THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE AND THE STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT AT THE THIRD GRADE OF STUDENT SCIENCE MAJOR OF SMA NEGERI 1 PRINGSEWU
TUTI HANDAYANI
0813042050
ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM ARTS AND LANGUAGE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND PEDAGOGY UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG
2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover…………………………………………………………………………
Table of Content……………………………………........................................
CHPATER I Introduction
A. Background of the problem…………………………………….
B. Formulation of the problem…………………………………….
C. Objective of the study……………………...................................
D. Definition of term………………………………………………..
CHAPTER II Literature Review
A. Concept of learning…….………………………………………
B. Concept of learning.…………...……………………………….
CHAPTER III Research Method
A. Research Design…….………………………….........................
B. Variable………..……………………….………………………
C. Population and sample…………………………………………
D. Instrument……….……………………………………………..
E. Method of Data analysis………..……………………………...
CHAPTER IV Result and Discussion
A. Result of Research………..……………………………………
B. Discussion……………………………………………................
CHAPTER V Conclusion
A. Conclusion………………………………………………………
BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………….…...……
I. INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses about background of the problem, formulation of the problems, objectives of the research, uses of the research, and definition of term.
1.1 Background of study
Students have varied learning styles, which are characterized strengths and preferences in the ways that they process information and learn. Culture, which influences the manner information is processed (Tsui, 1996), also influences learning style preference more so than other factors (Sauceda-Castillo, 2001). This study was designed to examine the relationship between learning style preference and achievement in the adult student especially student of senior high school.
Researcher has observed that some students prefer certain methods of learning more than others (Diaz & Cartnal, 1999) and, in particular, that different student have varying learning style preferences. Studies on adult students and their learning styles (Baumgartner, 2001; Claxton & Murrell, 1988) the researcher found the differences in learning style preferences (Dunn, et al., 1990). A concern in education is that of increasing diversity in the classroom.
The researcher’s interest was in adult learners, specifically the student senior high school and how learning styles correlated to achievement. Wang, Haertel, and Walberg (1997) discussed how educational strategies used to improve adult student learning can be used to provide ideas and considerations for forming educational practices. What gives meaning to people will influence decision making. In addition, what has shaped a person’s way of thinking provides the basis for understanding how that person accepts and rejects criteria. Hodges (1988) stated that it was important to know the learning styles of students to assist them in being able to achieve in their studies. If preferred learning styles are known for the students, then specialized teaching techniques can be applied to these students, thereby improving achievement.
Various learning style models provide foundational information for instruction and curriculum design. Various learning style models are used to design instruction. Examples of these models are the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Kolb’s learning style model (1984), and O’Brien (1985). Because students learn in different ways, teaching methods should not only vary but also take into consideration these differences. The researcher was interested in obtaining data regarding learning styles and achievement so that recommendations could be provided regarding maximizing student achievement.
A. Formulation of the problem
Based on the background of the problem above, the problems of this research are formulated as follows:
1. Which learning styles are evidenced by student senior high school as measured by the O’Brien Learning Style Inventory?
2. What is the correlation of preferred learning style and achievement as measured by grade obtained?
B. Objective of the Research
In relation to the formulation of the problem, the objectives of this research are as follows:
1. To find out which learning styles are evidenced by student senior high school as measured by the O’Brien Learning Style Inventory?
2. To find out what is the correlation of preferred learning style and achievement as measured by grade obtained.
C. Uses of the Research
The uses of this research are as follows:
1. Practically, this research can be used as reference for English teacher at senior high school to know the learning style of the student and the relationship between the learning style and the student’s achievement at the student of SMA Negeri 1 Pringsewu.
2. Theoretically, this research can be used as a contribution to English teacher and other students who are interested in conducting the future research in the same field.
D. Definition of Terms
· Learning styles are defined by Grasha (1996), as “personal qualities that influence a student’s ability to acquire information, to interact with peers and the teacher, and otherwise to participate in learning experiences” (p. 41). James and Gardner (1995) define it as the manner in which people process, store and recall what they are attempting to learn. In all definitions, learning styles entail the student’s ability to relate new information along with the environmental factors which allow a student to acquire new knowledge.
· Achievement is defined using the student’s level of passing grades in classes.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter discusses about the theories used in this study, such as: concept of learning, concept of learning style.
2.1 Concept of Learning
Learning theory is the basis for understanding how students learn. A review of the literature on learning theories highlights two main areas from which the hypotheses are based: constructivism and social cognition. Constructivist theory builds knowledge based on previously gained information and experiences (Vygotsky, 1978). Social cognitive theory, based on Piaget’s (1972) theory of cognitive development, includes the premise that social interaction is fundamental to the development of cognition.
This section discusses the learning theories which are the basis for the hypotheses in the study and the learning styles which resulted from understanding how students learn. The literature shows that research on the brain; its physiology and functional development are closely related to cognitive theory (Gardner, 1993; Gazzaniga, 1985). Processing information is part of brain function. The biology of the brain and the relation to function and knowledge are closely related. Tanner and Allen (2004) stated From a biological perspective, the brain is the organ of learning, and as such, a learning style is likely to be a complex, emergent interaction of the neurophysiology or an individual’s brain and the unique developmental process that has shaped it through experience and interaction with the environment.(p. 198) A review of the literature reveals two basic schools of thought: (a) that learning can be studied independently of the environment and that it takes place within the individual (Bruner, 1990), and (b) that learning has a connection to the environment and thinking is a result of these interactions (Greeno, 1989). The individual has innate abilities that allow development of thinking and knowledge based on the interactions with the environment. Huit (2003) developed an ecological model for development of cognition that is focused on the interaction of the individual with the environment. As complex systems are studied, the individual’s perceptions are also interlaced with their background and culture, which can be their environment as well (Bush 2003).
Vygotsky’s belief (1978) that studying the process of learning in the environment where learning is taking place, rather than the product, embraces Piaget’s theory that the learning is adaptive and can be either assimilated or accommodated. The process of learning, rather then the product is the emphasis. In essence, the process of learning is an adaptation due to the environmental factors that are present and ever changing. In addition, the learner is actively involved in modifying the learning environment as a part of learning. Using constructivist theory, Huitt (2003) discussed how knowledge is based on previously gained information and or experiences. Supporting this, Barley et al. (2002) explained constructivism as an active process. The active participation of the individual information is used to construct and process the learning. Supporting this, brain-based learning research (Jensen, 1998) shows that the brain is have a social component and that complex learning is enhanced by challenge, that learning is developmental, and that meaning is important.
Huitt (2003) discussed how an individual’s cognition is a result of various components involving the mind, biological maturation, and the environment. Environmental influences include family, local neighborhood or community, and culture. (Bridge, Judd & Moock, 1979). Given all the previously discussed theoreticians and their views on learning theory, Gardner (1983) presented a perspective on learning theory based on eight different levels of intelligence: linguistic-verbal, mathematical-logical, visual-spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical-rhythmic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic. These relate to a preferred method of learning by an individual. Each individual in turn has a preferred method, which is related to culture. If the perspective on learning theory and intelligence is implemented, learning situations can be tuned in to individuals within a culture. In other words, learning styles are based on individuals in a culture and learning can be influenced by knowing the individual’s preferred learning style. Knowing that learners may have a preferred learning style can help achieve optimal learning environments and situations.
2.2 Concept of Learning Style
Learning styles are a collection of multiple modes that determine how an individual perceives, processes and understands information. Learning styles are the modalities by which students most efficiently learn (Claxton & Murrell, 1987). They also are a major factor influencing a student’s educational performance (Claxton & Murrell, 1987; Dunn & Dunn, 1979; Felder, 1998; Torres & Cano, 1994). Students exhibit different approaches to learning and that this may differ from culture to culture due to its influences (Richardson, 1994).
Various learning style models have been devised that enable evaluation of student learning styles (Fox and Ronkowski, 1997). Instruction should be adapted to the learning style of the student (Felder, 1988). This is an interesting facet of pedagogical adaptation. Depending on the demographics of students, instructors may find themselves with a wide variety of cultural representations or they may find themselves teaching a vast minority population. Bush (2003) identifies cultural factors that might explain differences in mathematics achievement and attitudes. Banks (2006) discussed how cultural influences need to be understood in order to assist the students. Since the cultural aspects influence learning, the instructional pedagogy should be adapted to accommodate the learner (Felder, 1988).
Learning styles are ways in which students use information, stimuli and other forms of processes in a consistent manner to gain knowledge (Felder, 1993; Piaget, 1950; Vygotsky, 1978). Learning styles are not isolated categories but are a scale by which a preference may be made in the way a person learns. People can learn in multiple ways, however, the preference for learning may differ. A learning style can be defined in various ways, including the preference by which individuals learn best. A learning style does not preclude that individuals can learn in multiple ways and using various tools, rather it indicates that a preferred learning method exists by which information is attained, reflected upon and understood. In addition, as theory indicates, Tanner and Allen (2004) stated
From a biological perspective, the brain is the organ of learning, and as such, a learning style is likely to be a complex, emergent interaction of the neurophysiology or an individual’s brain and the unique developmental process that has shaped it through experience and interaction with the environment. (p. 198)
One of the oldest and simplest methods to look at learning styles involves three categories: (VAK) visual, auditory and kinesthetic (Tanner & Allen, 2004). Learners use all styles to learn, however, they exhibit a preference or a dominant style. The latter is the style the student prefers and is the best way the individual learns. The dominant style is reinforced or supplemented by the others. VAK refers to sensory modes of learning. An additional area was added by Fleming (1998) in a learning style inventory (VARK) to include reading-writing. These rely on the individual learning style preferences using sensory domains. Instead of ascertaining learning style preferences based on sensory modes, Gardner’s use of Multiple Intelligence Theory (1983), included additional modalities of gaining knowledge through intelligence. He added to the four-aforementioned modes; linguistic-verbal, logical-mathematical, visual-spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical rhythmic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic. The way each individual uses the various intelligences determines the learning style (Gardner, 1983, Pues, 1994). Within these one can find the sensory modalities of learning that are inclusive in these intelligences.
The O’Brien model shows that students can differ in how they learn. The original model emphasized four different but dichotomous methods of learning: sensing-intuitive, visual-verbal, active-reflective, and sequential-global signifying the individual’s preferred learning style. What these method refer to are (a) the sensory method by which information is received, (b) the modality by which information is received, (c) the process why which information is received, and (d) the order in which the information is received. Each student learns using the four areas or dimensions by which the information is learned. The emphasis of these areas of learning is that they are a continuum and are related to each other. In addition, the individual methods are indicators for not only how students learn, but how teaching can be accommodated to the stream of learning continuum. In order to further understand the five main categories, an explanation of the areas is required. Of relevance is the need to understand that these extremes represent the continuum by which students can learn and understand. Students under the O’Brien model are classified into five main categories:
1. Sensing learners (concrete, practical) or intuitive learners (innovative, conceptual),
2. Visual learners (pictures, diagrams preferred) or verbal learners (written and spoken information preferred),
3. Inductive learners (prefer understanding from specific to general terms) or Deductive learners (prefer understanding from general to specific),
4. Active learners (prefer to do things) or reflective learners (prefer to think things through), and
5. Sequential learners (prefer to be orderly, linear) or global learners (holistic, system thinkers).
Understanding these categories are relevant to teaching pedagogy for these are what teachers can use as teaching techniques to increase student learning. Instructional methods and the use of pedagogy conducive to the learner can affect student learning. The next section discusses these dimensions and how they relate to learning.
In the model, sensory students receive factual information and memorize well, whereas students who are intuitive perceive concepts and understand ideas better. Whereas, the sensory learner is adept at details and facts; the intuitive learner is skillful at instinctual and innovative approaches and ideas. The next area in O’Brien’s five classifications is that of visual and verbal learning.
This is how the learning can take place; the actual sensory method. Visual learners learn better when they see objects, pictures, diagrams, whereas, verbal learners learn best when they have auditory input. In addition, verbal learners also learn best through talking, writing, and discussion. Inductive and deductive learning relates to how a problem is ascertained and approached by the student. Inductive learners can address a problem as converging on a whole from the small intersections to the complete picture. They see specifics and move towards concepts and principles. Inductive learners prefer going from specific information to understanding the general picture. Deductive learners instead see the whole and move to the parts. They begin with generalities and with principles and move towards the individual applications. The deductive learner prefers seeing the general picture or concept dissecting it to the small or specific parts. The fourth classification of active versus reflective learning continues to offer a continuum of learning by individual students. Active learners prefer to be doing and being hands-on with activities. These may include discussions, active participation in group work and other dynamic modes of learning. Reflective learners, on the other hand prefer to do individual work, time to understand information, and to be doing so mostly in isolation away from other people’s opinions. The last classification relates to the preferred method of obtaining and building information, sequential versus. Global learning entails methodology in learning.
Sequential learners prefer to learn linearly; in an organized manner and step-by- step fashion. They may learn from the small to the larger picture in a sequential step-like fashion. On the other hand global learners see the whole picture and concepts and proceed to then detail the whole to its parts. The O’Brien model of dimensions of learning styles is a compilation of five different arenas contributing to learning. They assess the information and their perception (sensory-intuitive), the modality or perception (visual-verbal), the way the information is organized (inductive-deductive), the way the information is processed (actively or reflectively), and the way the information is understood (sequentially globally). In all dimensions, the learning styles are a dichotomy of learning and are continuous without extremes necessarily, but a stream from one end to the other. “The preferences on a given scale may be strong, moderate, or almost nonexistent, may change with time, and may vary from one subject or learning environment to another (Felder, 1993, p. 286). The range in the scale for each of the modalities in the learning styles varies and is not finite. This gives individual students a variety of ranges in between the two extreme continuums of preferences.
Research suggests that learning style preference and its implementation is an important factor in student achievement (Cano, 1999; Cano & Garton, 1994). The results from this study could reveal that the student senior high school may have learning style preferences that if pedagogy and teaching strategies are implemented for them, may result in increased student achievement. Given the science career shortages, students from senior high school can be encouraged to succeed in science classes by using learning style information for the benefit of teaching strategy implementation. For example, the observant sensor student could benefit from doing experiments and the intuitive learners can ‘think and theorize’, while the active learner can benefit from active group work and the reflective learner can do individual research and design. All instructors want their students to learn that is why teachers teach.
Research on the senior high school learner has revealed that adult learners want to know how to learn best and that instructional strategy that matches their learning styles can enhance learning and achievement. Limited research on adult students exists particularly, in science classes. Studies show that learning is improved when matches occur between the learner and the instructional strategy.
However, research focusing on the relationship between the learning style preference and achievement in the adult student is limited and virtually nonexistent. In addition, research focused on these students in science classes is also scarce.
III. RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter discusses information about the research design, questions and hypotheses,, variables, population, sample, the instrument, data collection methods, and the method of data analysis.
3.1 Research Design
A quantitative study design was chosen to test the correlation between learning style preference and student achievement in science major students in SMA N 1 Pringsewu. The study was a quantitative method design using a survey instrument, the O’Brien learning style. This method also allowed a large number of participants to be surveyed from a small group of individuals. The quantitative design proposed for this study was that of a modified one-shot case study (Creswell, 2003), Creswell stated
A quantitative approach is one in which the investigator primarily uses post positivist claims for developing knowledge (i.e., cause and effect thinking, reduction to specific variables and hypotheses and questions, use of measurement and observation, and the test of theories), employs strategies of inquiry such as experiments and surveys, and collects data on predetermined instruments that yield statistical data. (p.18)
The research design was based on gathering data to determine the relationship between the learning styles of the senior high school student and achievement (grades). Based on the purpose of the study, the questions were based on quantifying the data gathered in order to obtain information for the use of best applied learning techniques for student achievement. All students within the sample were invited and encouraged to participate in the study. However, the main emphasis was the student population preferences.
3.2 Variables
The independent variables in this study were the learning styles, ethnicity, and race. The independent variables were based on O’Brien (1985), categories of learning styles, and correlating the preferred styles in the senior high school student. The dependent variable was the student achievement measured in this study by the grade obtained at the end of the course, final test achievement. The dependent variable, student achievement as measured by the overall grade, was based on an A-F scale (A = 90-100; B = 80-89;
C = 70-79; D = 60-69; F < 60).
3.3 Population and Sample
The population used for this study consisted of senior high school students. The course subject was selected is English subject because of ease of accessibility by the researcher and the subject interest. The population of the study was comprised of students in SMA Negeri 1 Pringsewu. The investigation was conducted in the final semester with approximate population of 20 students. Grades were obtained at the end of the semester and provided by the instructor in the English subject.
3.4 The Instrument
The method used in this study involved the use of O’Brien Learning Styles (1985). The survey was developed using the four learning style dimensions of the instrument adapted from a learning style model developed in (1995) Matte and Green Henderson. The first version of the instrument was administered, and the data gathered was statistically analyzed. The researcher downloads the questionnaire and translates it into Indonesia. Then the researcher gives the questionnaire to the third grade student in science major of SMA N 1 Pringsewu.
3.5 Method of Data Analysis
The method of data analysis that was used in this study involved a quantitative method design that allowed relationship of the various independent variables to that of the dependent variable. The following quantitative methods were used: (a) descriptive statistics including frequency distribution tables and graphs.
After getting the data of students answer about their learning styles, the researcher analyzes the data. It is used to know whether there is a positive correlation between learning styles and students’ final test achievement score.
The researcher examines the students’ score using the following steps:
1. Making the table of the students answer about their learning style
2. Tabulating the data by using SPSS to know the comparison between learning styles and students’ mid test achievement score.
VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Result of the Research
Having been investigated the participant classes in questionnaire. Then the researcher analyzes the questionnaire answer. Input the data of questionnaire in to SPSS application. And the result is that in the following tables.
Table 4.1
| Descriptives | ||||||||
| FS | | | | | | | | |
| | N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Minimum | Maximum | |
| | Lower Bound | Upper Bound | ||||||
| 1 | 6 | 79.0000 | 3.40588 | 1.39044 | 75.4258 | 82.5742 | 75.00 | 85.00 |
| 2 | 2 | 79.5000 | .70711 | .50000 | 73.1469 | 85.8531 | 79.00 | 80.00 |
| 3 | 9 | 79.3333 | 3.42783 | 1.14261 | 76.6985 | 81.9682 | 75.00 | 85.00 |
| 4 | 3 | 80.0000 | .00000 | .00000 | 80.0000 | 80.0000 | 80.00 | 80.00 |
| Total | 20 | 79.3500 | 2.85205 | .63774 | 78.0152 | 80.6848 | 75.00 | 85.00 |
Table 4.2 One Way
| ANOVA | |||||
| FS | | | | | |
| | Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F | Sig. |
| Between Groups | 2.050 | 3 | .683 | .072 | .974 |
| Within Groups | 152.500 | 16 | 9.531 | | |
| Total | 154.550 | 19 | | | |
Table 4.3
| Multiple Comparisons | ||||||
| FS Scheffe | | | | | | |
| (I) learningstyle | (J) learningstyle | Mean Difference (I-J) | Std. Error | Sig. | 95% Confidence Interval | |
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||||
| 1 | 2 | -.50000 | 2.52075 | .998 | -8.3575 | 7.3575 |
| 3 | -.33333 | 1.62714 | .998 | -5.4054 | 4.7387 | |
| 4 | -1.00000 | 2.18303 | .975 | -7.8048 | 5.8048 | |
| 2 | 1 | .50000 | 2.52075 | .998 | -7.3575 | 8.3575 |
| 3 | .16667 | 2.41343 | 1.000 | -7.3564 | 7.6897 | |
| 4 | -.50000 | 2.81828 | .998 | -9.2850 | 8.2850 | |
| 3 | 1 | .33333 | 1.62714 | .998 | -4.7387 | 5.4054 |
| 2 | -.16667 | 2.41343 | 1.000 | -7.6897 | 7.3564 | |
| 4 | -.66667 | 2.05818 | .991 | -7.0823 | 5.7490 | |
| 4 | 1 | 1.00000 | 2.18303 | .975 | -5.8048 | 7.8048 |
| 2 | .50000 | 2.81828 | .998 | -8.2850 | 9.2850 | |
| 3 | .66667 | 2.05818 | .991 | -5.7490 | 7.0823 | |
Table 4.4
| FS | ||
| Scheffe | | |
| learningstyle | N | Subset for alpha = 0.05 |
| 1 | ||
| 1 | 6 | 79.0000 |
| 3 | 9 | 79.3333 |
| 2 | 2 | 79.5000 |
| 4 | 3 | 80.0000 |
| Sig. | | .979 |
| Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed. | ||
Means Plots
Table 4.5 The Result of The Comparison between Learning Style and Students final Test Achievement Score.
Correlations
| Descriptive Statistics | |||
| | Mean | Std. Deviation | N |
| FS | 79.3500 | 2.85205 | 20 |
| Learningstyle | 2.4500 | 1.09904 | 20 |
Table 4.6 the correlation of learning style preferred and the final test achievement of the science student of SMA N1 Pringsewu.
| Correlations | |||
| | | FS | learningstyle |
| FS | Pearson Correlation | 1 | .098 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | | .680 | |
| N | 20 | 20 | |
| Learningstyle | Pearson Correlation | .098 | 1 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | .680 | | |
| N | 20 | 20 | |
Table 4.7 The Result of the Correlation between Student Learning Style preferred and the final test achievement.
4.2 Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between learning style preferences and achievement, as measured by grades, by senior high school students. The study involved a quantitative analysis using descriptive analysis and statistical methods to address learning styles, and grades. The analysis of this study may have an impact on how students learn, are taught and succeed in English subject classes. The results of this survey will be used to recommend to students, learning strategies that might support learning and successful achievement by students in English subject. This chapter presents the data gathered using the O’Brien learning style, and final grade of the students enrolled in the English classes. The chapter is organized in several sections provides descriptive data on (a) sample of participants, and (b) data analysis using statistical methods.
A quantitative study design using statistical methods was chosen to test the correlation between learning style preference and student achievement in senior high school students in science classes. The study design used the O’Brien learning style. The independent variables for this study were learning styles of the students. The independent variable of learning styles was based on O’Brien (1985), categories of learning styles, and correlated with the preferred styles in the student’s high school. The other independent variables were obtained from a survey. The dependent variable was the student achievement measured in this study by the grade obtained at the end of the course, or final test score. Student achievement is measured by the overall grade, is based on an A-F scale (A = 90-100; B = 80-89; C = 70-79; D = 60-69; F < 60).
Table 4.2 Students’ Learning Styles and Students’ Mid Score
| No | Name | Learning Style | Mid Score |
| 1 | Agung Prabowo Wicaksono | 1 | 75 |
| 2 | Agung Tri Prabowo | 3 | 75 |
| 3 | Ami Kurniawati | 3 | 80 |
| 4 | Ana Kurnia Sari | 4 | 80 |
| 5 | Desta Ofsera Dina Rianti | 3 | 81 |
| 6 | Dewi Wulan Sari | 3 | 85 |
| 7 | Dian Efrianda | 2 | 80 |
| 8 | Eni Kartika | 1 | 78 |
| 9 | Fahrizal | 3 | 75 |
| 10 | Fera Sugi Lestari | 1 | 85 |
| 11 | Happy Utami Wulandari | 1 | 79 |
| 12 | Leni Prafita Sari | 3 | 78 |
| 13 | Muhammad Iqbal | 1 | 77 |
| 14 | Muhammad Robbi | 4 | 80 |
| 15 | Niken Eka Putri | 4 | 80 |
| 16 | Ratih Kumala Dewi | 3 | 80 |
| 17 | Ridho Dwi Syahputra | 2 | 79 |
| 18 | Sherli Ayu Pramodita | 3 | 83 |
| 19 | Tias Eka Nurcahyani | 3 | 77 |
| 20 | Yodi Prayodia | 1 | 80 |
From the data above the researcher can classified the learner into four groups:
1. There are six students who are preferred Visual and Verbal Learners (VIS-VER): Visual learners learn better when they see objects, pictures, diagrams, flow charts, and videos. Verbal learners, on the other hand learn better when they read words in a written fashion and when words are spoken. Listening is a preferred method of learning.
2. There are two students who are preferred Active and Reflective Learners (ACT-REF): Active learners learn better by actively participating and discussing or applying it with others. Reflective learners learn better by thinking about things, preferably alone.
3. There are nine students who are preferred Sensing and Intuitive Learners (SEN-INT): Sensing learners learn better when presented with facts, and think more in practical ways. Intuitive learners learn best when presented with the possibilities of innovation and relationships. They tend to work faster than sensing learners, who prefer to think things through more.
4. There are three students who are preferred Sequential and Global Learners (SEQ-GLO): Sequential learners learn better when subjects are presented in a linear manner. Each step follows another, and therefore, it forms a logical sequence. Global learners learn best when they are able to go from one area to another, to use information in a nonlinear manner. In all dimensions, the learning styles are a dichotomy of learning and are continuous without extremes necessarily, but a stream from one end to the other
4.3 Data Analysis and Relationship
The following section discusses research questions 1 through 2 in which relationships is made between learning styles, achievement of students as measured by grades.
This study used the O’Brien (1985) model of learning styles. The O’Brien model shows that students can be very different in how they prefer to learn. Originally, the model emphasized four different but dichotomous methods of learning: sensing-intuitive, visual-verbal, active-reflective, and sequential-global. These are the individual’s preferred learning style. What these refer to are (a) the sensory method by which information is received, (b) the modality by which information is received, (c) the process why which information is received, and (d) the order in which the information is received. In order to further understand the five main categories, an explanation of the areas is required. Students under the O’Brien model are classified into the following categories:
1. Sensing learners (concrete, practical) or intuitive learners (innovative, conceptual),
2. Visual learners (pictures, diagrams preferred) or verbal learners (written and spoken information preferred),
3. Active learners (prefer to do things) or reflective learners (prefer to think things through), and
4. Sequential learners (prefer to be orderly, linear) or global learners (holistic, system thinkers).
The majority of students (77.8%) preferred a sensing learning style. Visual and sequential learning were also preferred learning styles for all gender. Students preferred sensing over intuitive, visual over verbal, and sequential over global. Senior high school students did not prefer active over reflective learning styles as demonstrated from the O’Brien learning style. The number differential was almost half for each choice of active versus reflective for all gender. All students indicated the same preferences, however, and what is implicated by these results is that as demonstrated with the demographic data that senior high school students enroll in these classes at a higher rate. Since these students demonstrate a preference in certain learning styles over others, this information can be used to infer teaching techniques that may enhance achievement.
In this study, achievement was defined as obtaining a grade of B and C. Overall; most students passed the English course with 55% receiving a B, and 45% a C. From this information, it can be seen that there is no students who failed the course. Table 4.7 provided the data for this research question. No relationship was found in student achievement for any of the four dimensions in learning styles. ANOVA (F(4,157) = .919, p > .05) analysis did not show significant difference in learning style preference and achievement.
V. CONCLUSION
A. Conclusion
A primary goal of this chapter is to summarize the results and discuss the implications and significant factors that may aid in the educational achievement of senior high school classes in English courses. And the conclusions are:
1. Students can be very different in how they prefer to learn.
2. These are the individual’s preferred learning style. From the twenty students of SMA Negeri 1 Pringsewu, there are six students who preferred the visual learning style, two students preferred auditory learning styles and nine students preferred intuitive or kinesthetic learning style and three students preferred in sequential global learning style.
3. There is no relationship was found in student achievement for any of the four dimensions in learning style.
REFERENCES
Setiyadi, B. 2006. Metode Penelitian untuk pengajaran Bahasa Asing Pendekatan
Kualitatif dan Kuantitatif. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Graha Ilmu.
Yufrizal, Hery, M.A.,Ph.D. 2008. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition, Bandung: Pustaka Reka Cipta.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar