Does student learning style affect performance on different formats of biomechanics examinations?

Students' learning style preferences have been widely adapted into teaching and learning environments. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between self-reported and assessed learning style preferences (visual, auditory, reading/writing, kinesthetic: VARK) on performance in different types of multiple-choice examinations (T1: text only format and T2: visual format) given in an introductory biomechanics class. Students who enrolled in three biomechanics classes at a state university were recruited to participate in the study. Ninety students (47 males and 43 females) completed a learning style survey and two types of examinations. Results showed that approximately half of the students were assessed and self-reported as kinesthetic for their preferred learning style. There was no significant difference in test performance between students who preferred visual and reading/writing learning styles (self-reported and assessed). These students demonstrated similar learning and comprehension of biomechanical concepts regardless of whether the test material was presented in their preferred sensory mode or not. Interestingly, female students' perceptions of their learning style preference may have a positive effect on the test results when the test is presented in their preferred format.     

Clay modeling versus written modules as effective interventions in understanding human anatomy

The effectiveness of clay modeling to written modules is examined to determine the degree of improvement in learning and retention of anatomical 3D relationships among students with different learning preferences. Thirty‐nine undergraduate students enrolled in a cadaver dissection course completed a pre‐assessment examination and the VARK questionnaire, classifying learning preference as visual, auditory, read/write, or kinesthetic. Students were divided into clay, module, and control groups with preference for learning style distributed among groups. The clay and module groups participated in weekly one‐hour classes using either clay models or answering written questions (modules) about anatomical relationships, respectively. The control group received no intervention. Post‐assessment and retention examinations were administered at the end of the semester, and three months later, respectively. Two variables (Δ1, Δ2) represented examination score differences between pre‐ and post‐assessment and between post‐assessment and retention examinations, respectively. The Δ1 for clay and module groups were each significantly higher than controls (21.46 ± 8.2 vs. 15.70 ± 7.5, P ≤ 0.05; and 21.31 ± 6.9 vs. 15.70 ± 7.5, P ≤0.05, respectively). The Δ2 for clay and module groups approached but did not achieve significance over controls (?6.09 ± 5.07 vs. ?8.80 ± 4.60, P = 0.16 and ?5.73 ± 4.47 vs. ?8.80 ± 4.60, P = 0.12, respectively). No significant differences were seen between interventions or learning preferences in any group. However, students of some learning styles tended to perform better when engaging in certain modalities. Multiple teaching modalities may accommodate learning preferences and improve understanding of anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. © 2013 American Association of Anatomists.     

Another Nail in the Coffin for Learning Styles? Disparities among Undergraduate Anatomy Students’ Study Strategies,Class Performance,and Reported VARK Learning Styles

The concept and existence of learning styles has been fraught with controversy, and recent studies have thrown their existence into doubt. Yet, many students still hold to the conventional wisdom that learning styles are legitimate, and may adapt their outside of class study strategies to match these learning styles. Thus, this study aims to assess if undergraduate anatomy students are more likely to utilize study strategies that align with their hypothetical learning styles (using the VARK analysis from Fleming and Mills, 1992 , Improve Acad. 11:137–155) and, if so, does this alignment correlate with their outcome in an anatomy course. Relatedly, this study examines whether students’ VARK learning styles are correlated with course outcomes regardless of the students’ study strategies, and whether any study strategies are correlated with course outcomes, regardless of student-specific VARK results. A total of 426 anatomy students from the 2015 and 2016 Fall semesters completed a study strategies survey and an online VARK questionnaire. Results demonstrated that most students did not report study strategies that correlated with their VARK assessment, and that student performance in anatomy was not correlated with their score in any VARK categories. Rather, some specific study strategies (irrespective of VARK results), such as use of the virtual microscope, were found to be positively correlated with final class grade. However, the alignment of these study strategies with VARK results had no correlation with anatomy course outcomes. Thus, this research provides further evidence that the conventional wisdom about learning styles should be rejected by educators and students alike. Anat Sci Educ. © 2018 American Association of Anatomists.     

大学生学习风格和教学方法——国际贸易专业大学生VARK调查和分析

关于学生学习风格的研究，在国际上比较流行的理论和方法有很多，著名的有多重智力理论、Kolb模型、MBTI模型和VARK模型。国内目前使用较多的是前三种，使用VARK对学习风格进行分析研究的相对较少。本文重点使用VARK模型对某大学国际经济与贸易专业1—3年级的学生学习风格进行了调查，然后依据调查结果对教学管理、教师教学和学生学习方法提出建议。