Learning Style Thesis

ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 1
Research Title: Relationship of Learning Styles and L2
Proficiency among Grade 8 Students in
Tagabas National High School
Researcher: Menchie P. Banqueles
Degree : Bachelor in Secondary Education
Specialization: Major in English
Research Adviser: Melca DG. Cabanggangan
I. Abstract
This study is focused on the learning styles and L2 Proficiency among Grade 8
students in Tagabas National High School, Catanauan. Both the different learning styles
and the level of proficiency in English of the respondents were determined.
Descriptive-survey method was employed and purposive sampling procedure was
used in selecting the student-respondents. In addition, to achieve the objectives of the
study, descriptive design of research was utilized through the participation of Grade 8
students of Tagbagas National High School of 63 student-respondents. Hence, the study
revealed that the Grade 8 students sometimes manifest the characteristics of visual,
auditory, and kinesthetic learners. In terms of the level of proficiency must of the
respondents are mostly in approaching proficiency level in English. Only 9.52% are in
the advanced level and 19.15 are in the beginning level. This indicates that they have
differences in the levels of proficiency. Furthermore, the results of the study show that
hypothetical stand is accepted which indicates that there is no significant relationship

between the respondents of learning styles and L2 proficiency among the Grade 8
students. Since, the computed T-value is less than the critical value.
Keywords: Learning styles, English, English Proficiency, Level of Proficiency

II. Background
A. Rationale of the Research
Learning styles can broadly be defined as the learners' consistent ways of employing
certain stimuli in pedagogical contexts. From another view, learning styles are closely
connected with educational conditions under which learners are most likely to learn
(Briggs, 2014). In yet another view, learning styles are viewed as the correspondence
between the learners' fit and comfort and different methods of instruction (Kiefer, 2014).
Although the notion of learning styles is widely accepted, no agreement is reached over
the best way to measure the trend. Some notes of caution must be mentioned in that
learning styles just allocate learners along a continuum with some hints to discover the
various forms of mental representations. The shifting sands in the history of learning
styles encompass a large number of models and theories with an attempt to take
individual differences in pedagogical contexts in to account.
Every student uses his or her own unique learning style. Often they use a
combination of them. However, quite often the student is not aware of specific styles of
learning. In addition, teachers will teach many times using specific style that may not be
most suitable for students (Junar, 2015). Many students are observed to be barely English
proficient (Santiago, 2015), and they struggled in the classroom because the teacher did
not accommodate them. In the worst cases they were assigned a seat at the back of the
classroom and simply given a dictionary to help them (Aurora, 2014). Moreover, Aurora
discussed that too often the minority student is ignored, and as long as there are no
discipline problems, will occupy their desk for the entire school year while learning very
little. According to Ely and Alvarez (2014), the teacher is the most important catalyst in
bringing about the learners’ self-awareness, and it is the teacher who may be in the best
position to empower students by showing them how to empower themselves.
However, some teachers are ignoring the fact that language learners use different
learning styles and strategies and apply specific actions and behaviors that help them
learn. Teachers do not always consider these styles in writing daily lesson plans (Merci,
2014).
Each student learns in different ways and this affects their performance. The learning
of new words in English proficiency learning is a sure sign of all living languages as
never-lasting and a continuous process. language. However, learning the genius of the
English language is deemed pointless without being proficient in it. Demoting the
significance of English leads to a bookish, stilted language with an unimaginative tone
(Basti, 2014). For some learners, learning English using their own style is like a play
while others find it 'swimming against the tide' and therefore struggle hard to learn and
comprehend these gems of culture, skills and creativity using the English language.
Furthermore, while the application of English by a Filipino learner creates a feel of
innovative understanding, but some others often find them problematic and stressful.
Tagabas National High school is facing a dilemma today due to changing
environment. Today, students tend to be easily distracted by the surroundings. In that
case, students are not able to learn, specifically in the L2. Thus, the researcher came up
with the study regarding to the variety of the learning styles for the learners. In that way,
the teachers are able to identify how the students will learn the L2 in fastest and most
efficient way the students could learn it. Furthermore, conducting this study will also be a
B. Purpose of the Research
The study aims to find the Relationship of learning styles and L2 proficiency among
Grade 8 students in Tagabas National High School with the end view of preparing an
English Proficiency program.
Specifically, this study answered to the following questions:
1. What are the different learning styles of the respondents in learning English?
2. What is the level of proficiency of the respondents in English?
3. Is there a significant relationship between the students’ learning styles of their
level of English proficiency?
4. What program may be proposed based from the findings of the study?
C. Theoretical Framework
This study is anchored on the following theories:
Theory of Motivational Interference
The theory of motivational interference has been introduced to study effects of
school–leisure conflict. Motivational interference is defined as the cognitive, affective,
and behavioral impairment of a chosen activity as a result of the motivational properties
of a non-chosen alternative (Curryl, 2014). It displays itself in phenomena such as
reduced persistence, switching activities, superficial learning, and bad mood. If pupils
engage in study behaviour, the expected consequences not only of the action actually
performed but also those of dismissed leisure activities influence their actual motivation.
Thinking about alternative options is expected to impair learning. In a cross-sectional
study, Entwistle and Tait (2015) found that motivational interference increased the more
attractive a non-chosen task was to the learner. Furthermore, there is experimental
evidence for the influence of dismissed options on the quality of current behaviour.
When this alternative option was present during pupils’ studying, experience, and
performance of learning suffered and learning results were impaired. School–leisure
conflict is not only detrimental for learning though – it also can have negative effects on
free time experience. Pupils who highly value achievement tend to enjoy meeting friends
less when a learning commitment is left pending than pupils to whom achievement is not
of high value.
This theory implies that the notion of school–leisure conflict leading to
motivational interference can be reconstructed as a self-control dilemma denoting an

internal conflict between the pursuit of behavioral plans that differ in their long-term
importance. It takes up the idea of costs as a category of task value in the expectancy-
value theory. It also implies that the choices are influenced by positive and negative task
valences, which both are characterized by immediate as well as long-range consequences.
In school–leisure conflicts, self-control is needed because the pupil weighs an immediate
goal of high present attraction (spending time with friends) against a goal that usually is
less attractive but important for the future.
Expectancy-Value theory
According to Fischbein (2010) behavior is a function of the expectancies one has
and the value of the goal toward which one is working. Such an approach predicts that,
when more than one behavior is possible, the behavior chosen will be the one with the
largest combination of expected success and value. Expectancy-value theories hold that
people are goal-oriented beings. The behaviors they perform in response to their beliefs
and values are undertaken to achieve some end. However, although expectancy-value
theory can be used to explain central concepts in uses and gratifications research, there
are other factors that influence the process. For example, the social and psychological
origins of needs, which give rise to motives for behavior, which may be guided by
beliefs, values, and social circumstances into seeking various gratifications through
media consumption and other non-media behaviors.
Expectancy value theory suggests that “people orient themselves to the world
according to their expectations (beliefs) and evaluations”. Utilizing this approach,
behavior, behavioral intentions, or attitudes are seen as a function of “(1) expectancy (or
belief) – the perceived probability that an object possesses a particular attribute or that a
behavior will have a particular consequence; and (2) evaluation – the degree of affect,
positive or negative, toward an attribute or behavioral outcome (Grub, 2011).
This theory proposed that persons are differentially susceptible to motivational
interference depending on their value orientations. A more general definition states that
values are generalized beliefs about the desirability of behaviors and events. The value
orientation concept can be linked to motivation theory. It resembles the concept of task
value, valence, or valuing, used in integrative theories of motivation, such as the
Expectancy-Value Theory.
Curry's Onion Model Theory
Using the way in which learning/cognitive style is measured to propose a layer-like
model of learning behavior, Curry (1983, 1987) utilizes an onion metaphor to illustrate
inner and outer layers of the construct. Initially proposing three layers, Curry later
includes ``social interaction'' as a fourth layer. ``Instructional preference'' refers to the
individual's preferred choice of learning environment. It is described as the outermost
layer, the most observable layer and the layer most susceptible to influence, making it the
least stable level of measurement. Instruments cited as measuring instructional preference
include the Learning Preference Inventory (Rezler & Rezmovic, 2011). Social interaction
provides the next layer and relates to the individual's preference for social interaction
during learning.
VAK Model (Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic)
The best way to define learning styles is to derive the definition for learning
itself, as learning is a process whereby knowledge is created through the
transformation of experience (Kolb, 1984). Although this study employs only the
VAK model, yet comprehending all the learning styles, developed by Reid (1987),
will broaden the understanding of preferred learning styles of students, such as: visual,
whereas the students learn better from seeing words as in books, and on the chalkboard as
they can remember the information and instructions better if they can read them;
auditory, students learn from hearing words spoken and from oral presentations. They can
recall information by reading aloud or moving their lips as they read; Kinesthetic,
Students learn through experience and being involved physically in the classroom.
Students tend to remember information well by actively participating in activities, field
trips and role plays in the classroom; Tactile, students learn through hands-on
experiences with materials. They love working on experiments in a laboratory and
handling and building models. These students can remember information by writing notes
or instructions; Group, students learn well when they study with at least one other
student. These students can complete work well when they work with others. The
stimulation received from group work helps them to learn and understand new
information; and Individual students learn best when they work alone. When they study
alone they can remember information well.

D. Literature Survey
The researcher reviewed some relevant literature what has been written in the
literature on the issue related to the present study about the relationship between different
learning styles and their English Proficiency.
Learning Styles
One concept in particular which has provided some valuable insights into learning in
both academic and other settings is learning style. There is general acceptance that the
manner in which individuals choose to or are inclined to approach a learning situation has
an impact on performance and achievement of learning outcomes. Whilst and perhaps
because learning style has been the focus of such a vast number of research and
practitioner-based studies in the area, there exist a variety of definitions, theoretical
positions, models, interpretations and measures of the construct.
According to Reid (2018), learning styles are defined as " the particular way in
which a learner tries to learn something. In second or foreign language learning, different
learners may prefer different solutions to learning problems. For example, some may
want explanations for grammatical rules; others may not need explanations. Some may
feel writing down words or sentences helps them to remember them. Others may find
they remember things better if they are associated with pictures.".
Felder & Dietz (2014) tried to make a distinction between styles and strategies. He
defines styles as those related to personality (such as extroversion, self -esteem, anxiety,
or cognition such as left/right- brain orientation, ambiguity, tolerance, field sensitivity).
While strategies are specific methods of approaching a problem or a task, modes of

operation for achieving a particular end. Brown also claims that individuals may have
various strategies while the styles seem to be more constant and predictable.
There is no agreement on the number or variety of learning styles though, and there
are various ways of classifying learning styles under different categories, for example,
Hills (2014) distinguishes between cognitive style (field dependent versus field
independent, analytic versus global, reflective versus impulsive); sensory style (visual
versus auditory versus tactile versus kinesthetic) and personality styles (tolerance of
ambiguity, right brain versus left brain dominance).
On the other hand, Hansen (2014) identifies four major language learning styles:
communicative, analytical, authority-oriented and concrete. His classification of those
styles was derived from learners' strategy preferences. In the communicative style, the
learners were defined by the following learning strategies: they like to learn by watching,
listening to native speakers, talking to friends in English, watching television in English,
using English out of class, learning new words by hearing them, and learning by
conversation. In the analytical style, learners like studying grammar, English books and
newspapers, they also like to study alone, find their own mistakes, and work on problems
set by the teacher.
According to Li and Xin (2014) in the authority-oriented style the learners prefer the
teacher to explain everything, having their own textbook, writing everything in a
notebook, studying grammar, learning by reading, and learning new words by seeing
them. In the concrete style, learners tend to like games, pictures, film, video, using
cassettes, talking in pairs, and practicing English outside class.

However, Tai (2013) expressed that the level of ambiguity and debate is such that
even the task of selecting an appropriate instrument for investigation is an onerous one,
with the unifying of subsequent findings within an existing framework problematic, at
best. This paper does not seek to achieve an absolute resolve and converge upon the ideal
model and measure of learning style, but rather to inform through description and
comparison. It is intended as a resource for researchers and professionals who desire a
broad appreciation of the area of learning style and who may, previously, have been
working with an in-depth understanding.
Cheema (2014) have previously noted that researchers in the field of cognitive
style/learning style often present only a very limited (if any) account of the variety of
theories and instruments which exist for the measurement of style. The terms ``learning
style'', ``cognitive style'' and ``learning strategy'' are understandably frequently used
imprecisely in theoretical and empirical accounts of the topic. The terms learning style
and cognitive style are, on some occasions, used interchangeably, whilst at other times
they are afforded separate and distinct definitions.
Cognitive style is described by Bostrom & Lassen (2016) as an individual's typical or
habitual mode of problem solving, thinking, perceiving and remembering, while the term
learning style is adopted to react a concern with the application of cognitive style in a
learning situation. Cheema (2014) went on to describe cognitive style in terms of a
bipolar dimension while learning style is seen as encompassing a number of components
which are not mutually exclusive.
It is also likely that cognitive style at the very least can be regarded as one significant
component of learning style. Park (2014) stated that cognitive styles are the ways in
which different individuals characteristically approach different cognitive tasks; learning
styles are the ways in which individuals characteristically approach different learning
tasks.
Riding and Buckle (2014) further stated that different strategies can be selected by
learners to deal with different tasks. Learning styles might be more automatic than
learning strategies which are optional.'' This final point, which attempts to distinguish
between style and strategy, rejects a recurring issue in the area.
Perhaps the more workable view is that a style may well exist is some form, that is it
may have structure, but that the structure is, to some degree, responsive to experiences
and the demands of the situation (process) to allow change and to enable adaptive
behavior. The ``motherboard/software'' and ``hard/soft'' wiring analogies have also been
used to describe the interface of style (motherboard/hard wiring) and strategy
(software/soft wiring). Investigating the issue of stability in learning style Loo (2014) did
and evidence to support consistency in learning style over time, but was critical of current
techniques of analysis and recommended caution in drawing any conclusion regarding
stability.
Learning-centered approaches are distinguished on the basis that there is a greater
interest in the impact of style on learning in an educational setting, and the development
of new learning-relevant constructs and concepts, often born out of the utilization of
assessment instruments.
Peck (2011) subsequent discussion of learning-centered approaches is framed around
the distinction between process-based models, preference-based models and cognitive
skills-based models. Process models are defined in terms of perceiving and information
processing, with Kolb's Experiential Learning Model representing one such approach.
Preference models focus on individuals' preferences for the learning situation and include
preferred time of day for study, temperature, light, preference for group/independent
study.
Cognitive skills-based approaches are characterized by the desire to apply cognitive-
centered models of style to a learning situation. These approaches focus on field-
dependency, perceptual modality and memory. The term “learning style” has been
defined in various ways. This is because, different researchers have their own
understanding of what constitutes learning styles (Zou, 2016).
Murillo (2015) defined learning styles as the general approaches (as opposed to
specific strategies) that students resort to in learning a new subject. Marzano, et al. (2013)
defined it as a biological and developmental set of personal characteristics that make the
same instruction effective for some learners and ineffective for others. Pearson (2014)
defines it as students’ preferred mode of learning. Knowing students’ learning styles is
important and beneficial to teachers as it will allow them to tailor their way of teaching so
as to accommodate the learning style preferences of their students.
Letteri (2015) regarded learning styles and strategies as being among the main
factors that help determine how and how well the students learn a second or foreign
language, and indeed different students will tend to favor different learning styles.
Cox and Kojima (2014) who suggest that further research be carried out to
investigate the relationship between learning style and performance so that the link
between the two is made clearer. Apart from that, studies should also be carried out to
examine whether gender has any influence on students’ preferred learning styles.
According to Taylor (2014), language learning styles are amid the factors that play
significant role in determining how well learners learn a language. Learning styles are the
general plans like global or analytic, auditory or visual, feeling or thinking that learners
employ in getting a language or in learning any other issue. These styles are the overall
patterns that give general direction to learning behavior. Learning style is also defined as
the biologically and develop mentally imposed set of characteristics that make the same
teaching method wonderful for some and terrible for others.
Richardson (2014) reiterated that learning styles should not be considered as
dichotomous, rather, they generally work on a continuum. As an example, an individual
may be more thinking-oriented than feeling, or more closure-oriented than open, or
equally visual and auditory but with lesser kinesthetic and tactile involvement.
Stebbins (2014) argued that few if any people could be classified as having all or
nothing in any of these categories. Besides, given that no single L2 Instructional
methodology fits all learners, the more the instructors know about their learners' style
preferences, the more effectively they can orient their L2 instruction. In other words,
some learners may need instruction presented more visually, while others might require
more auditory, kinesthetic, or tactile types of instruction. Without having enough
knowledge about their learners' style preferences, instructors cannot effectively prov ide
the needed instructional variety.
In terms of learning English, Pritchard (2013) stated that a number of researchers
propose that a mismatch between students’ preferred learning styles and instructors’
preferred teaching styles have bad effects on students’ learning and attitudes in the class
and to English in general.

A match between students’ preferred learning styles and the instructors’ preferred
teaching styles, on the other hand, would lead to an increase in motivation and learning as
shown in studies by Griggs and Dunn (2014).
Rossi (2014) defined language learning style as the natural, habitual and preferred
way or ways of absorbing, processing and retaining new information and skills. For the
purpose of this study, Reid’s definition of learning style and her classification of learning
styles into six types, Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic, Tactile, Group, and
Individual, will be used as they are the most widely used and accepted definition and
categorization of learning styles.
In fact, Peacock acknowledges that Reid’s work has aroused a great deal of interest
in the concept of learning style since it was published in 1987. Daley (2014) carried out a
study that aimed to investigate the present state of English vocabulary learning styles and
teaching styles at a primary school in China, and to investigate the strategies of English
vocabulary teaching used by teachers. He also, made suggestions for improvement and an
attempt to put forward several practical vocabulary teaching strategies to meet the needs
of different learning styles, which might reduce teaching and learning style conflicts.
Results obtained from Fu's study indicated that the learning styles of many students and
the teaching styles of many teachers do not match. The majority of students are visual
learners, while most teachers, on the other hand, adopt the auditory teaching style. He
also claimed that, in all academic classrooms, no matter what the subject is, there will be
students with multiple learning styles. Thus there are academically diverse learners and
teachers need to make curriculum choices that complement the interests, the needs and
the strengths of students.

Furthermore, Putintseva's (2016) article reminds the teachers of the need to be aware
of individual learning styles and learner diversity, and asserts that EFL/ESL teachers
should be aware of their students' learning styles, as this can be useful for them. On
another hand, Tai, (2013) conducts a study to explore the preferred learning styles of
adult EFL students in order to better understand their impact and shape on the language
learning process and to help determine to design the curriculum and the instruction for
classroom practice for higher achievement and increased motivation for learning. He
claimed that adult EFL students vary in their perceptual learning style preferences. These
differences influence adults learning motivation and success. Because of social and
possibly biological influences, a number of differences i.e. gender exist in approaches to
learning a second/foreign language. He concluded that the computer-assisted style was
perceived by respondents as being the most preferred, while individual and visual styles
were perceived as the least preferred.
Moreover, he found that there were significant relationships between auditory,
tactile, kinesthetic, and computer-assisted learning style and motivation in learning
English. Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory Kolb explains that different people naturally
prefer a certain single different learning style.
Geiger, et al (2014) classified learning strategies in to six types of strategies:
Memory strategies help learners’ link one concept with another but do not necessarily
involve a deep level of understanding. Cognitive strategies help learners to manipulate
the language in direct ways, for example through reasoning, analysis, note-taking,
summarizing, synthesizing, and outlining. Compensatory strategies help learners make up
for missing knowledge for instance, by guessing from the context in reading exercises.
Metacognitive strategies enable the learner to control cognition e.g. planning for a task,
gathering and organizing materials and evaluating task success, evaluating the success of
any type of learning strategy and so forth. Affective strategies help learners to regulate
emotions, motivations and attitudes. Finally, social strategies help the learners work with
others and understand the target culture as well as language. These strategies are
interrelated and at times may overlap with one another.
Visual Learning Strategy
Encouraging critical thinking around the visual has become an essential
educational task to support lifelong learners to participate within democracy (Alter, 2011;
Eisner, 2002; Gude, 2007; Grushka, 2005; Hardy, 2006). It is argued that critical thinking
is a process which requires reflective skills and evaluation of ideas (Cottrell, 2005; Ennis,
2011). To foster these critical abilities, education needs to consider students as active
thinkers and guide their reflective process through innovative strategies which promote
independent thinking and discussions around diverse issues (Eisner, 2002; Grushka,
2005; Gude, 2007; Duncum, 2010).
Auditory Learning Strategy
In a study by Cohen and Wolvin (2011), story-listening is argued to be very
important for auditory learning. They emphasized the importance of stories for auditory
learners and reported that the stories both provide much more than entertainment and
help us understand ourselves and the world around us. The study states that stories are
central to communication and trained story listeners are more cognitively focused.
Storytelling is important, but Cohen and Wolvin emphasize the need to refocus on story
listening. Accordingly, great potential for creating classroom education around the stories
can be provided to improve the listening skills of students and their general
understanding skills.
The individuals who learn by listening can learn this skill through life as a
learning tool. Children begin to listen to the voices in the womb of the mother and they
listen to the voices in their surroundings after birth so as to speak (Tompkins, 1998: 260.
Fw. Akyol, 2010).
Tactile Learning Style
Many cognitive theorists define learning as “an inner process that changes the
nervous system by the stimulus and unit of the external and internal stimulus. Each
individual has different cognitive, affective and physical features so each individual’s
learning style is different because the environmental, cultural and genetic features that
affect him/ her are different” (Durmuscelebi, 2013, p. 211). With this knowledge,
educators should be cognizant of the approaches they use to teaching students new
content. All children are unique in their schema, background knowledge, academic
abilities, strengths and needs. Kinesthetic teaching is defined as “the use of creative
movement in the classroom to teach across the curriculum” (Griss, 2013, p. 1). “By
creating a rich, contextual environment, kinesthetic learning constructs memories
connected to time, place and emotions, which we call episodic encoding. Students
activate and ingrate physical, emotional and cognitive responses to what they are
learning, making learning more meaningful. Another author defined kinesthetic learners
as “individuals that learn best with an active “hands-on” approach. These learners favor
interaction with the physical world. Most of the time kinesthetic learners have a difficult
time staying on target and can become unfocused effortlessly” (Gilakjani, 2012, p.2).
One way to incorporate kinesthetic movement and tactile experiences into daily
academic lessons is by using peer interactions as a preferred learning style. Peers can be
heterogeneously or homogeneously grouped in order to facilitate meaningful discussions,
interactions, debates or even Kagan style teaching structures (Ediger, 2013). Some Kagan
style teaching practices that involve kinesthetic movement include “Hand-Up, Pair-Up”;
an activity that promotes meaningful discussions and interactions between heterogeneous
pairs of students. Students are required to stand up and wander the classroom until they
reach a peer who does not sit near them. At this point, students are required to “high-
five” their peer, look them in the eyes and say “Hello, my name is …” Each student is
then given one minute to verbally respond to a question or prompt. At the conclusion of
both peer responses, they are required to say, “Thank you for sharing.” prior to walking
away and sitting down at their seat. This activity promotes manners, social skills and
intentional conversation in addition to walking around the classroom. Thus, the body is
given the chance to increase the heart rate and blood flow to the brain. In addition, “small
groups might be established with members interacting to clarify ideas. Mannerly
movement can be used to form each group needs emphasis” (Ediger, 2013, p. 16). Aside
from the social interaction benefits, these small group interactions can teach students self-
control and how to move about the classroom in a purposeful manner that is respectful
and conscientious of their peers working around them.
Furthermore, Shoval and Shulruf (2011) completed a research study looking into
the benefits of kinesthetic movement. Findings suggested “students who are physically
active while seeking knowledge and/ or solutions are more successful than their peers
who are more socially active, even if initially they were lower achievers. Passive students
demonstrated the lowest academic achievements” (p. 58). This study supports the notion
that educators should encourage movement and a hands-on approach to learning and
experimenting within the classroom setting.
McCarthy‘s Four Learning Styles
Four learning styles have been identified by McCarthy (2014). Innovative learners
search for personal meaning while they learn, drawing on values, enjoying social
interaction, cooperation with the desire to make the world a better place. Analytic
learners have a desire for intellectual development and learning important things’ to add
to the world’s knowledge, drawing on facts while learning; patient and reflective.
According to Reza (2014), common sense learners have a desire to find solutions
since they value useful things; they are kinesthetic, practical and straightforward and
would like to make things happen. Finally, dynamic learners search for hidden
possibilities, judge by gut feeling, synthesizing information from diverse sources; are
enthusiastic and adventurous.
Based from McCarthy (2014), the students have their own way of independent
learning styles. Each of the students have their own talent that will be cultivated when
guided decorously. Furthermore, McCarthy (2014) is more focused on the analytical
intelligence of the students. However, Reza (2014) is more focused on the kinesthetic and
the emotions of the students. He/she stated that English language is being learned through
emotional and psychomotor movement. On the other, the researcher agrees on both
statement, that English language is acquired through talent and analytical intelligence,
since the brain take a big part in acquiring new language. Hence, knowledge is not
effective without the use of practice and drill. Therefore, mind, body, and heart are
always needed in learning.
Relationship between Learning Styles and Level of Proficiency in English
Vaseghi, etal., (2013) examines the learning style preferences of 75 Iranian high
school students. Their study was an attempt to identify the students' preferred learning
styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, tactile, group, and individual). Results obtained
showed that students' learning style preferences were kinesthetic and tactile. While
auditory, visual and individual were minor.
Likewise, Shakib (2013) described the learning styles models, in particular Reid’s
Perceptual Learning Style Preference. They concluded that teachers should take in their
consideration the differences in learning styles among students and enhance students'
learning strategies for their successful learning. Moreover, they emphasize the need to
enable students to be self-aware of both style and strategies, as students who know their
learning style preferences are able to build their self-confidence and can reinforce their
willingness to be risk-takers. Their study also revealed that differences do exist in
learning styles among the students from different gender and such differences should be
taken into account when teaching foreign languages.
Wong & Nunan (2011) also carry out a study that aimed at exploring student’s views
as to how they prefer learning English derived from their belief that learners' preferences
are of a crucial importance in the development of learner’s autonomy. Results of their
study revealed significant results suggesting a need for a closer co-operation between
students and teachers as to how learning activities should be arranged and implemented
in the classroom.
Some studies also have revealed a significant positive relationship between learning
styles and achievement in the English language proficiency as well as in other fields such
as economics, mathematics, and sciences, other studies have not found such a significant
positive relationship. It also presents research findings on style preferences of the
participants from different proficiency levels. Some investigations on the effect of
learning styles on achievement when it was matched to teaching styles have been
presented Investigating style preferences of learners from different levels of proficiency
was the aim of Neely’s (2013) study. Findings show a preference for visual learning by
students with higher language proficiency. It has also been stated that more proficient
ESL learners have probably had more exposure to the written word, and therefore feel
comfortable learning visually.
High achievers also show a preference for visual and kinesthetic styles in the study
carried out by (Cutolo & Rochford, 2017). The researchers designed a study on 2,597
incoming freshmen in a private university located in a large metropolitan area. The study
was conducted economics students and instructors at Saint Mary’s College of California.
It aimed at identifying the relationship between learning style preferences and academic
achievement. The results revealed that specific learning style preferences correlate with
achievement and that learning style preferences are varied according to academic
performance.
Park, (2014) investigated the relationship between learning styles and achievement
between different ethnic groups. The study concerned the basic perceptual learning style
preferences for the group and individual learning of Armenian, African, Hispanic,
Hmong, and Korean, Mexican, and Anglo secondary school students. The result revealed
significant students’ achievement level differences.
Li & Qin (2013) present an interesting contrast to the findings of the aforementioned
studies. The sample consisted of 187-second year college non-English major students.
The study aimed at investigating the relationship between learning styles of a group of
Chinese EFL college students and their language learning outcomes. The version of the
Myrers-Briggs Type Indicator Form G (MBTI- G) was used. The findings revealed that
learning styles were only weakly or indirectly related to language learning outcomes.
Similarly, Diseth & Martinsen (2013) conducted a study to analyze the relationship
between approaches to learning (deep, strategic, and surface), cognitive style, motives
and academic achievement on 192 undergraduate students. The results similarly revealed
that styles only had indirect effects on achievement.
L2 proficiency comes with variety of learning styles, since there are students’
diversity Hills (2014) distinguished between the cognitive styles wherein the brain
functions in independent learning, while sensory style is responsible for the five senses of
human being, lastly the personality is including, for it has the tolerance of ambiguity. The
researcher identified that brain is not the only reason for effective learning but every
human body should be included for the long life learning. Furthermore, learning styles
are very effective, Lette (2015) regarded that learning styles and strategies as being
among the main factors to determine how well the students learn in second language,
indeed it is strongly evident that students are favored with different learning styles.
According to the information cited by different authors, the learning of the students
L2 proficiency is based on the learning styles used by the teacher inside the classroom.
E. Significance of the Research
This study is significant to the following persons and institutions:
Grade 8 students. This study enables to help them assess their learning styles in
order to improve their English Proficiency. Through this study, the students are expected
to have their own desire to be proficient in English with their own learning style.
Teachers. The output of this study will be able to help them in assisting their
students in finding their learning styles. The teachers will also be able to guide their
pupils well in becoming English proficient.
Future Researchers. The findings of this study can provide new information that
they may be used as their reference in the same field and as future educators.
Administration. The output of this study shall be able to help their teachers in
providing proper guide for their pupils especially in assessing their learning styles.
F. Statement of Desired Outcomes
After the study, the teachers will understand the individual differences of the learners
in their learning styles as well as their L2 proficiency, and as a result, they shall be
capable of handling the students’ who acquires the problem.
The Grade 8 students who do not acquire mastery in L2 shall be considered as the
subject of the study. Moreover, this study shall diagnose the individual differences of the
learners and their learning styles in order to come up with a language enhancement
program that may proposed in addressing the students’ difficulties.

The researcher will determine the relationship of learning styles and L2 proficiency
among Grade 8 students in Tagabas National High School.
The study aims to assess the learning styles of the students in order to help them find
the best way to be English proficient to improve the English proficiency of students.
G. Major Final Output
The researcher came up with VAK learning style program which will benefit the
Grade 8 students of Tagabas National High School. This output shall be able to determine
the learning style suitable for every activity in the English language proficiency.
RESEARCH OUTPUT
I. Title Activity
VAK Learning Style Program
II. Activity Proponents
Menchie P. Banqueles
III. Rationale:
The VAK learning style program optimized learning to determine and elevate the
different learning styles and the L2 proficiency among the learners. This program
promotes further development of the learners’ second language learning. Various
activities will be conducted that will support the students’ learning in the following areas
for development. Thus, the output in each area will serve as the basis of their
improvements. After the program all participants are expected to engage their language
learning.
The study revealed that the Grade 8 students sometimes manifest the
characteristics of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners. The researcher created a
program that reinforce the student’ VAK (visual., auditory, kinesthetic) learning style. In
that way, the students able use their skills improve it in a meaningful way.
English Objectives Strategies of Expected Output Monitoring and

Proficiency Activities Evaluation
Skills
Visual * to be skillful *view at least 15 *expand cognitive *Rubrics will be used
in viewing a pictures. skills in as the criteria for
certain context memorizing the evaluation and for
or picture. *try to remember pictures. choosing “the bi”
*be creative in all of the 15
making pictures. *use some *a panel of judges
meaning out of strategies to will give them a score
picture or *tell the 15 remember the according to their
word. pictures to the picture. performance.
* Express a group.
strong .
emotions in
showing what
have seen in
the picture or
word.
Auditory *reinforce the *listen to the * establish a *rubrics will be used
critical classmate critical thinking to check the work of
thinking while carefully. while listening. the students.
listening.
*after listening, * be creative
*organize organized thought enough to make a
thought and while story out of words.
create a short remembering all
story out of the the words. *be a creative
words. storyteller.
*create a short
story out of the
word.
Kinesthetic * dramatize the *dramatize the * express a strong *Rubrics will be used
story. story. emotion in a role as the criteria for
play. evaluation and for
*manifest choosing “the best
various * use as many role play”.
movement to movement as
express possible to *a panel of judges
emotion. perform the role will give them a score
play successfully. according to their
*enhance the performance.
physical
movement
while.
H. Target Beneficiaries of Research
This study is focused on enrichment of the learners’ learning styles and L2
proficiency. In that case, the Grade 8 students of Tagabas National High School shall
greatly benefit this study, since the study includes the learning styles of the students they
are able to identify their learning styles in meaningful way. Furthermore, it is also
focused in the L2 proficiency so they are able to have an expertise in the English
language which is very essential in this century.
I. Definition of Terms
The researcher provided the following definition of terms used in the study. The
following may serve as a guide to the readers:
English Proficiency is the state of having the ability to communicate and
comprehend English in all its basic skills. This includes reading, writing, and listening
and speaking.
English language refers to the world’s second language, and may be used in many
varieties around the world.
English Proficiency Program is a program that will highlight activities that will
help in improving the language skills of a person. An English Proficiency Program may
be designed based on the levels of skills of a person. It it’s the output of written
performance used for the enhancement of the target respondents’ L2 proficiency.
Learning Style is a term used to describe a technique or way that a student or a
teacher or anybody is capable of adapting to in order to learn something.

J. Scope and Limitations of Study
The study covers the relationship of learning styles and L2 proficiency. In addition to
that, the researcher also conducted a study with regards to the English proficiency
program that would be facilitative for the English teachers in handling the students’
diversity. Thus, this research shall lead to the English proficiency program in order to
develop the students’ mastery in English language. However, this research will focus
only among the 63 students of Grade 8 in Tagabas National High School.
However, the study does not cover other English language learning such as writing.
Thus, this study covers only the relationship of learning styles and L2 proficiency
learning and some teaching interventions that will help the teachers to handle the learning
diversity of the students.
III. Description of Method or Approach
This part presents the methods and procedures that the researcher used to have
pertinent findings for this study. It contains research design, research instrument, data
gathering procedures, data analysis plan, and research paradigm and the statistical tools
used for the study.
A. Research Design
The researcher utilized a descriptive- survey method in this study in order to
determine the difficulties that the students encounter in the mastery of the second
language. Thus, this method was used since the researcher wants to know the learning
styles of the students in learning the second language, and the solution is also presented
to solve some problems.

According to Maia (20121), descriptive research is a method that can describe the
findings based from the figures or data gathered. It involves the description, recording,
analysis, and interpretation of the present nature and composition. This is the most
appropriate method since it seeks to determine the learning styles of the respondents.
This study used the correlation approach in determining the significant
relationship among variables. According to Johns (2013), correlation measures the extent
to which two or more variables fluctuate together, whether positive or negative
correlation.
B. Research Instrument
In this study, the researcher employed a research-made questionnaire was adapted
from Kendra (2019) to gather the needed data to answer specific objectives. Hence, the
objectives are the learning styles and L2 language proficiency that are mainly cited prior
to the learners’ learning process.
C. Data Gathering Procedures
In gathering the necessary data, the researcher notified the Head Teacher with an
endorsement letter signed by the advisor to conduct a study in the respective schools. The
questionnaires were distributed by the researcher to the school. The respondents were
given sufficient time to answer the instrument, which accompanied through the process
such as gathering of data and interpretation. Therefore, the survey had been conducted on
some specific respondents. The gathered data was tallied, analyzed, interpreted, using the
appropriate tools.
D. Respondents
The respondents of the study are the Grade 8 students of Tagabas Ibaba National
High School. The Grade 8 is consisting of 63 students. The respondents were chosen for
the research, since they are expected to acquire mastery of the four macro skills. A Grade
8 student is expected to utilize a specific macro skill with proficiency. Hence, the
researcher aims to identify a certain skill for them to master it and use it on future
purpose.
E. Sampling Procedure
Purposive sampling was utilized in the selection of respondents. Whereas, this
involves identifying and selecting individuals or groups of individuals that are especially
knowledgeable about or experiences with phenomenon with a phenomenon of interest
(Cresswell & Plato Clark, 2011).
Hence, purposive sampling enables the researcher to squeeze a lot of information
out of the data that the researcher has connected. It allows the researcher to describe the
major impact their finding have on the population.
F. Hypothesis
There is no significant difference between the learning styles and the L2
proficiency of the students.
G. Data Analysis Plan
The purpose of this research is to determine the relationship of the different
learning styles and the English proficiency levels of the respondents. In order to do the
analysis of the data, the data to be gathered were categorized, tabulated and analyzed.
Using percentage and weighted mean, and t-test, these data were analyzed.
To determine the different learning styles and the English proficiency level of the
respondents, the weighted mean formula was used. A weighted mean tool helps in the
interpretation of the results through the weights because this is the measurement of
central tendency that represents the average of a given data.
Wm=∑FW/N wherein Wm= weighted Mean
∑Fw is the sum of the product of the frequency
and the weight
N is the total number of respondents.
Pearson R
Pearson r is applicable to get the correlation of two variables using this formula:
N∑ xy- ∑ x ∑ y
r=________________________________
√([𝑛∑𝑥^2 ) − (∑〖𝑥)〗^2][𝑁∑𝑦2 − (∑𝑦)

2
E. Research Paradigm
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Different learning
styles of the Proposed English
respondents in * Survey through Proficiency
learning English questionaire Program
Level of *analysis and SpeechFestival
Proficiency in interpretation of 2019
English data
Figure 1. Conceptual Paradigm
The conceptual paradigm of the study is shown in an input-process-output flow of
the study. The input includes the different learning styles of the respondents in learning
English and the level of proficiency in English of the respondents. The process includes
the survey, the data gathering using questionnaire, data analysis and interpretation, while,
the output will be an English proficiency program which is the Speech Festival 2019.
IV. Result and Discussion
This part presents the gathered data, organized and processes statistically, and
carefully interpreted to obtain information that would answer the problems presented in
chapter one. The tables were sequenced according to the statement of the problem, each
immediately followed by analysis, interpretation and discussion based on the concepts,
principles, and theories.
This is divided into two parts. The first part deals with the learning styles of the
students. Furthermore, the first part is divided into three tables. The first table deals with
the weighted mean distribution on respondents’ visual learning style; the second table is
about the weighted mean distribution on respondents’ auditory learning style; the third
and last table is namely the weighted mean distribution on respondents’ tactile learning
style. Meanwhile, the second part pertains the level of proficiency of the respondents in
English. Lastly, the third part is the significant difference between the students’ learning
styles of their level of English proficiency of the grade 8 students.

Part 1. Different Learning Styles in Learning English
Table 1. Weighted Mean Distribution on Respondents’ Visual Learning Style
Statement WM QD R
I can easily understand and follow direction on a map. 2.38 Sometimes 1
I like to write things down or take notes for visual review. 2.32 Sometimes 2
I require explanation of diagrams, graphs or visual

2.46 Sometimes 3
directions.
I prefer obtaining information about an interesting subject

2.29 Sometimes 4
by reading about it.
I am skillful with and enjoy developing making graphs and

2.25 Sometimes 5
charts.
I prefer to see information written on the board and

2.21 Sometimes 7
supplemented by visual aids and assign readings.
I think the best way to remember something is to picture in

2.06 Sometimes 6
my mind.
I can understand a news article better by reading about it in

the newspaper or online rather than by listening to a report Sometimes 8
about it on the radio or internet. 1. 95
GRAND MEAN 2.24 Sometimes
Legend:
Often 2.50-3.00 WM- Weighted Mean
Sometimes 1.50-2.49 QD- Qualitative Description
Seldom 1.00-1.49 R-Rank
Table 1 shows the visual learning styles of students’ in Tagabas National High
School. It registered the grand mean of 2.24, which means that the respondents
sometimes they manifest the visual skills as their learning style.
As a result, the respondents stated that sometimes they can easily understand and
follow direction on a map with the weighted mean of 2.38. The respondents also said that
they like to write things down or take notes for visual review in 2.32, they require
explanation of diagrams, graphs or visual directions with the weighted mean of 2.46, they
prefer obtaining information about an interesting subject by reading about it with the
weighted mean of 2.29, the students are skillful with and enjoy developing making
graphs and charts 2.25, also they prefer to see information written on the board and
supplemented by visual aids and assign readings with the weighted mean of 2.21, they
think the best way to remember something is to picture in my mind with the weighted
mean of 2.06, and lastly can understand a news article better by reading about it in the
newspaper or online rather than by listening to a report about it on the radio or internet
with the weighted mean of 1.95.
Additional research indicates that student’s native mental processes work in
narrative images in symbols and other imagery taking the place or at least being used in
conjunction with the text (Black, 2010). The suggestion here is that the students are
mostly works in narrative image in symbols, which means that students are highly
productive when lesson or the context is being used effectively when it is transmuted in
image or symbols for better understanding of the learners.
Hence, exposure to reading material has a great impact on the learning process of
the respondents. It is evidently shows here that most of the respondents are willing to
read English materials as a part of their learning process in the enhancement of their
language proficiency. This study strongly suggests that adult learners can benefit from
extensive and pleasure reading and that a well-equipped library, easy access books, and
encouragement and time to read are all key factors of reading habits (Rodrigo,
Greenberg, & Segal, 2014).

Table 2. Weighted Mean Distribution on Respondents’ Auditory Learning Style
Statements WM QD R
I can remember best by listening to a lecture that

2.35 Sometimes 1
includes information, explanations, and discussions.
I do best in academic subjects by listening to lectures

2.37 Sometimes 2
and tapes.
I would rather listen to a good lecture or speech than

2.17 Sometimes 3
read about the same material.
I learn to spell better by repeating words out loud than

2.06 Sometimes 4
by writing the words on papers.
I prefer listening to the news on the radio or online

rather than reading about it in a newspaper or in the 2.02 Sometimes 5
internet.
I can tell if sounds match when presented with pairs of

1.98 Sometimes 6
sounds.
Legend:
As shown in table 2 above, the Grade 8 students stated that sometimes they are
auditory learners with the grand mean of 2.16. The learners stated that sometimes they
can remember best by listening to a lecture that includes information, explanations, and
discussions with the weighted mean of 2.35.
This provision followed by the learning style, which shows that the students do
best in academic subjects by listening to lectures and tapes (wm=2.37). Thus, thy would
rather listen to a good lecture or speech than read about the same material (2.17), they
learn to spell better by repeating words out loud than by writing the words on papers
(wm=2.06), they prefer listening to the news on the radio or online rather than reading
about it in a newspaper or in the internet (wm=2.02), they can tell if sounds match when
presented with pairs of sounds (wm=1.98).
In a study by Cohen and Wolven (2011), story listening is argued to be very
important for auditory learning. They emphasized the importance of stories for auditory
learners and reported that the stories both provide much more than entertainment and
help us understand ourselves around us. Thus, the study states that stories are central to
communication and trained story listeners are more cognitively focused. Storytelling is
important, but Cohen and Wolven emphasize the need to focus on story listening.
Accordingly, great potential for creating classroom education around stories can be
provided to improve listening skills of students and their general understanding skills.
Table 3. Weighted Mean Distribution on Respondents’ Tactile Learning Style
Statements WM QD R
I prefer to use posters, models or actual practice and

2.38 Sometimes 1
other activities in class.
I enjoy working with my hands or making things. 2.32 Sometimes 2
I can remember best by writing things down several

2.17 Sometimes 3
times.
I think the spelling words by “finger spelling” them. 2.05 Sometimes 4
I am good at working and solving jigsaw puzzles and 2.03 Sometimes 5

mazes.
I chew gum, or snack while studying. 1.71 Sometimes 6
Legend:
As shown in the table 3, the students stated that sometimes the tactile skills were
being used as their learning styles with the grand mean of 2.11. The students stated that
sometimes they prefer to use posters, models or actual practice and other activities in
class (wm=2.38), they chew gum, or snack while studying (wm=1.71), they enjoy
working with their hands or making things (wm=2.32), they learners stated that they can
remember best by writing things down several times (wm=2.17), they think the spelling
words by “finger spelling” them (wm=2.05). Lastly, they are good at working and
solving jigsaw puzzles and mazes (wm=2.03).

Students have different ways. They have their own way to deal with particular
condition and new information. Some students that are kinesthetic learn best with and
active “hands-on” approach. These learners favor interaction with the physical world.
Most of the time kinesthetic learners have a difficult time staying on target and can
become unfocused effortlessly (Ldpride,n.d.). Hence, this indicates that in accordance
with the result the students learn effectively when they are moving. In addition to
(Ldpride, n.d), the students are will learn meaningfully when the teacher is creative
enough to make the students work on their way. To the information, (Howard, 2011)
stated that, for learners who need bodily/kinesthetic learning, activities that are based on
movement or utilize manipulatives are highly effective, and naturalists thrive when they
can be outside observing or doing scientific experiments.
All children are unique in their schema, background knowledge, academic
abilities, strengths and needs. Kinesthetic teaching is defined as “the use of creative
movement in the classroom to teach across the curriculum” (Griss, 2013, p. 1). “By
creating a rich, contextual environment, kinesthetic learning constructs memories
connected to time, place and emotions, which we call episodic encoding. Students
activate and ingrate physical, emotional and cognitive responses to what they are
learning, making learning more meaningful. Another author defined kinesthetic learners
as “individuals that learn best with an active “hands-on” approach. These learners favor
interaction with the physical world. Most of the time kinesthetic learners have a difficult
time staying on target and can become unfocused effortlessly” (Gilakjani, 2012, p.2).
Prior to the statement of Griss (2013, p1) and Gilakjani (2012, p.2) hands on
approach must always be used in the learning style of the students. In that case, the tactile
learners are able to show off their skills for their learning styles.
PART II. Respondents’ Language Proficiency Level
Table 4: Frequency Distribution of the Respondents’ Level of Language Proficiency
Legend Percentage Mean

Level of Proficiency Frequency
Score
90 above Advanced 6 9.52 92
85-89 Proficient 15 23.81 86.6
80-84 Approaching Proficiency 30 47.62 82.17
75-79 Developing 12 19.05 78.08
75 below Beginning 0 0.00 0
Total 63 100
Legend:
Advanced - 90 and above Developing - 75 - 79

Proficient - 85 – 89 Beginning - 74 and below
Approaching Proficiency- 80 -84
Table 4 shows that majority frequency distribution of the respondents are
approaching proficiency, this reveals that 6 out of 63 total number of respondents or
9.52% were in advance level of proficiency. Thus, according to the result gathered those
students are mostly advanced in their level of proficiency. Lastly, 12 out 63 total number
of the respondents or 19. 05% were in developing level of proficiency.

Based from the result above, there 57 out of 63 students who are not on the
proficient level of English proficiency. Thus, Schmitt & McCarthy (as cited in Jian-Ping,
2013) suggest to use intentional language learning since learning English words
intentionally can “give a sense of progress and a sense of achievement” (p. 250). In
achieving the English language proficiency Schmitt and McCarthy as cited by Jian-Ping
(2013) stated that the students have to work hard and learn intentionally. They must
work on their English fluency. Also they must also work on their pragmatic
comprehension, “development of pragmatic comprehension ability in English as a foreign
language context” (Rafieyan, Majid, & Eng, 2013, p. 131). In that way, the sense of
progress and achievement in English proficiency will be reach.

PART III. Test for Significant Relationship
Table 4: Test for Significant Relationship between the Learning Styles of the
Students and Their Level of English Proficiency
t-value
critical
Correlation r-value Interpretation significance level Decision
value
at 0.05
Negatively Weak
Advanced vs. Visual -0.245 1.973 0.250 Reject Ho
Correlation
Negatively Weak
Advanced vs. Auditory -0.337 0.337 0.250 Reject Ho
Correlation
Negatively Very
Advanced vs. Tactile -0.005 0.039 0.250 Accept Ho
Weak Correlation
Negatively Moderate
Proficient vs. Visual -0.595 5.782 0.250 Reject Ho
Correlation
Negatively Weak
Proficient vs. Auditory -0.335 2.777 0.250 Reject Ho
Correlation
Negatively Very
Proficient vs. Tactile -0.040 0.313 0.250 Reject Ho
Weak Correlation
Approaching Proficiency Negatively Very
-0.022 0.172 0.250 Accept Ho
vs. Visual Weak Correlation
Approaching Proficiency Negatively Moderate
-0.407 3.480 0.250 Reject Ho
vs. Auditory Correlation
Approaching Proficiency Very Weak
0.122 0.960 0.250 Reject Ho
vs. Tactile Correlation
Negatively Weak
Developing vs. Visual -0.202 1.610 0.250 Reject Ho
Correlation
Negatively Very
Developing vs. Auditory -0.120 0.944 0.250 Reject Ho
Weak Correlation
Negatively Very
Developing vs. Tactile -0.033 0.258 0.250 Reject Ho
Weak Correlation
Table 4 shows the test for significant relationship between the different learning
styles of the students and their level of English proficiency. This reveals that Advanced
level has negatively weak correlation on Visual learning style with r-value -0.245 this
relationship is significant since the computed t-value of 1.973 is greater than the critical
value 0.250. Correlation between Advanced level and auditory with r- value of -0.337 is
also negatively weak correlation id negatively weak correlation with t-value 0.337 which
is greater than critical value. Meanwhile, advance level vs. tactile learning style of the
respondents has negatively very weak correlation and tends to accept the null hypothesis
“there is no significant difference between advanced level and tactile learning style
having t-value of 0.039 which is greater than that of critical value of 2.5. Based on this
result, it can be inferred that respondents on the advanced level of English proficiency
has negative correlation on their learning style which means learning style of the
respondents does not affect directly on their level of English proficiency.
However, in the correlation between proficient level and visual learning style with
the r- value -0.595 with the negative moderate correlation with t-value of 5.782. While,
proficient and Auditory style with the r- value of -0.335 with the negatively weak
correlation with the t-value of 2.777. Hence, proficient and tactile with the r-value 0.040
with the negatively very weak correlation with the t- value 0.313. Also, the correlation
between approaching proficiency and visual with the negatively very weak correlation
with t-value of 0.172. Furthermore, approaching proficiency and tactile with the r- value
0.122 with very weak correlation with the t-value 0.960. Developing and visual with the
r- value -0.202 in a negatively weak correlation with t-value 1.610. Developing and
Auditory with the r- value -0.120 in a negatively very weak correlation with the t-value
0.944. Lastly, developing and tactile with r- value -0.033 in a negatively very weak
correlation in a negatively very weak correlation with r-value 0.258.
.
IV. Conclusions
Based from the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. The study revealed that the Grade 8 students sometimes manifest the
characteristics of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners.
2. In terms of the level of proficiency must of the respondents are mostly in
approaching proficiency in English. Only 9.52% are in the advanced level and 19.15
are in the beginning level. This indicates that they have differences in the levels of
proficiency.
3. The results of the study show that hypothetical stand is accepted which indicates
that there is no significant relationship between the respondents of learning styles
and L2 proficiency among the Grade 8 students. Since, the computed T-value is less
than the critical value.

III. Recommendations
Based from the findings and conclusions, the following is recommended:
1. According to the result of the study, among all the learning styles of the
students, visual learning style is the most effective method of the students
in learning in order to cope up with the subject. In this case, the visual
skills of the students must often be utilized in delivering a topic. He
teacher are able to create various activities for visual learners, so that the
students are able to use their knowledge in maximum content.
2. The study shows that the level of proficiency of the students was
advanced. Whereas, the different learning styles were applied to the
enhancement of students’ English language proficiency. To be more
specific, the four macro skills must be utilized effectively along with its
corresponding activities to create a meaningful knowledge.
3. The four macro skills must merge in a specific learning area in favor of the
life-long learning of the student.
4. The VAK (Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic) learning style are most preferred
by students to manifest in different activities for a meaningful learning.

IV. References
Alter, F. (2011). Exploring visual arts pedagogies that support critical and creative
thinking. Australian Art Education, 34(1), 10-29.
Aurora, S. (2014). The nature of learning styles and their relationship to performance in
children. Educational Studies, 2, 21±27.
Basti, A. (2014)."Behaviorally at-risk African-American students: The importance of
student- teacher relationships for student outcomes", Journal of School
Psychology. 45(1), 83-109.
Bostrom, L., & Lassen, L. M. (2016). Unraveling learning, learning styles, learning
strategies and meta-cognition. Education + training, 84.’
Briggs, A. (2014). The cognitive style index: A measure of intuition±analysis for
organisational research. Journal of Management Studies, 33, 119±135.
Cheema, I. (2014). Cognitive styles: An overview and integration. Educational
Psychology, 11, 193±215.

Cohen, Steven D. & Wolvin, Andrew D. (2012) Listening to Stories: An initial
Assessment of Students Listening Characteristics. Listening Education, 2/2011
pp. 16-25.
Cox and Kojima (2014) Comparison of eleven major learning styles models: Variables,
appropriate populations, validity of instrumentation and the research behind
them. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 6, 203±222.
Cresswell J.W, Plano Clark VL (2011) Designing and conducting mixed method
research. 2nd Sage; Oaks, CA: 2011.
Curry, L. (2014). Integrating concepts of cognitive or learning style: A review with
attention to psychometric standards. Ottawa, ON: Canadian College of Health
Service Executives.
Curry, E. D. (1983, 1987). Patterns of learning styles across selected medical specialities.
Educational psychology, 11, 247±278.
Cutolo, A., & Rochfor, R. A. (2017). An analysis of freshman learning styles and their
relationship to academic achievement. College Quarterly, 10(2).
Daley, C. E. (2014). Using learning styles to predict foreign language achievement at the
college level. System, 28.

Kendra (2019). Different Learning Styles in Learning
English.https://learning.ucmerced.edu/sites/learning.ucmerced.edu/files/page/doc
uments/learningstylequestionnaire.pdf
Diseth, A., & Martinsen, O. (2013). Approaches to learning, cognitive style, and motives
as predictors of academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 23(2).
Durmuscelebi, M. (2013). Examining candidate teachers’ learning styles by some
variables. International Journal of Academic Research. 5 (3). 210-19. Retrieved
from Ebscohost. Web. 17. Oct. 2014
Ely and Alvarez (2014). Learning style theory: Less than meets the eye. Academy of
Management Review, 5, 445±447.
Ennis, R. H. (2011). Critical thinking: Reflection and perspective, part 1. Inquiry: Critical
Thinking across the Disciplines, 26(2), 4-18.
Entwistle, N. J., & Tait, H. (2015). The Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory.
Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction, Edinburgh: University of
Edinburgh.
Felder, R.M., & Dietz, E.J. (2014), "The Effects of Personality Type on Engineering
Student Performance and Attitudes", Journal of Engineering Education, 91(1),
3–17.
Fishbein (2010). A factor analysis of expectancy Value theory. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 52, 753±759.
Freedman, R. D., & Stumpf, S. A. (2014). 'A Study of Learning Styles, Teaching Styles
and Vocabulary Teaching Strategies in Chinese Primary School- How Do They
Differ and How Can They Be Integrated?".
Geiger, et al (2014). Cognitive system principles of levelling and sharpening: Individual
differences in visual time-error assimilation effects. Journal of Psychology, 37,
105± 122.
Giggs, J. & Dunm, P. (2014). Learning C with Adam. International Journal on E-
Learning, 4 (3), 337-350.
Griss, S. (2013). The power of movement in teaching and learning. Education Week
Teacher. Retrieved from www.edweek.org.
Grub, S. (2011). Learning and studying: A research perspective. London: Routledge.

Hanssen, C. S. (2014). Learning style in ̄uences students' examination performance. The
American Journal of Surgery, 176, 62±66.Learning Styles 443
Hills, J. S. (2014). Cognitive Style Interest Inventory. Bloom®eld Hills, MI: Oakland
Community College Press.
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York:
Basic Books.
Jian-Ping, L. (2013). Is Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition Feasible to EFL Learning?
ELT , 6 (10), 245-251.
Junar, D. (2015)."Building Relationships with Challenging Children", Educational
Leadership, 61(1), 60-63.
Kiefer, A. (2014). "One size doesn't fit all: Achieving accountability through application
of learning patterns". In R.R. Sims & S.J. Sims (Eds), "Learning styles and
learning a key to meeting the accountability demands in education", (pp.211-
226). New York: Nova Science.
LdPride,n.d. (2009). What are learning styles? Retrieved from
http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm.
Letteri, C. A. (2015). Cognitive pro®leÐbasic determinants of academic achievement.
Journal of Educational Research, 73, 195±199.
Li and Xin (2014) A comparison of learning styles between gifted and non-gifted high
school students. Childhood Education, 83.
Li, J., & Qin, X. (2013). The relation of learning styles to language learning outcomes:
An empirical study. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1).
Loo, R. (2014). Evaluating change and stability in learning stylesÐa methodological
concern. Educational Psychology, 17, 95±100.
Marzano, R.J., & Marzano, J.,S & Pickering, D.J.(2013), "Classroom Management that
Works", Alexandaria, VA: Association for supervision and curriculum
development and Vocational Education Students" , Education, 125(4), 527.
McCarthy (2014) The development of an inventory to assess the learning styles of adults
with learning difficulties.Journal of Intellectual Disabilities
Merci, G. (2014). The development of an inventory to assess the learning styles of adults
with learning difficulties.Journal of Intellectual Disabilities.

Murillo (2015). On qualitative differences in learningÐoutcomes and processes. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4±11.
Neely, R. O., & Alm, D. (2013). Meeting individuals needs: A learning style success
story. Clearing House, 66(2). International Journal of English Linguistics Vol. 7,
No. 5.
Park, C. C. (2014). Learning style preferences of Armenian, African, Hispanic, Hmong,
Korean, Mexican, and Anglo students in American secondary schools. Learning
Environment Research, 4(2)
Pearson, J. T. E. (2014). Researching students' learning: Approaches to studying in
campus±based and distance learning. Buckingham: Society for Research into
Higher Education and Open University Press
Peck,S. (2011). Learning styles and strategies in adult immigrant ESL students. In M. J.
Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 118-125). Boston,
Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Pritchard, A. (2014). Ways of Learning: Learning Theories and Learning styles in the
Classroom (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Putintseva, R. J. (2016). Cognitive styles analysis. Birmingham: Learning and Training
Technology. On the nature of cognitive style. Educational Psychology, 17,
29±49.
Rafieyan, V., Majid, N. B., & Eng, L. S. (2013). Relationship between Attitude toward
Target Language Culture Instruction and Pragmatic Comprehension. ELT , 6
(8), 125-132.
Reid, J.M. (1987). The learning style preferences of ESL students.
[Electronic version] Tesol Quarterly. 21(1), 87-110. Retrieved December 2011,
from http://lwtoefl.ielp.pdx.edu/internal_resources/tutor/level_1_regular/
Learning_Style_ESL%20_%20Reid.pdf
Reid, M. J. (2018). The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly,
21(1).
Rezler, R. J., & Rezmovic, S. (2014). The relationship between cognitive style and
personality in further education students. Personality and Individual Differences,
23, 379±389
Reza,P. (2014), " Language Learning Style Preferences: A Theoretical and Empirical
Study, Advances in Asian Social Science (AASS). Vol. 2, No.2.
Richardson, M. D. (2007). A matter of style: Looking at L2 teachers’ teaching styles
from the perspective of learning style. Linguagem& Ensino, 10(1)

Riding, R. J., & Buckle, C. F. (2014). Learning styles and training performance.
Shef®eld: Training Agency.
Rodrigo, V., Greenberg, D., & Segal, D. (2014). Changes in reading habits by low literate
adults through extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 26(1), 73.
Rossi (2014). The relationship between cognitive style and intelligence. Educational
Psychology, 14, 413±425.
Shoval, E., and Shulruf, B. (2011). Who benefits from cooperative learning with
movement activity? School Psychology International. 32 (1). 58-72. Retrieved
from Ebscohost. Web. 17. Oct. 2014.
Stebbins, C. (2014). Cultural- specific perceptual- learning- styles preferences of
postsecondary students of English as a second language. In M. J. Reid (Ed.),
Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 108-117). Boston,
Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Santiago, F. (2015), Learning style preferences of southeast Asian students. Urban
Education, 35(3).
Shakib,S.(2013), "Learning Styles Preferences of Iranian EFL High School Students",
International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature.Vol.2, No.4.

Tai, F.. (2013), "Adult EFL Students’ Preferred Learning Styles and Motivation", The
Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 9, No. 2.
Taylor, E. M. (2014). Imagery performance and prose comprehension in 7 year old
children. Educational Studies, 2, 21±27.
Tompkins, G. E. (2005). Language Arts Patterns of Practise (6. edition). New Jersey:
Pearson Publishing.
Vaseghi, etal., (2013) Learning styles and elementary school ESL. In Learning styles in
the ESL/EFL classroom, edited by J. Reid. Boston, MA: Heinle & Henle.
Wong, L.L.C & Nunan, D. (2011), "The learning styles and strategies of effective
language learners". System, Volume 39, Issue 2, 144–163.
Zou, D. (2016). "Learning Strategies in Adult Migrant Education", National Centre for
English Language Teaching and Research, Sydney.

Appendices
MENCHIE P. BANQUELES
Brgy. Pagsangahan Sa Francisco Quezon
Contact No.09504183462
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Age : 33 years’ old

Date of Birth : November 6, 1986
Place of Birth : San Francisco, Quezon
Gender : Female
Citizenship : Filipino
Religion : Roman Catholic
Father’s Name : Romulo Banquiles
Mother’s Name : Rosario Banquiles
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT:
Tertiary : Manuel S. Enverga University Foundation Catanauan, Inc.

Bachelor of Secondary Education (2019-up to present)
Secondary: Pagsangahan National High School (2000-2005)
Primary: Pagsangahan Elementary School (1995-2000)
TRAINING/SEMINAR ATTENDED:
March 22 – April 18, 2018 Practice Teaching In-Campus

MSEUF Catanauan
Brgy. 09 Catanauan, Quezon
January 27, 2018 Seminar on “Current Trends in Research
Writing in Education”
Education Department
EU Gymnasium
Catanauan, Quezon
February 21, 2018 Career Fair 2018
Guidance Office
MSEUF Gymnasium
Catanauan, INC.
October 17, 2017 GOAL SETTING: “Shoot for the Moon and
Land with the Series”
College Department
MSEUF Third Floor
Catanauan, INC.
October 18, 2017 8th Regional Students’ Congress with the theme
“Communicating Across Generations”
cum Wellness and Physical Literacy.
College of Education
Lucena, City
Manuel S. Enverga University Inc.

Catanauan, Quezon
September 18, 2019
ISABEL P. ROGEL
Head Teacher I
Tagabas National High School
Dear Madam:
Greetings of Peace!
I, Menchie P. Banqueles, undergraduate student of MSEUF Catanauan is currently

conducting a study entitled “RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLES AND
ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY AMONG GRADE 8 STUDENTS IN
TAGABAS NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL”. This is a partial requirement for the course
Bachelor in Secondary Education.
In line with this, I would like to request permission to conduct a survey in your school.
Your accommodation will certainly help realize the objectives of the study.
Rest assured that all the information gathered will be treated with strict confidentiality
and shall only be used to serve the purpose of the study.
Thank you very much for your accommodation.
Respectfully yours,
MENCHIE P. BANQUELES
Researcher
Endorsed by
MELCA D. CABANGGANGAN
Department Head/Research Adviser
Relationship of Learning Styles and English Language Proficiency
Among Grade 8 students in Tagabas National High School
Respondent’s Questionnaire
Dear Respondents,
The undersigned is currently working on her undergraduate thesis which aims to identify
the “RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE
PROFICIENCY AMONG GRADE 8 STUDENTS IN TAGABAS NATIONAL HIGH
SCHOOL”in this regard, may I request you to answer the questionnaire below?
Rest assured that whatever information that you will provide will be treated with utmost
confidentiality and shall only be used for the purpose of this study.
MENCHIE BANQUELES
Researcher
PART I: Different Learning Styles in Learning English

Directions: Please rate the statements to identify the different learning styles in learning English
by checking the space that corresponds to your answers. Be guided by the scales below.
Scale Verbal Interpretation

Often O
Sometimes S
Seldom S
Learning styles Often Sometimes Seldom

3 2 1
1. I can remember best by listening to a lecture that
includes information, explanations and discussions.
2. I prefer to see information written on the board and
supplemented by visual aids and assigned readings.
3. I like to write things down or take notes for visual
review.
4. I prefer to use posters, models, or actual practice
and
other activities in class.
5. I require explanations of diagrams, graphs, or visual
Directions
6. I enjoy working with my hands or making things.
7. I am skillful with and enjoy developing making
graphs and charts
8. I can tell if sounds match when presented with pairs
of
sounds.
9. I can remember best by writing things down several
times.
10. I can easily understand and follow directions on a
map.
11. I do best in academic subjects by listening to
lectures and tapes.
12. I learn to spell better by repeating words out loud
than by writing the words on paper.
13. I can understand a news article better by reading
about it in the newspaper or online rather than by
listening to a report about it on the radio or internet.
14. I chew gum, smoke or snack while studying.
15. I think the best way to remember something is to
picture it in my mind.
16. I learn the spelling of words by “finger spelling”
them.
17. I would rather listen to a good lecture or speech

than
read about the same material.
18. I am good at working and solving jigsaw puzzles
and
mazes.
19. I prefer listening to the news on the radio or online
rather than reading about it in a newspaper or on the
internet.
20. I prefer obtaining information about an interesting
subject by reading about it.

Learning Style Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Learning Style Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Learning Style Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 1

Research Title: Relationship of Learning Styles and L2

Proficiency among Grade 8 Students in

Tagabas National High School

Researcher: Menchie P. Banqueles

Degree : Bachelor in Secondary Education

Specialization: Major in English

Research Adviser: Melca DG. Cabanggangan

and the level of proficiency in English of the respondents were determined.

Descriptive-survey method was employed and purposive sampling procedure was

used in selecting the student-respondents. In addition, to achieve the objectives of the

students of Tagbagas National High School of 63 student-respondents. Hence, the study

hypothetical stand is accepted which indicates that there is no significant relationship

Keywords: Learning styles, English, English Proficiency, Level of Proficiency

A. Rationale of the Research

individual differences in pedagogical contexts in to account.

position to empower students by showing them how to empower themselves.

significance of English leads to a bookish, stilted language with an unimaginative tone

Furthermore, while the application of English by a Filipino learner creates a feel of

Tagabas National High school is facing a dilemma today due to changing

environment. Today, students tend to be easily distracted by the surroundings. In that

B. Purpose of the Research

English Proficiency program.

Specifically, this study answered to the following questions:

2. What is the level of proficiency of the respondents in English?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the students’ learning styles of their

level of English proficiency?

This study is anchored on the following theories:

Theory of Motivational Interference

The theory of motivational interference has been introduced to study effects of

school–leisure conflict. Motivational interference is defined as the cognitive, affective,

and behavioral impairment of a chosen activity as a result of the motivational properties

of a non-chosen alternative (Curryl, 2014). It displays itself in phenomena such as

Thinking about alternative options is expected to impair learning. In a cross-sectional

attractive a non-chosen task was to the learner. Furthermore, there is experimental

performance of learning suffered and learning results were impaired. School–leisure

This theory implies that the notion of school–leisure conflict leading to

motivational interference can be reconstructed as a self-control dilemma denoting an

valences, which both are characterized by immediate as well as long-range consequences.

In school–leisure conflicts, self-control is needed because the pupil weighs an immediate

less attractive but important for the future.

According to Fischbein (2010) behavior is a function of the expectancies one has

media consumption and other non-media behaviors.

according to their expectations (beliefs) and evaluations”. Utilizing this approach,

positive or negative, toward an attribute or behavioral outcome (Grub, 2011).

This theory proposed that persons are differentially susceptible to motivational

value, valence, or valuing, used in integrative theories of motivation, such as the

Curry's Onion Model Theory

Using the way in which learning/cognitive style is measured to propose a layer-like

includes ``social interaction'' as a fourth layer. ``Instructional preference'' refers to the

individual's preferred choice of learning environment. It is described as the outermost

least stable level of measurement. Instruments cited as measuring instructional preference

VAK Model (Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic)

itself, as learning is a process whereby knowledge is created through the

Students tend to remember information well by actively participating in activities, field

experiences with materials. They love working on experiments in a laboratory and

alone they can remember information well.

learning styles and their English Proficiency.

an impact on performance and achievement of learning outcomes. Whilst and perhaps