• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Advances in health sciences education: theory and practice >When will learning style go out of style?
【24h】

When will learning style go out of style?

机译：什么时候学习风格会过时？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This issue contains a beautifully designed and executed study looking at learning style and its potential interaction with learning. Cook (1) administered the Index of Learning Styles to 123 residents, which classified the participants on four dimensions: active-reflective, visual-verbal, sensing-intuitive, and sequential-global. This inventory has some similarity to the more popular Kolb inventory, which has a concrete-abstract dimension analogous to the sensing-intuitive axis. The visual-verbal axis, while not present in other inventories, is actually the one that, in my experience at least, people usually volunteer when they think about learning styles, i.e., "I'm a verbal learner". And I'll have much more to say about this.They then did a within-subject design, where all residents saw two instructional modules in a problem-based format, and two in a didactic content-first format. Everything was crossed over. Residents then did a knowledge post test with multiple choice questions. According to the theory, "sensing" residents should do better on a case-based approach and "intuitive" residents on a didactic approach. At the end of the day, there was no difference in scores between the conditions where sensing style was matched to problem-based and intuitive to didactic, and the mismatched condition. Further, there was no relationship between sensing-intuitive and preference for one format or the other.Now, this is one study, and there are a zillion potential problems. Maybe the instrument was not reliable or valid enough. Maybe the hypothesis about a link between sensing-intuitive and problem first-content first is wrong. Maybe the modules did not do a very good job of exploiting the PBL format. Maybe the multiple choice test did not really get at the important learning. Maybe, maybe....
机译：本期包含设计精美且执行良好的研究，着眼于学习风格及其与学习的潜在相互作用。 Cook（1）对123位居民进行了学习风格指数的管理，将参与者分为四个维度：主动反射，视觉语言，感官直觉和整体顺序。此清单与更流行的Kolb清单有一些相似之处，后者具有类似于感应直觉轴的具体抽象尺寸。视觉-语言轴虽然没有出现在其他清单中，但实际上至少在我的经验中，人们通常会在思考学习方式（即“我是语言学习者”）时自愿参与。我对此有更多的话要说，然后他们进行了主题内设计，所有居民都看到了两个基于问题的格式的教学模块，以及两个以内容为先的格式的教学模块。一切都过去了。然后，居民会进行多项选择题的知识后测。根据该理论，在基于案例的方法中，“感知”居民应做得更好，而在教学方法中，“直观”居民应做得更好。归根结底，感官风格与基于问题的匹配和对教学的直觉相匹配的条件与不匹配条件之间的得分没有差异。此外，感知直觉与偏好一种格式或另一种格式之间没有任何关系。现在，这是一项研究，存在数不胜数的潜在问题。仪器可能不可靠或不够有效。关于感知直觉和问题优先于内容之间联系的假设可能是错误的。也许这些模块在利用PBL格式方面做得不是很好。也许多项选择测验并没有真正地学到重要的知识。也许吧...

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号