论文部分内容阅读
Abstract:Employing quantitative approach with questionnaires, the study aims at investigating the overall English learning styles of junior middle school students, the differences in English learning styles between high-achievers and low-achievers and the relationship between junior middle school students’ English learning styles and their achievements.
Key Words:Junior middle school students; English learning styles; achievements
I Introduction
1.1 Background of the Study
In recent years, the focus of education study has shifted from how to teach to how to learn as humanistic approach develops and individualized teaching popularizes. The study of the differences of English learners becomes a new hot topic of English teaching research. As a crucial part of the differences of student individuals, learning styles run through the whole learning process and even have persistent influence on learners.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Generally speaking, in traditional teaching practice, teachers are always dominant in the whole class and require students to adapt themselves to their teaching method, and seldom notice students’ individual differences. So students have to obtain knowledge only from the teachers’ lectures. Some may follow well, while some may not understand what teachers say. If a teacher employs a uniform strategy to teach the students with various characteristics, it certainly leads to ineffectiveness on part of the students.
1.3 The Significance of the Study
On the one hand, the study of learning styles can provide teachers with an awareness of changing the uniform teaching methodology into taking various teaching methods and strategies in accordance with students’ diversified learning styles consciously.
On the other hand, the study can not only help students choose appropriate learning strategies in different learning situations purposefully, but also stretch other learning styles through different activities and tasks to make up the deficiency of their own learning styles
II Literature Review
2.1 Definitions of Learning Styles
Learning style has been defined as “cognitive, affective, and physiological traits that are relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment” and as “a consistent way of functioning that reflects underlying causes of behavior” as well （Keefe, 1979:4）.
The definition given by Dunn (1986:11) is: “learning style is the way in which each person absorbs and retains information and/or skills; regardless of how that process is described, it is dramatically different for each person”.
2.2 Categories of Learning Styles
Reid（2002） divides learning styles into three major categories: cognitive learning styles, sensory learning styles, and affective/personality learning styles. Cognitive learning styles include field-independent/field-dependent（FI/FD）learning styles, analytic/global learning styles, reflect/impulsive learning styles, tolerance/intolerance of ambiguity learning styles and Kolb’s experiential learning styles consisting of converger, diverger, assimilator, accommodator. Sensory learning styles include perceptual learning styles（such as visual, auditory, tactile, kinesthetic and haptic）, environmental styles（such as sound, light, temperature, classroom design, food intake time and mobility）and sociological styles（such as group, individual, teacher authority, team and pair）. Affective/personality learning styles refer to Myers-Briggs’ classification, including extraversion-introversion, sensing-intuition, thinking-feeling, judging-perceiving, tolerance/intolerance of ambiguity and left/right hemisphere.
Curry（1983） puts forward a metaphor of an onion in which the layers of the onion are analogous to different level of a person’s style. At the core of the onion is the style in the sense of basic personality traits. The next layer, information processing, is the individual’s preferred intellectual approach to assimilating information. Social interaction, the third layer, addresses how students interact in the classroom. Finally, the outer layer of the onion is concerned with the instructional preference, the individual’s preferred environment for learning.
III Study Methodology
3.1 Subjects
This study selected 125 junior middle school students of Class118 and Class126 from the middle school affiliated to Xinzhou Teachers’ College as subjects, which consisted of 65 male students and 58 female students.
3.2 Measuring Instruments
The first measuring instrument was a learning style preference questionnaire developed by Zhu Yongcheng（2006）, which was relatively comprehensive.
The second measuring instrument was the junior middle school students’ average achievement of four English examinations, including two midterm and two final examinations.
3.3 Procedure
Firstly, the author selected a small part of the students to carry out pilot study, and then modified confusing items according to the students’ feedback to ensure that the questionnaire is suitable for them.
Secondly, the author distributed the questionnaires in the unit of class. The students were asked to answer the questions as soon as possible and not change the answers once decisions were determined.
Finally, the author got back the questionnaires after the students finished them. 123 questionnaires were valid.
3.4 Data Analysis
The author put the questionnaires results into the computer and employed SPSS10.0 software to analyze the data.
IV Results and Discussion
4.1 The Overall English Learning Styles of Junior Middle School Students
The data result indicates that serial learning style is the most popular with the junior middle school students and impulsive learning style is their least preferred learning style.
The mean of serial learning style is the highest of all types and indicates the students’ most preferred to serial learning style. This result is confirmed by classroom observations. In the ESL/EFL classroom, teachers often divide a lesson into some parts: new words and expressions, grammar, reading comprehension and language points appeared in the lesson. The students are asked to follow the teacher’s teaching steps strictly.
The students’ least preferred learning style is impulsive learning style which is also in accordance with the results of class observations. In class, after a question is put forward, only a few students give the answers quickly, while most of them keep silent to think about it more carefully. When one student is assigned to answer a question, he/she tries his /her best to organize the words considerably. It is observable in English classroom where most students are afraid of making mistakes; they seldom speak in class unless asked to do that. They often need more time to think before answering a question.
4.2 The Differences in English Learning Styles between High-achievers and Low-achievers
Another Independent-sample t-test was conducted to find out if there exists any significant difference in learning style preferences between high achievers and low achievers. The students were divided into two groups according to their English achievements which are arrayed from the highest achievement to the lowest one. The first 27％ were the high-achievers, while the last 27％ were the low-achievers.
The data result shows that there exists significant difference in English learning styles between the high-achievers and low-achievers, which can be found in global, random, individual, independent and analytic learning styles.
The significant difference in global learning style indicates that high-achievers can treat learning problems in an overall point of view, especially in reading, while low-achievers only pay attention to details, which will affect their dealing with test items.
The significant difference in random learning style indicates that high-achievers don’t like step-by-step learning and strict plans. If their teacher changes teaching plan, they can still adapt themselves to the changing situation. However, low-achievers prefer to learn following the teacher’s instruction and strict learning plans.
The significant difference in individual learning style indicates that high-achievers would like to learn English individually, while low-achievers like learning with other classmates and need their help.
The significant difference in independent learning style shows that high-achievers can arrange learning schedule, make learning plans well and learn effectively independently, while low-achievers depends more often on teachers’ instruction and their classmates’ help.
The significant difference in analytic learning style indicates that high-achievers are skillful in analyzing the structure of an English sentence or passage to help them understand the whole sentence or passage. But low-achievers are poor in this aspect. This result is different from the Wang’s research. His research finds out that male and female students did not show any significant difference in learning styles. The possible reason may be that the subjects in his research are English majors who can not cover a large percentage of English learners in China.
4.3 The Correlation between Students’ English Learning Styles and Their Achievements
Person correlation analysis was employed to analyze the correlation between the junior middle school students’ English learning styles and their achievements.
The data result indicates that there are three learning styles having positively significant correlation at 0.05 levels with the students’ achievements, which can be found in global, random and analytic learning styles. But generally speaking, in terms of the meaning represented by correlation coefficients, the one whose absolute value is below 0.20 stands for the lowest correlation which can be ignored; the one whose absolute value is from positive or negative 0.20 to positive or negative 0.40 represents low correlation（Qin Zhiqiang, 2006:102）. According to the standard, the correlation of analytic learning style can be ignored, and global and random learning styles have low correlation with the students’ achievements.
V Conclusions
The study can reach the conclusions as follows:
（1）Junior middle school students prefer serial learning style most and impulsive learning style least.
（2）There exists significant difference in global, random, individual, independent and analytic learning styles between high-achievers and low-achievers.
（3）There are two learning styles having positively significant correlation with junior middle school students’ English achievements at 0.05 levels, which can be found in global and random learning styles.
VI Suggestions
The concrete suggestions are as follows:
（1）English teachers can continue to enhance the traditional teaching method, presenting the lessons step by step, which can help students make progress in their English learning. In addition, teachers can leave more time to those students before taking for an answer. A long time should be given to them, and thus they can fully demonstrate their potential abilities.
（2）Teachers can encourage low-achievers to learn to arrange their learning schedule, make their own learning plans and learn to learn English individually and independently. Meanwhile, teachers can tell students both global ability which is about the whole look of one thing and the analytic ability which concerns details are so
important that they should pay much attention to these two skills.
Teachers can assign more learning tasks requiring the main idea of a passage and the details involved in it. In addition, teachers can encourage low-achievers to be more creative learners and it’s not necessary to follow teachers’ plan and instruction absolutely strictly.
（3）Teachers can give all the students more reading materials needing global skills, such as the overall meaning of a text. Also, teachers can encourage their students to think outside of box and try to become creative learners.
To this end, the teachers can explain the definition of learning style, define general terms, complete questionnaires, or observe keenly. Assessing learning styles with these or other instruments should not trap students in pigeonholes but instead provide avenues to foster intellectual growth and self-esteem. They can serve as a concrete mechanism for introducing the topic of learner differences and lead students to a more heighted understanding and appreciation of their individual learning characteristics.
［References］
［1］Guo Hongmei. “A Study on Learning Style Preferences of Secondary School Structure.” M.A. Thesis. Shandong University, 2009.
［2］Hong Yurong. “A Study on the Learning Style Preferences of Tibetan EFL Learners.” M.A. Thesis. The College of Foreign Languages Northwest University Xi’an. 2005.
［3］Lu Ting. “A Study on Learning Styles of High School Students and Possible Relationships between Learning Styles and English Learning Achievements.” M.A. Thesis. Nanjing Normal University. 2005.
［4］陆根书. “ 学习风格与学习成绩的相关分析”. 高等工程教育研究.No.4（2005）:44-48.
［5］秦志强. 《学业成绩考试的定量分析》. 第一版. 北京：中国戏剧出版社，2006.6.
（作者单位：天津工业大学，天津300387）
Key Words:Junior middle school students; English learning styles; achievements
I Introduction
1.1 Background of the Study
In recent years, the focus of education study has shifted from how to teach to how to learn as humanistic approach develops and individualized teaching popularizes. The study of the differences of English learners becomes a new hot topic of English teaching research. As a crucial part of the differences of student individuals, learning styles run through the whole learning process and even have persistent influence on learners.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Generally speaking, in traditional teaching practice, teachers are always dominant in the whole class and require students to adapt themselves to their teaching method, and seldom notice students’ individual differences. So students have to obtain knowledge only from the teachers’ lectures. Some may follow well, while some may not understand what teachers say. If a teacher employs a uniform strategy to teach the students with various characteristics, it certainly leads to ineffectiveness on part of the students.
1.3 The Significance of the Study
On the one hand, the study of learning styles can provide teachers with an awareness of changing the uniform teaching methodology into taking various teaching methods and strategies in accordance with students’ diversified learning styles consciously.
On the other hand, the study can not only help students choose appropriate learning strategies in different learning situations purposefully, but also stretch other learning styles through different activities and tasks to make up the deficiency of their own learning styles
II Literature Review
2.1 Definitions of Learning Styles
Learning style has been defined as “cognitive, affective, and physiological traits that are relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment” and as “a consistent way of functioning that reflects underlying causes of behavior” as well （Keefe, 1979:4）.
The definition given by Dunn (1986:11) is: “learning style is the way in which each person absorbs and retains information and/or skills; regardless of how that process is described, it is dramatically different for each person”.
2.2 Categories of Learning Styles
Reid（2002） divides learning styles into three major categories: cognitive learning styles, sensory learning styles, and affective/personality learning styles. Cognitive learning styles include field-independent/field-dependent（FI/FD）learning styles, analytic/global learning styles, reflect/impulsive learning styles, tolerance/intolerance of ambiguity learning styles and Kolb’s experiential learning styles consisting of converger, diverger, assimilator, accommodator. Sensory learning styles include perceptual learning styles（such as visual, auditory, tactile, kinesthetic and haptic）, environmental styles（such as sound, light, temperature, classroom design, food intake time and mobility）and sociological styles（such as group, individual, teacher authority, team and pair）. Affective/personality learning styles refer to Myers-Briggs’ classification, including extraversion-introversion, sensing-intuition, thinking-feeling, judging-perceiving, tolerance/intolerance of ambiguity and left/right hemisphere.
Curry（1983） puts forward a metaphor of an onion in which the layers of the onion are analogous to different level of a person’s style. At the core of the onion is the style in the sense of basic personality traits. The next layer, information processing, is the individual’s preferred intellectual approach to assimilating information. Social interaction, the third layer, addresses how students interact in the classroom. Finally, the outer layer of the onion is concerned with the instructional preference, the individual’s preferred environment for learning.
III Study Methodology
3.1 Subjects
This study selected 125 junior middle school students of Class118 and Class126 from the middle school affiliated to Xinzhou Teachers’ College as subjects, which consisted of 65 male students and 58 female students.
3.2 Measuring Instruments
The first measuring instrument was a learning style preference questionnaire developed by Zhu Yongcheng（2006）, which was relatively comprehensive.
The second measuring instrument was the junior middle school students’ average achievement of four English examinations, including two midterm and two final examinations.
3.3 Procedure
Firstly, the author selected a small part of the students to carry out pilot study, and then modified confusing items according to the students’ feedback to ensure that the questionnaire is suitable for them.
Secondly, the author distributed the questionnaires in the unit of class. The students were asked to answer the questions as soon as possible and not change the answers once decisions were determined.
Finally, the author got back the questionnaires after the students finished them. 123 questionnaires were valid.
3.4 Data Analysis
The author put the questionnaires results into the computer and employed SPSS10.0 software to analyze the data.
IV Results and Discussion
4.1 The Overall English Learning Styles of Junior Middle School Students
The data result indicates that serial learning style is the most popular with the junior middle school students and impulsive learning style is their least preferred learning style.
The mean of serial learning style is the highest of all types and indicates the students’ most preferred to serial learning style. This result is confirmed by classroom observations. In the ESL/EFL classroom, teachers often divide a lesson into some parts: new words and expressions, grammar, reading comprehension and language points appeared in the lesson. The students are asked to follow the teacher’s teaching steps strictly.
The students’ least preferred learning style is impulsive learning style which is also in accordance with the results of class observations. In class, after a question is put forward, only a few students give the answers quickly, while most of them keep silent to think about it more carefully. When one student is assigned to answer a question, he/she tries his /her best to organize the words considerably. It is observable in English classroom where most students are afraid of making mistakes; they seldom speak in class unless asked to do that. They often need more time to think before answering a question.
4.2 The Differences in English Learning Styles between High-achievers and Low-achievers
Another Independent-sample t-test was conducted to find out if there exists any significant difference in learning style preferences between high achievers and low achievers. The students were divided into two groups according to their English achievements which are arrayed from the highest achievement to the lowest one. The first 27％ were the high-achievers, while the last 27％ were the low-achievers.
The data result shows that there exists significant difference in English learning styles between the high-achievers and low-achievers, which can be found in global, random, individual, independent and analytic learning styles.
The significant difference in global learning style indicates that high-achievers can treat learning problems in an overall point of view, especially in reading, while low-achievers only pay attention to details, which will affect their dealing with test items.
The significant difference in random learning style indicates that high-achievers don’t like step-by-step learning and strict plans. If their teacher changes teaching plan, they can still adapt themselves to the changing situation. However, low-achievers prefer to learn following the teacher’s instruction and strict learning plans.
The significant difference in individual learning style indicates that high-achievers would like to learn English individually, while low-achievers like learning with other classmates and need their help.
The significant difference in independent learning style shows that high-achievers can arrange learning schedule, make learning plans well and learn effectively independently, while low-achievers depends more often on teachers’ instruction and their classmates’ help.
The significant difference in analytic learning style indicates that high-achievers are skillful in analyzing the structure of an English sentence or passage to help them understand the whole sentence or passage. But low-achievers are poor in this aspect. This result is different from the Wang’s research. His research finds out that male and female students did not show any significant difference in learning styles. The possible reason may be that the subjects in his research are English majors who can not cover a large percentage of English learners in China.
4.3 The Correlation between Students’ English Learning Styles and Their Achievements
Person correlation analysis was employed to analyze the correlation between the junior middle school students’ English learning styles and their achievements.
The data result indicates that there are three learning styles having positively significant correlation at 0.05 levels with the students’ achievements, which can be found in global, random and analytic learning styles. But generally speaking, in terms of the meaning represented by correlation coefficients, the one whose absolute value is below 0.20 stands for the lowest correlation which can be ignored; the one whose absolute value is from positive or negative 0.20 to positive or negative 0.40 represents low correlation（Qin Zhiqiang, 2006:102）. According to the standard, the correlation of analytic learning style can be ignored, and global and random learning styles have low correlation with the students’ achievements.
V Conclusions
The study can reach the conclusions as follows:
（1）Junior middle school students prefer serial learning style most and impulsive learning style least.
（2）There exists significant difference in global, random, individual, independent and analytic learning styles between high-achievers and low-achievers.
（3）There are two learning styles having positively significant correlation with junior middle school students’ English achievements at 0.05 levels, which can be found in global and random learning styles.
VI Suggestions
The concrete suggestions are as follows:
（1）English teachers can continue to enhance the traditional teaching method, presenting the lessons step by step, which can help students make progress in their English learning. In addition, teachers can leave more time to those students before taking for an answer. A long time should be given to them, and thus they can fully demonstrate their potential abilities.
（2）Teachers can encourage low-achievers to learn to arrange their learning schedule, make their own learning plans and learn to learn English individually and independently. Meanwhile, teachers can tell students both global ability which is about the whole look of one thing and the analytic ability which concerns details are so
important that they should pay much attention to these two skills.
Teachers can assign more learning tasks requiring the main idea of a passage and the details involved in it. In addition, teachers can encourage low-achievers to be more creative learners and it’s not necessary to follow teachers’ plan and instruction absolutely strictly.
（3）Teachers can give all the students more reading materials needing global skills, such as the overall meaning of a text. Also, teachers can encourage their students to think outside of box and try to become creative learners.
To this end, the teachers can explain the definition of learning style, define general terms, complete questionnaires, or observe keenly. Assessing learning styles with these or other instruments should not trap students in pigeonholes but instead provide avenues to foster intellectual growth and self-esteem. They can serve as a concrete mechanism for introducing the topic of learner differences and lead students to a more heighted understanding and appreciation of their individual learning characteristics.
［References］
［1］Guo Hongmei. “A Study on Learning Style Preferences of Secondary School Structure.” M.A. Thesis. Shandong University, 2009.
［2］Hong Yurong. “A Study on the Learning Style Preferences of Tibetan EFL Learners.” M.A. Thesis. The College of Foreign Languages Northwest University Xi’an. 2005.
［3］Lu Ting. “A Study on Learning Styles of High School Students and Possible Relationships between Learning Styles and English Learning Achievements.” M.A. Thesis. Nanjing Normal University. 2005.
［4］陆根书. “ 学习风格与学习成绩的相关分析”. 高等工程教育研究.No.4（2005）:44-48.
［5］秦志强. 《学业成绩考试的定量分析》. 第一版. 北京：中国戏剧出版社，2006.6.
（作者单位：天津工业大学，天津300387）