL Classification:

1. INTRODUCTION

Many of us who are in the business of teaching, are concerned about the performance level of the students in our classes. We continually ask ourselves, "what can I do to improve their performance, understanding and enjoyment of the discipline I am teaching?" This is particularly true when teaching large first year classes (400-600 per class), many of whom have no personal interest in economics but are taking the course because it is a compulsory component of their business degree.

The question of how we can improve performance becomes central when dealing with students who appear to understand the material in class, actively participate in any discursive activities and utilise opportunities to ask questions directly of the lecturer, then perform well below expectations in assessments. After having several students like this, I began to think there was another application of learning styles.

For a number of years I have explicitly talked about learning styles with students who come to see me with difficulties. In going over a mid-semester test with two students it became very obvious that their difficulty did not lie in their understanding of the material but in their ability to express that understanding in a variety of ways. This highlighted that the issue was one of translation between the 'languages' in which we teach economics eg. words, graphs and algebraic expression. These 'languages' also relate to learning style preferences. Thus the issue became one of translation - when delivering the material and when the students then need to respond to that material. This paper then explores this issue of translation in the context of first year economics classes.

The paper starts with a brief summary of key theories of learning and how learning styles fit within those theories. It then briefly explains the VARK framework of learning styles to be used in this paper and relates that to the standard delivery methods in large first year courses. The paper considers possible ways that maths may be fitted into this VARK framework and when it is likely to lie outside of its boundaries. Second, language acquisition theory is outlined and that theory related to a student's learning and response to non-preferred learning styles. The paper concludes with two case studies of students with specific 'language' difficulties and how, by treating their difficulties as language problems, they were able to overcome these difficulties and succeed in their first year course, leaving it with a positive attitude to learning new things, not only economics.

2. THEORIES OF LEARNING

“Learning is a complex set of processes that may vary according to the developmental level of the learner, the nature of the task and the context in which the learning is to occur” (Gredler, 1992, p10). There are a significant number of factors that determine how an individual learns and thus there are a large number of theories relating to the subject of learning. Each seeks to develop a set of principles that is consistent with predetermined assumptions about the nature of learning. Three such theories are shown in the top part of Figure 1.

[pic]

Figure 1: Theories of Learning

Behaviourism is based on the assumption that the environment is the key factor responsible for how well an individual learns. Behaviourist theories explain how an individual is likely to learn in different environments and how the environment can influence an individual’s behaviour. An example is of a cat running for food when it hears a tin being opened (Foxall, 1999).

Cognitive theories seek to explain how the brain processes and stores information. These theories assume that the individual’s mental processes are the key factors in determining how well an individual learns. (Lightbown & Spada, 1993)

Interactionist theory assumes that the environment and mental processes are both involved in an individual’s learning. The two processes interact.

All three theories make different contributions to the literature on learning styles. However, the most important of these in terms of learning styles and preferred sensory modes would appear to be the cognitive theories. This relationship will be explained in more detail below.

2.1 What is a Learning Style?[1]

A learning style is the way in which a student begins to concentrate on, process and retain new and difficult information. An individual’s skill preferences and biological make-up will determine his/her learning style and affect learning behaviour. The learning style affects how the individual acts in a group, learns, participates in activities, relates to others, solves problems, teaches and works.

Learning styles, like the theories of learning, are complex. A range of different theories on learning style are listed in the bottom half of Figure 1. To provide a complete picture of an individual, it would be necessary to develop a learning profile. The profile would include the student’s preferences with regard to personality type (Myers-Briggs), social interaction (Grasha-Reichmann), left brain versus right brain thinking (Brain dominance inventory), sensory modes, environment, chronopsychology, thinking versus feeling, competitive versus collaborative, reflectivist versus activist, theorist versus pragmatist, and so on. The first four are explained in more detail below.

Personality types are often assessed by using a Myers-Briggs test to determine how people take in information, make decisions and relate to other people. Following the test, an individual is classified in terms of the following opposing preference pairs: introvert-extrovert, sensing-intuitive, thinking-feeling and judging-perceiving.

Social interaction addresses how students interact with teachers and fellow students in the classroom. Anthony Grasha and Sheryl Reichmann developed the Grasha-Reichmann inventory to assess students involved in tertiary education. Like Myers-Briggs, the inventory categorises students around bi-polar pairs: competitive-collaborative, avoidant-participant, and dependent-independent.

Brain dominance considers which side of the brain is used to process different kinds of information. Students can be classified as left-brain dominant, right-brain dominant or bilateral dominant. A student who is left-side dominant is more likely to prefer information to be conveyed verbally. On the other hand, a student who is right-side dominant is more likely to prefer non-verbal information and is more artistic.

The focus in this paper is on sensory modes of learning. There are three senses used to process new information: hearing (auditory), seeing (visual) and feeling (kinesthetic). These sensory modes will be discussed in more detail below. It is important that we emphasise that this is just one variant of learning style determination as outlined in Figure 1.

2.2 Diagnosing Learning Styles

Learning style inventories (generally questionnaires) are used to help a student determine different aspects of his/her learning style. By using a number of different learning style inventories it is possible to create a full learning profile of a student. 'VARK' is one such example of a learning style inventory tool. It is the main focus of this paper and is discussed in more detail below.

2.3 Why are learning styles important?

Students absorb and process information in different ways. A student, for example, could be visual or auditory, logical or intuitive in his/her reasoning; competitive or collaborative; work steadily or in fits and starts. Similarly teaching methods vary with the learning preferences of the lecturer. One lecturer may prefer structured teacher-centred sessions, while another allows students to discover principles for themselves; one lecturer may talk non-stop while another prefers visual methods; one may focus on theories while another continually refers to real life applications.[2]

Students therefore learn best when their learning style is consistent with the modes of teaching used by their lecturers. In the case where there is a mismatch between the style of the learner and the teaching method of the lecturer, a student can become discouraged with the course and achieve below his/her potential, or in extreme cases withdraw totally from the course. Thus it becomes useful for a student to know his/her learning style preference to help plan the learning tasks necessary for academic achievement.

3. SENSORY PREFERENCES (VARK)

As stated above, one of the ways in which learning styles can be addressed is in terms of sensory intake of information. The preferred sensory mode of babies could be considered gustatory and tactile, in that they like to become familiar with new objects by putting them into their mouths. As we get older however, our preferred sensory modes develop.[3]

The literature search has shown that the majority of Sensory Preferences Inventories report on an individual’s learning style in terms of the three primary senses used to process information: visual, auditory and kinesthetic (or tactile). The first two are self explanatory and the third is like the preferred sensory mode for babies, that is the use of hands to touch, to handle, or to do things.[4]

Neil Fleming and Colleen Mills (1992) have taken the Stirling's (1987) VAK sensory preferences inventory and developed it in two ways. Firstly, the visual sense (V) has been disaggregated so that a distinction is made between visual information presented as text (R to indicate read/write) and that presented as pictures, such as diagrams and videos (V has been used for this second category but it should not be confused with the V from VAK style questionnaires which represent all information sensed visually - rather it is a subset of this categorisation). This is to recognise the fact that while both modes rely on visual presentation, some students work more easily with text, whereas others prefer diagrams. This is one way in which VARK differs from other sensory inventory systems that have been developed.

Fleming and Mills have also made VARK more than just another learning style inventory which simply categorises a student according to his/her preferred learning mode. Rather, VARK can be thought of as a self-help kit for student and lecturer alike. It includes a straight forward diagnostic questionnaire[5] (that takes approximately 10 minutes to complete), tips for students divided according to their preferred learning mode, as well as useful information for lecturers wanting to cater for the diversity in their classrooms.

Many authors suggest that lecturers should adjust delivery methods to accommodate the different sensory modes of students in their classes, or provide a variety of delivery methods to cover the visual, auditory, read/write and kinesthetic styles of students. Fleming and Mills take a different (and what we consider more realistic) approach, to empower the students. “[I]t is simply not realistic to expect teachers to provide programs that accommodate the learning style diversity present in their classes, even if they can establish the nature and extent of that diversity” (Fleming and Mills 1992, p 138). The lecturer can assist students by encouraging them to fill out the questionnaires and giving them time to reflect on the meaning of their preferred learning styles. It would also be useful to discuss with students, how they can adjust their learning behaviour in line with their preferred sensory mode. This latter method has been used successfully and reported on by a team at Auckland University of Technology (see (Dabb et al., 1998)

4. LARGE CLASS DELIVERY METHODS

In teaching large classes and multiple streams of a course, at times with different lecturers, the ability for lecturers to adjust their teaching to accommodate the different modes of their students is obviously severely limited. What tends to happen is that concepts and ideas are conveyed in a variety of methods. These do tend to focus on visual (V), aural (A) and Read/Write (R) with little opportunity provided for Kinaesthetic (K) methods[6]. The presumption by the teaching staff, myself included, is that by going over the same idea in words (A), on graphs (V), by lecture notes (R) and in algebra (possibly R but see next section) is that we are reinforcing the idea through repetition. For traditional university students who tend to be strong in A and R this is probably true. However, with the rapid growth in the tertiary sector over the last twenty years, there are an increasing number of students for whom the traditional delivery methods are not preferred learning styles.

There is now a large group of students, often considered non-traditional students, who are stronger in visual (V) and/or kinaesthetic (K) learning styles so the shift to large lectures often presents them with multiple problems. At the same time, changes in the school curricula have tended to provide far wider acceptance and encouragement of V and K styles than was present even twenty years ago. This means these students may well have been very successful students at school where strong V and K preferences are more accepted and also often mitigated by small classes, close contact and study with peers, closer student/teacher relationships and a more interactive environment generally. First year university study does not provide these mitigating factors. This can result in these students floundering - not due to lack of ability but due to a lack of skills to manage 'foreign' learning styles.

4.1 Maths skills and VARK

When considering how maths skills fit in with VARK there are two levels that appear to be relevant. These relate directly to the degree of maths inability and fear or aversion

If a student has an extreme aversion to maths they see this as an entirely different language. Students may even say we are talking Greek to them. In this situation they lack the 'language' skills to even recognise the language being used and respond to this by tuning out. The problem that this causes is that when we change back to English or any other style they are more comfortable with, they do not immediately pay attention, and so there will usually be a delay. If this happens multiple times within a lecture it compounds their difficulties. For these students they view anything that has a graph or an equation or numbers as "maths - therefore I can't do it". In identifying maths simply as a language they need to learn, in the same way they have learnt the jargon of the major subjects, steps can then be made toward acquiring maths skills in a preference order that matches their learning preferences - the 'easy' parts first. However, this paper is not about conquering a maths aversion.[7]

The second group of students are those who have limited maths skills and/or confidence. For this group it often comes down to what they define as maths. For example a strongly visual person who also has some maths skills may feel reasonably comfortable with graphical representations yet feel threatened by the algebraic expression of the same idea. Similarly someone with very strong Read/Write skills and maths skills may be comfortable with algebra but not with graphs. A student who is more kinaesthetic with maths skills will prefer examples that are realistic and use real numbers rather than algebraic expression or sketch graphs. This is then similar to being able to recognise a language and maybe, pick up key words. The student in this position will tend to remain more focussed on the material even though it is in a foreign language - they pick up sufficient to get the idea that it is saying the same thing as the words they have already heard. Clearly, for both of these groups some understanding of language acquisition will be useful.

5. LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THEORY

The focus on this paper is in second language acquisition (SLA) - that is a language acquired after early childhood (including what may be third or subsequent languages learned). SLA tends to be viewed in two ways: as a part of applied linguistics where the focus is on the experiences of the learner, particularly in the classroom; or as a part of the language system and learning processes themselves. The latter is particularly important when considering language acquisition with little or no formal training (termed naturalistic acquisition) (Canale & Swain, 1980). It is often this type of language acquisition that students develop their learning style preferences through.

What has been found through SLA is that there is a consistent order in the acquisition of language structures (Archibald, 2000). More importantly this order remain reasonably consistent between first and subsequent language acquisition. This order can be broken into four periods: silent; formulaic speech; experimental phase and; fluency[8].

Most learners begin their acquisition process with a 'silent period' in which they speak very little if at all. For some this can be a period of 'language shock' in which they actively reject the incomprehensible input of the new language (consider our maths averse students). During this 'silent' period may learners are engaging in private speech (sometimes called 'self-talk'). While appearing silent, they are rehearsing important survival phrases and lexical chinks. Consideration of this silent period can place a new importance on students who do not participate in smaller classes. As they acquire their new language skills they start to participate and speak up - entirely consistent with what happens in the classroom.

The second phase is that of formulaic speech. The memorised phrases developed and practiced silently during the silent phase are then employed in this second period. This is where the student has a number of key phrases that they are able to use, often in context. It is this phase of language acquisition that can lead to difficulties in economics. Students who are at this phase of their language acquisition can and often do ask questions using the correct phrases suggesting a level of understanding that they have not actually achieved yet. As lecturers or tutors we then respond in a similar vein. While this does reinforce the language skills developed already by the student it does little to move their language acquisition forward. Rather it reinforces the replication rather than creative thinking.

The third phase is the experimental phase of acquisition. At this point the learner will start to use words and put them together in ways different from those through which they were acquired. They effectively start to experiment, try new combinations and develop a deeper understanding. There will be grammatical and semantic errors that may suggest poorer acquisition than in formulaic speech but this is genuine development. In terms of economics these are students who will be attempting to re-phrase things, creating links between ideas and experimenting with the application of the concepts. While obviously not always correct this is equivalent to a deeper level of learning than those in the grammatically correct formulaic phase.

The final stage is fluency. While a simple concept, it has multiple components to it, including reading, writing, comprehension and speaking. One way of considering fluency is the idea that a student 'thinks' in the language. In the earlier phases they may translate back into their first tongue, think of the answer, translate that into the second language and then use it. The degree of this translation reduces as they move through the order of acquisition. In the silent phase and formulaic speech phases most phrases will require translation to first tongue. However by the experimental phase the learner may only translate new ideas or concepts or more difficult ones while not needing to translate those already familiar to them.

5.1 Economic Language Acquisition

When we then apply SLA to the acquisition of economics and learning styles it starts to become obvious how teaching methodology can actually be counter-productive in some cases. As already mentioned, most first year courses tend to move seamlessly between visual, read/write and aural expressions of concepts. However, if students are not fluent in all of these learning preferences they will lack the ability to move between them in the same way. Rather, depending on where they are in the language acquisition process, they will either start 'translating' ideas to a form that they can speak fluently or shut down and ignore the language they do not recognise.

In the former case the pace with which they are able to translate will always be slower than the pace at which the material is delivered. This will result in key linkages or ideas being missed entirely by the student. We often see this reflected when students express questions in terms of seeing how we got from point (a) to point (b) but not understanding how they get to point (c). It is highly probable that while they were still translating the point (a) to point (b) part, the lecturer had already moved on to explaining point (b) to point (c).

In the latter case this is reflected by the students simply ignoring the section they are uncomfortable with. Unfortunately however, it does not stop there. They are also likely to miss the first part of the next section which, although in a language with which they are comfortable they missed the start of. Again this is reflected in missing links between ideas. The best way to illustrate these difficulties is with the use of two case studies that highlight particular translation problems and solutions.

6. CASE STUDIES OF TRANSLATION

6.1 Case Study 1: Extremely limited visual skills

The first case was a mature student who was, coincidentally, multilingual in languages but not learning styles. His participation in class was always good and discussion showed a clear understanding of the ideas being taught. However, his first test result was outstanding in that he had either missed out or performed extremely poorly in every question that had a graph associated with it in any way - either as a part of the question or required in the answer. Discussion with the student had him explaining he had felt he had extremely poor visual skills. This difficulty was reflected in his daily life as a total abhorrence and inability to deal with maps or diagrams. He was however, extremely comfortable with read/write and aural skills and comfortably managed the algebraic requirements of the course.

As a language teacher he had an understanding that he lacked these visual skills and so had developed a strategy to cope by simply avoiding activities that required them or getting the information in a non-pictorial form. He even went so far to explain that this was one reason he was so comfortable with languages - because there was no requirement for these skills. Unfortunately he now had to complete an economics paper (in fact, the first of two) that did require these skills.

Having identified the problem and more importantly that the problem was not his understanding but his ability to convey that understanding in a variety of 'languages' the key became to find a solution. The first approach taken was for him to simply copy graphs down in class and not to bother at that time with the understanding. He would then write out lengthy (read/write) explanations of the graph after class. The graph would not speak to him but the words did. By learning and understanding the words he was then able to remember the picture that went with it. Another way that I have had described to me is that the graphs were treated as 'icons' representing the words in the same way that computer icons represent actions or programmes.

This immediate solution meant that he stopped tuning out whenever a graph was used and instead focussed on getting it down correctly and matching the explanation correctly with it. As a long term solution this approach was going to be limited as it was still extremely difficult for him to manage changes on the graph. He could memorise the starting and finishing points but being able to identify them from a question in another language, such as words, was still too difficult. For this he needed to develop his visual language skills.

As mentioned, fortunately this student was actually multi-lingual (fluent in four languages). We then discussed how he approached a new language and the type of process he went through in learning a language. We took these ideas and applied them to the acquisition of a visual language. What was interesting is one strategy he used for his language acquisition was to immerse himself as much as possible in the language being learnt. This was in contrast to the strategy he had developed for his visual language acquisition which was one of avoidance. Having identified this little contradiction he made an effort to stop avoiding visual queues.

Being a student on study exchange to Auckland this was relevant in a number of aspects of his life. He started using maps more and attempting to follow bus routes etc on the maps. Instead of immediately looking for alternative ways of gaining this information, such as asking people, he started trying to follow more visual prompts. The second thing he did was start to learn the language of graphs from introduction to graphs books. By gaining this information from books it supported his read/write preference. When he had difficulty he would ask questions of the lecturer that was supported by his aural preference. In this way he built up his basic vocabulary of visual language so although he was still needing to translate, he started to be able to keep key or formulaic phrases that he did not need to translate. Perhaps more importantly his translation to and from visual graphs became much more explicit enabling him to further develop his visual language skills.

Results? He did not become an 'A' student overnight. He did however, start to complete test papers and make a reasonable attempt at the graphical questions. He organised his test time accordingly so that he could do the parts of the paper that were non-visual quicker allowing him greater time to make the translations for the visual questions (yes, he did still tend to leave these until last). This is in contrast to the usual advice we give students to allocate their time carefully according to the marks allocation. He did allocate his time carefully but according to where he knew he would need it. This was only a twelve week course and his visual difficulty was not identified until week six. He still managed to improve his results dramatically and ended up with a comfortable passing grade. More importantly he was on the road to developing his skills further so there would be a reasonable expectation that his result in the following semester would be more reflective of his grades in non-visual papers (usually A's). He also found it was improving his confidence in other visual arenas such as travelling around strange cities.

6.2 Case Study 2: Extremely limited translation skills

The second case was a young, female student who had much more balanced learning preferences. The difficulty here was that if she was asked a question in one 'language' she could respond in the same language. However, if she was asked a question in one language and asked for the answer in another language she was unable to translate between the two. She did have a minor difficulty with maths but that was not the source of her difficulty and she readily admitted that she could do the maths required but simply had to focus on it and practise. It was not the real source of her difficulty.

Once again, having identified which step she was struggling with she could then practise translation between her separate languages. She was most comfortable with aural so she would talk through her explanation of a graph. By recording this she could then write it. In this way she used her aural preference as the intermediary between her visual and read/write language skills. Given her ability with all of the languages she very rapidly developed the translation skills required. She also changed her study strategy to one of choosing to practise questions where the answer was required in a different language from the one it was asked in. These very easy methods enabled her to improve her performance dramatically in the second test and final exam. Her final grade ended up being one of her best grades and she found she transferred this understanding of her learning to her other courses.

7. CONCLUSION

Difficulties that students have with first year economics, particularly when taught in large classes, are often perceived as an inability to think like an economist, mathematical difficulties or marginal students of more limited academic aptitude who perhaps should not be there or some combination of the three. Students in turn perceive their lack of achievement as an inability to 'do' economics or maths. Often the truth is a disjunction between how we teach and how the student learns. A disjunction made more real by a greatly expanded tertiary sector and a school system that is more flexible in both delivery and response styles.

One solution to this is for lecturers to include a range of teaching styles in their lectures even when constrained by large class teaching and poor lecture theatre acoustics but kinaesthetic preferences are often still largely ignored. In teaching economics this is often taken further and seen as reinforcing ideas and concepts by delivering the same idea in several forms: graphically, by words and by maths. While the intention is sound the receipt of it may actually compound the issue when students have particular learning style weaknesses. In these cases it can appear as if we are delivering material in a foreign language leading to the student losing interest and becoming negative about the course.

If however, we explicitly talk about the different languages of economics and the translation between these languages the students are then in a position to identify their weak learning preferences and to find strategies that either compensate for the weakness and/or develop their weakness so it is less of an impediment to success. The benefits of such an approach are not limited to the student's success in economics but can have wider implications for their tertiary study and even their life in general as illustrated by the first case study above.

This implies that the concept of teaching things in multiple ways is not wrong but that more focus needs to be taken on the process of translation between the methods so a student can 'learn' the way that suits them - so long as they can then translate that learning to the method required. As class sizes grow and the range of student types increases this strategy becomes more rather than less important.

There is substantial work that can still be done in this area. While the VARK questionnaire used in this work is readily available online it would be nice to develop a further enhancement that more specifically focuses on the various languages needed for economics. There is also the possibility of developing a range of supporting material for teachers and students that can help develop the translation skills required. There is substantial potential for this approach to overcome many of the poor perception issues that first year economics courses often suffer from but it requires lecturers who are committed to not only the teaching of economics but to the student learning of economics.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archibald, J. (Ed.). (2000). Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.

Dabb, H., Eveleens, W., et al. (1998, 1-3 July). VARK: Teaching and Learning Modal Preferences. Paper presented at the New Zealand Diploma in Business Conference, Nelson, NZ.

Evans, J. (2000). Adults' Mathematical Thinking and Emotions. London: Routledge.

Fleming, Neil D. (1995). “I’m different; not dumb: Modes of presentation (VARK) in the tertiary classroom.” Contributed paper, annual conference of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, Rockhampton, July.

Fleming, Neil D. (No date). “VARK - A resource pack for students and teachers...”. Lincoln University.

Fleming, N., & Mills, C. (1992). Not another Inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. To Improve the Academy, 11, 137-149.

Foxall, G. (1999). Behaviourism. In P. Earl & S. Kemp (Eds.), The Elgar Companion to Consumer Research and Economic Psychology (pp. 38-46). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Grasha, A.F. (1990). Using traditional versus naturalistic approaches to assessing learning styles in college teaching. Journal of excellence in College Teaching, 1, 23-29.

Gredler, M. (1992). Learning and Instruction: Theory into Practice. New York: Macmillan Publishing.

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1993). How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

St Hill, Rod. (1997). “Modal Preferences in Teaching and Learning Economics.” Contributed paper, fifth annual Teaching Economics Conference, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, 2-4 July.

Stirling, P (June 20, 1987) "Power Lines" New Zealand Listener, pp13-15

Zapalska, Alina. (1996). “The Market Game: Interactive Learning Through Market Stimulation.” The 1996 SBAA Innovation Teaching Award at the Southern Business Administration Association, College of Business and Public Affairs, Clemson University, SC, August 1996.

Web Sites





















-----------------------

[1] There is a great deal of confusion regarding the difference between learning styles and cognitive styles. Many authors use the terms interchangeably. Both learning styles and cognitive styles address the way in which individuals process information.

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5] This questionnaire and resource kit are now also available online at:



[6] The use of games and experiments in class is an exception, tend to be less used in large class formats and used only by a very small number of lecturers in these formats.

[7] For some ideas on this please see (Evans, 2000) or

[8] The description and breakdown of these four steps is largely taken from (Canale & Swain, 1980) and (Lightbown & Spada, 1993)

-----------------------

1

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download