LS identification is traditionally done by a questionnaire. There are many available on the net depending on which LS you are planning to use. This is effective only when the learner answers the questions honestly. The questions are not many, and hence the accuracy of such an assessment is arguable. We have been looking at some mechanisms for inducing learning style from data analysis. I believe there are efforts from others also in this direction.

One thing is identifying LS -assuming that a conceptual and strategical framework has been developed and discussed. A different thing is to generate a platform of learning opportunities for a large number of students taking into account their different LS. This is the real question put by Prof. Allibaih,

A second point I would like to put is: are students to be taught according to their LS? Can we think of LS as complementary styles that help to conform teams and develop collaborative learning as well as collaborative work later in the professional field? I think this is a possibility we should not let go.

Greetings

First, learning styles aren't anywhere near as strongly robust as you might think. But the way to handle them in large class sizes is to make them reflective. Get the learners to use the instruments themselves, then explain the outputs, maybe even get them to discuss them amongst themselves, and helping them adapt materials for themselves. That's much easier (and better) than imposing it as part of the teaching structure.

I would recommend having a read of the review of learning syles by Coffield et al. (2004) if you haven't already. It's available here: http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv13692 - and there's a related piece here: http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv12401.

The main thrust of the report is that the classification of individual children's learning styles is probably not as helpful as some authors of learning styles instruments say it is. However, a couple of models, that emphasise learners' reflection on their learning may have some use in the classroom.

Another paradigm to consider is using the lecture or large classroom as a type of 'resource center' for teaching and learning. In this model students are directed towards other means of learning by the activities and discussion of the lecture or large classroom. By doing this and providing supplementary educational resources (case studies, video, web resources etc.) the risk of teaching and learning style mismatch is reduced.

The learning styles construct is in some respects similar to cognitive style, which has been researched extensively since the mid-1950s. Cognitive style, however, is generally classified as two-dimensional (reflective/impulsive; field dependent/field independent are the most common), unlike the seven dimensions of learning styles.

A frequent misconception regarding both cognitive style and learning style is that a person's style is defining. That is, a person with a field-independent cognitive style or an aural learning style cannot process information or learn any other way. Too often ignored is that both constructs describe a "preferred" style, not a defining style, and here is the problem in most of the attempts to link learning style to pedagogy. It simply is not the case that a person with, say, an aural learning style cannot learn by other means, just as it is not the case that a person with a field-dependent cognitive style cannot process information independently of the field. Another misconception is that teachers use a single method of instruction and that this method will be incompatible with some students' learning style. Admittedly, this may occur in some instances, but such cases are arguably evidence of poor teaching.

As Stuart points out above, the scholarly research on learning styles does not strongly support the efficacy of learning style inventories as accurate reflections of particular styles of learning. The idea that these styles are "preferred" and not "defining" (as James points out) is probably the best way to look at these learning styles. In a large classroom setting, teaching to individual style is difficult, if not impossible. However, a good teacher does not rely solely upon one presentation--lecture, reading from the text, everything in Power Point, etc. One must consider the age, background of the students and the actual subject matter presented. When I teach freshmen and sophomores (composition and literature), I use a variety of media and use my Blackboard Learn system extensively to communicate with students and to upload materials as their own "resource center." I hope to help students who tend to be auditory learners (many African-American students are auditory learners) and other students who tend to be more mathematical/logical or musical, etc. But no matter what a student's preferred style may be, that student must be able to adapt to the professor's needs and the needs of the subject being studied. When I do encounter a student having problems with large chunks of text, I do sit down with that student and discuss how they study and learn. Often I use a very simple inventory to see if there is a more dominant learning pattern in that student. Then, we consider new methods of breaking up the material for more effective studying. Some students prefer charts and graphs (we once covered the entire French Revolution in tables, charts rather than text). We did some visual imaging for improved retention of anatomy bones and muscles. Some students drew pictures of the circulatory system or other body systems to help retain names of organ parts and function. Learning style can assist a professor but that style should never dominate the professor's presentation of material. Reliance upon any one style of teaching or learning style is detrimental to the students in the class, most of whom will become easily bored by a rather monochromatic approach to teaching.

Aysha Bey

University of Alabama at Birmingham

As a principal of a large primary school, the question of large class sizes is regularly raised by parents. The key for our school is a strong focus on differentiation more than learning styles. We agree with James Wiliams' comment in the fact that all children can learn from a variety of delivery means. Its more of a question of the pedagogical approach and building a learning sequence around the specific needs of the student.

My findings match Kenneth's. I don't try to explicitly find or label their learning style, but I set up the classroom and curriculum in such a way that they naturally favour what they are good at while getting support to improve their weaknesses. I slowly establish a rough idea of what they are like by their responses to instruction. I also as above, spend more time knowing their curriculum or conceptual strengths and weaknesses so that I don't waste their time, nor set goals to far above their reach.

HI Mohammad, I would like to ask you how large is the number of students? Sometimes, the size may impede using an adequate mix of methods in class. If the number of students is less than 30 students then Aysha's style mixed with what Mark and Kenneth presented would be suitable. When numbers grow to 40s or more, then Mark's and Kenenth's approach is suitable.

In my own classes, Business students with an average of 38 students, I use a variety of methods utilizing all sorts of techniques inside as well as outside the classroom, using technology supported as well as traditional exercises.

Iwodd agree with Kenneth that focussing on learning styles is unproductive. Whether they are a superstition or not, they are subject to contextual change from student to student and time to time. Monitor students and change approaches on the fly to maximise uptake of new ideas. The old ideas of Vygotsky are still generally true. New ideas have to be able to be linked to existing conceptual frameworks for each student, so getting into their conceptual framework is the best you can do. Sometimes a scattergun approach can work until you get a greater knowledge of each student's state of development.

Mark, I agree with you and Kenneth that learning styles themselves are not more important than learning outcomes. But I still think that learning styles are a rational way that should be considered in order to achieve the set learning objectives, learning outcomes, strategic goals in general.

Hussin, my classes exceed 50 students in practical platforms, while they reach 200 students in lectures. So, when coming closer to the smaller numbers in the computer labs for example, I always think of learning styles and active learning strategies to be considered at the time of lecturing.

Let me ask my question in another way: Is it possible that, we may make a shift in the learning outcomes through considering learning styles in classes of large numbers?

HI Mohammad

I would not say making changes based on learning styles, rather include in the learning outcomes different assessment styles that take into consideration individual work, team work and presentation skills. I know it is tough and takes time, but realizable.

ِBassam Hamdar, I think you and me seek the same answer of the question.

Hussin Hejase and Kenneth Howell agree about maintaining and keeping our learning outcomes as higher goals and think mainly in adapting the tools (teaching, learning, and assessment tools) we use to achieve those goals.