Advances in Asian Social Science (AASS) 441

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2012, ISSN 2167-6429

Copyright © World Science Publisher, United States
www.worldsciencepublisher.org

Language Learning Style Preferences: A Theoretical and

Empirical Study
1
Reza Vaseghi*, 2Afsaneh Effatdokht Ramezani, 3Reza Gholami
1
Department of Language and Humanities Education, Faculty of Educational Studies, University Putra Malaysia
2
Department of ELT, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Bangi
3
Department of Language and Humanities Education, Faculty of Educational Studies, University Putra Malaysia
Email: r.vaseghi@hotmail.com
Abstract - Learners’learning style has been one of the most important factors SLA researchers have focused on. However,
Learners’learning styles have been ignored and have been considered as an insignificant component in the learning process.
This paper aims at describing learning styles models, in particular Reid’s Perceptual Learning Style Preference
Questionnaire (PLSPQ) and review the past studies conducted on learning style. Furthermore, the paper discusses some
pedagogical implications which show how learning styles are important. Finally, it concludes and examines the gaps which
exist in the literature for further study.

Keywords –Learning Style; Learning Style Models; ESL/EFL Learning Style Preferences

1. Introduction visual learner. If on the other hand, you prefer to learn it by

listening you are an auditory one (Slavin, 2000).
In the last five decades, the topic of learning styles has
been of considerable interest in the administrative and Acquiring and processing of information by learners
organizational science, as well as the academic community. occurs in various ways. Their learning styles may be
Since its inception, several hundred articles, chapters, and influenced by their previous learning experiences, genetic
books have been written on the subject of learning style make-up, and culture. Some learners are more comfortable
(Reid 1987/1995; Dunn & Dunn 1972; Kolb 1984; Fleming with data and facts, while others prefer mathematical
2001). Each researcher begins his or her work by indicating models and theories. According to Felder (1996), some
the conceptual dilemma and methodological problem learners are visual and prefer to learn by charts, whereas
surrounding this concept and almost all indicate that little others like to learn by spoken explanations, and are called
agreement exists about what learning styles mean or how to auditory learners. In addition, some students like to learn in
adequately measure it. According to Benati and VanPatten group, while others prefer to learn individually.
(2010), learning styles have been studied from different
perspective. For instance, some researchers have tried to Even the learning styles of a family are different. The
find ways to measure and evaluate them, others have learning style of parents are completely different, children
looked into their classifications and meanings, and some of often get the learning style of one of them but not the
them have attempted to find the correlation between others. In addition, genetic and experience can help learners
learning styles with several factors such as gender, age, develop their own learning styles. Developmental elements
achievement, and culture. Therefore, learning style is an of learning styles are conformity or nonconformity,
important issue in learning. motivation, and a need for more and less structure.
Learning style preferences change over the time. Although,
2. Learning Style after a period, individual develops a strong style
preferences that help the learner to learn easily when taught
According to Gordon (1998), learning styles have effects with styles which complement those style preferences.
on educational process and how students perform. Dunn
and Griggs (1998) defined learning style as the attitude, Reid (1987:89) defines “perceptual learning styles” as
favorites, and conducts that learners utilize in their learning. the changes “among learners in using one or more senses to
Moreover, according to them, the learning method might understand, organize, and retain experience”. In this paper,
have a lot or a bit of differences. For instance, do you the terms “perceptual leaning style” and “learning style”
remember the name of a person if you see it written down? will be used interchangeably. Some researchers (Reinert
If you prefer to learn it by seeing the written name you are a 1970; Dunn 1983/1984; Garger &Guild 1984) have shown
that learners have four main perceptual learning channels:
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 442

1. Auditory learning: Listening to a person. they expected of highly motivated learners to learn and
2. Visual learning: Studying diagrams and pictures what the available resources were. To teach learners who
3. Tactile learning: “hands-on learning, e.g. building were less motivated, teachers could give them short
models”(Reid 1987:89). assignments.
4. Kinesthetic learning: experiential learning,
which is the physical participation in a learning Sociological stimuli group consists peers, self, pairs, and
situation. teams. Some learners preferred to learn in a team, whereas
some liked to learn by themselves. Therefore, Dunn and
3. Reid’s Learning Style Model Dunn suggested that learners should be given the right to
select the ways to complete their assignments.
According to Reid (1995: viii), learning styles are
“individual natural, habitual, and preferred way(s) of Perception, intake, time, and mobility were the elements
absorbing, processing, and retaining new information and of the physical stimuli group. For example, learners learned
skills” She also showed that all learners have individual by different styles such as auditory, visual, tactile, and
characters regarding to learning processes. For example, kinesthetic styles. The suggestion was that teachers could
some learners may respond to hands-on activities, others identify learners’ perceptions, and develop instruction,
may favor visual presentations. It is clear that people learn which would help learners to learn based on their preferred
differently and these differences in learning abound learning styles.
ESL/EFL settings. In Reid (1987) study, six learning styles
referred to the Perceptual Learning Style preference. Finally, psychological stimuli group included analytic
vs. global, right vs. left-brain, and reflective vs. impulsive
According to her, Perceptual learning style preference elements. For example, global learners preferred to see the
refers to the perceptual channels through which students overall picture before they learned, whereas analytic
like to learn. These are divided into auditory (listening to learners could learn step by step without seeing the overall
lectures and tapes), visual (reading and studying diagram), picture.
kinesthetic (physical activity and movement), tactile
(hands-on, doing lab experiments), group (studying with 5. VARK Learning Styles Model
others or in group), and individual learning (studying
alone). Neil Fleiming (2001) proposed the VARK model.
Fleming (2001:1) defined learning style as “an individual’s
4. Dunn & Dunn Learning Styles Model characteristics and preferred ways of gathering, organizing,
and thinking about information. VARK is in the category of
Dunn (1990:353) defined learning style as “the way in instructional preferences because it deals with perceptual
which individuals begin to concentrate on, process, modes.” VARK means Visual (V), Aural (A),
internalize and retain new and difficult information”. Read/Write(R), and Kinesthetic (K).
According to Dunn and Dunn’s (1978/1992), a person’s
learning style could be determined based on 21 elements According to Fleming (2001), Visual learners like to
organized into five stimuli groups which were learn by maps, charts, graphs, diagrams, pictures,
environmental, emotional, sociological, physical, and highlighters, and different colors. Aural learners prefer to
psychological stimuli groups. Those stimuli groups affect learn by discussing the topics with their teachers and other
learner’s learning. students, explain new ideas to others, and use a tape
recorder. Read/write learners like to learn by essays,
There are different characteristics for learners which can textbooks, definitions, readings, and taking notes.
be matched to the four elements that are called Kinesthetic learners prefer to learn by field trips, doing
environmental stimuli group namely sound, light, things to understand them, laboratories, and hand-on
temperature and design when the learners are trying to approaches. Multimodal preference for an individual is
learn. For example, some learners prefer to learn in a quiet considered more than one learning style preference.
environment, while some learners like to learn while
listening to the music simultaneously. Teachers could 6. Perceptual Learning Style Preference
regulate the environmental elements based on the learners’ Questionnaire (PLSPQ)
preferences and provided a learning environment in which
the learners feel most comfortable. Perceptual learning style preference questionnaire in
Reid (1987) study was the pioneer for perceiving the
The emotional stimuli group included motivation, perceptual learning style preferences of ESL/EFL learners
persistence, responsibility, and structure elements, which at the university level. Learning style preferences include
are developed from their experiences. Learners had the Visual, Auditory, Tactile, Kinesthetic, Group, and
different motivational levels and could be differently Individual learning styles. As the name suggests, visual
motivated. For instance, teachers could exactly tell what learning style refers to the learning by seeing. Auditory
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 443

learning style refers to the learning through listening to provides a detailed review of many previous studies which
someone. Tactile learners like to learn through hands-on have been conducted on learning styles in general including
experiences (building models and working with vocabulary ESL and EFL learners’learning styles in different contexts.
puzzles). Kinesthetic learners prefer to learn by physical
activity and movement. Individual learners prefer to study A study by Reid (1987) examining 90 students’
alone. Group learners like to work and study in group. preferred types of learning styles who were joining a
Chinese university in the USA revealed that the participants
Reid (1987) investigated perceptual learning style preferred kinesthetic and tactile learning styles while they
preferences among non native speakers of English who did not prefer group learning style. Following Reid’s study,
studied in the U.S. She created a survey in 1984 called the Melton (1990) carried out a study involving 331 students
Perceptual Learning Style Preference questionnaire joining five schools in The People's Republic of China
(PLSPQ) which was constructed to identify preferences for (PRC). Findings showed that multiple learning styles
auditory, kinesthetic, visual, tactile, group, and individual including kinesthetic, tactile, and individual learning styles
learning styles. According to Reid (1987:91) before her were the students’preferred learning styles. In a survey
PLSP questionnaire, “there has been no published research distributed to 147 adult L2 immigrants in the US, Rossi-Le
that describes the perceptual learning style preferences of (1995) obtained results which were consistent with Reid’s
Non- Native English speakers (NNSs)” (1987) findings in the sense that the participants showed
preference of kinesthetic and tactile learning styles as their
Perceptual learning style preference questionnaire major learning styles. Another study by Sharifah Azizah
(PLSPQ) was done in 98 different countries. The learners and Wan Zalina (1995) among the Malay students in a
studied in 29 different fields and had 52 different language Malaysian tertiary institution displayed similar findings to
backgrounds. A total of 1,388 learners answered the the previous findings since individual learning style and
questionnaire: 154 were native speakers of English and kinesthetic and tactile learning styles were preferred by the
1,234 were non-native speakers of English. They were students, and added to these, other styles such as visual and
encouraged to answer the questionnaire as it applied to their auditory styles were the participants’preferences and group
study of English as a foreign language experience. Their learning styles were found their least preferred learning
answers showed that learning style may change as students styles.
progress in their studies ( in general, graduate students had Stebbins (1993) conducted a study employing the
different styles than undergraduate) and that these styles are Perceptual learning style preference questionnaire (PLSPQ)
directly related to gender, major field of study, class, native among 660 ESL students who were enrolled in eight
language, and the amount of time spent on learning university-affiliated intensive English programs and were
English. Questionnaire answers showed, for example, those coming from 63 countries. They were majoring in 92 fields
Spanish speakers chose group style as their minor or of study, and had 43 language backgrounds. It was
negative learning style. It is important to note, all these interesting that the results of Stebbins’ study were in
Spanish speakers were not all come from the same country. parallel with Reid’s (1987) findings in the sense that the
In addition, all other learners regardless of the language ESL students participating in this study strongly preferred
they spoke, age, or major field of study, had a negative kinesthetic and tactile learning styles more than native
attitude towards group learning style. English speakers and group learning was the least preferred
learning style by most native speakers of English and ESL
7. Review of Previous Studies on Learning students.
Styles
Furthermore, two other studies by Jones (1997) and Chu
As an interesting area for learning research, learning et al. (1997) which were conducted among 81 students of
styles have attracted a huge number of researchers who Chinese university and 318 Singaporean university students
have examined them from different angles. These studies respectively obtained similar results to the above mentioned
on learning styles in general and in the ESL and EFL studies as in both studies, the participating students reported
learners’learning styles in particular have emerged from a their preference of kinesthetic and tactile learning styles.
concern for identification and description of the features of However, results concerning their disprefered styles differ
effective language learners. Researchers’attempts or efforts since in the first study, the students did not prefer individual
to provide better understanding of effective language learning styles whereas in the second study, it was found
learning and learners have identified various learning styles out that other learning styles were disfavored by the
reported by students or observed by researchers in different participants.
learning contexts. They have investigated learning styles in
terms of their patterns or classes and sub-classes, learners’ Similar findings indicating that kinesthetic, tactile, and
preferred or most frequently used patterns in learning group styles were perceived as the major learning style
diverse language skills, etc. Such attempts or efforts seem preferences for ESL learners were obtained by Rosniah
to be of significance since they have contributed greatly to Mustaffa (2005) in her study carried out among Bachelor of
our understanding of learning. Therefore, this section Arts students in English language studies at Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia during eight months (two semesters).
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 444

The study also revealed additional results concerning the studies also have reveled results which go beyond these
participants’ visual, auditory, and incongruent styles as findings as neither did the learners reveal major learning
their minor learning styles. Other consistent results were styles nor did they report minor learning styles as their
those discussed by Riazi and Mansoorian (2008) who preferences. One of these studies is the one by AdiAfzal
surveyed the preferred learning styles of (N=300) Iranian Ahmad (2011) which aimed at identifying the learning style
EFL students who were studying English at EFL institutes preferences of 252 low level students at a local tertiary
in different cities in Iran as it was found that the auditory, institution. His findings showed that the students did not
visual, tactile, and kinesthetic learning styles were preferred have any major or even minor learning style preference. All
by students as the major styles and they chose the six learning styles were negative learning style preferences
individual and group learning styles as their minor styles. and among six learning styles, individual learning was the
least preferred learning style.
In line with these most commonly discussed findings
about learners’preferred learning styles as revealed in other Other studies on learning styles came out with different
studies, Alsafi (2010) investigated this area among 90 Saudi results showing that learners’preferred learning styles are
Second-year medical students at King Abdul-Aziz those which differ from the types of learning styles which
University, and revealed that in general, Kinesthetic, have been reported in the above studies. For example,
Auditory, and Tactile learning styles were preferred by the Akgün (2002) investigated the learning styles of 350
participants while they disfavored using visual, group, and randomly selected English learners in their optional
individual learning styles. In confirming part of the above courses, and 47% of the learners were women and 53% of
results about the most preferred learning styles for learners them were men. The study also involved almost 47
in diverse contexts, Hyland’s Japanese learners favored teachers. By employing an instrument developed by
Auditory and Tactile styles, and disfavored Visual and Willing (1988), the results indicated that the most preferred
Group styles (1993). Hyland also reports that senior learning styles of learners were concrete, communicative,
students favored kinesthetic style. Moreover, Trinidad authority-oriented, and analytical learning styles. The same
(2008) administered VARK Learning Preference Test learning styles were among teachers. However, two other
(Fleming 2001) to 298 students from Southern Illinois studies obtained findings which limited learners’preferred
University Carbondale and Ranken Technical College, and learning styles to those styles supporting auditory and
it was revealed that the highest number of the participants visual learning or only visual learning or even learner-
(227) estimated almost around (76.6%) preferred centered learning and teacher-centered. Landry (2001)
kinesthetic learning style. In applying Reid’s Learning investigated 101 full-time sworn law enforcement officers
Style Preference questionnaire as the main instrument for based on VARK learning style preference test. The results
data collection, Ong et al. (2006) determined the learning showed that the all students preferred VARK (Visual,
style preferences of Cohort 3 students of the B. Ed. (TESL) Aural, Read/Write, and Kinesthetic) as their most
Foundation course at Institut Perguruan Bahasa- preferences and the second preferences of them was
Antarabangsa (IPBA). Based on the findings, kinesthetic Read/Write that had an overall affect on the strength of the
learning was their major learning style. This means most of Multimodal preference. The study by Kara (2009) which
the students like to be active in the classroom. Auditory aimed at examining learning styles among (N=100) second
learning was the least preferred learning style. On the other year learners studying in ELT Department in Anadolu
hand, none of the subjects were verbal learners. University found out that the students liked visual and
auditory styles.
In contrast to the previously reviewed findings of
previous studies on ESL and EFL learning style In addition, Arslan (2003) aimed to evaluate learning
preferences, a few studies investigating the same research style preferences of the students in engineering departments
area in different contexts showed that some of the same at Middle East Technical University (METU). Results were
previously reported preferred learning styles as previously analyzed according to Felder and Silverman’s (1988).In her
discussed were selected as learners’negative learning styles study, 400 students were randomly selected among senior
in such studies. For instance, Mulalic et al. (2009a) studied engineering students. Results of the study revealed that
160 students at the Department of Language and engineering students were more active learners and heavily
Communication in University TenagaNasional. The sensing learners rather than intuitive. After deep
findings showed that those students preferred kinesthetic, consideration she found that the most learning style
individual and tactile learning styles as their negative preferences of the all engineering students were visual
preferences, and auditory, visual, and group learning styles learning. NuridaEsmail and NorzainiAzman (2010)
were their minor preferred. In the same way, the findings identified the learning styles of adult learners in non formal
obtained by Hariharan and Ismail (2003) from surveying education programs at selected Malaysian community
secondary school students in Kedah of Malaysia displayed colleges. A survey of 959 adult learners from 14
revealed that the students did not have any major learning community colleges was carried out to determine their
style. However, they selected kinesthetic and group as their learning styles using a modified version of Conti’s
minor learning styles and chose tactile, visual, auditory, and Principles of Adult learning scales. Results showed that the
individual learning as their negative learning styles. A few
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 445

adult learners preferred behaviors of learner-centered and Moreover, Shouhong Zhang (2002) surveyed (N=528)
teacher-centered styles. students in both multimedia and traditional classrooms
during spring semester 2002. This study used VARK
All previous studies previously presented almost focus learning style preference test. The results showed that 50%
on learning styles by exploring, identifying and examining of the students agreed with visual learning style and 30% of
them among learners who were not categorized into groups, them agreed with read/write learning style. A few students
but as learners who usually constituted one group in each agreed with kinesthetic and aural styles. The proportion of
study coming from. However, another body of previous students with a visual learning style or a read/write learning
research on learning styles has concentrated on this style was evenly divided between students in multimedia
interesting area where each study tended to categorize the classrooms and traditional classrooms.
participating learners into two or more than two groups
(based on their levels, majors or fields of study, etc) for the An exception to the evidence of the existing major
purpose of finding out the similarities and differences differences in learning styles among learners divided into
between such groups of learners in terms of their preferred groups according to their different majors or fields of study
learning styles. Such studies on learning styles have as reported by the above studies is the study by
established themselves as comparative studies. Cody (1983) SyafawaniHalim (2009) which investigated the learning
evaluated the learning style preferences of 240 students in style preferences of 80 first year students from the Faculty
grades five through (N=12) students who were categorized of Arts and Sciences (both field of study) in Universiti
in groups based on their IQ. This study was based on Dunn Kebangsaan Malaysia according to Reid. This is because it
and Dunn model. The results showed that the normal was revealed that there was no clear difference between
students had a strong need for a structure (studying in a both fields of study, but there was a small difference in
quiet and warm environment, knowing exactly what was major and minor preferences of group learning style.
required and late in the day).They were the least motivated Students from the Faculty of Arts liked to learn in groups,
group, and preferred to learn kinesthetically. Talented while students from the Faculty of Science preferred group
students needed less structure. They preferred to learn early style as their minor learning style preferences.
in the morning and in a moderate temperature. They
demonstrated a right-brain processing style. Most of the While most of the previously presented and discussed
talented students liked to study with music, in the evening, studies on learning styles focused on categorizing learners
and in a cool temperature. Also, they were more motivated into groups based on their college majors, a few studies
and preferred to learn visually. In another study by Tai examining learning styles concentrated on another criterion
(1999a), 209 traditional and nontraditional EFL students in of group categorization of the participating learners. For
junior colleges from five randomly selected schools in instance, the study conducted by Park (2000) investigating
Taiwan were selected for comparing their learning styles the perceptual learning style preferences (PLSP) of
according to Reid. The results showed that the most Southeast Asian students such as Cambodian, Hmong, Lao
preferred learning style was auditory and group learning and Vietnamese in comparison with the white students is a
styles, while visual and individual learning styles were as good typical example of such comparative studies. She
their least preferred learning styles. Traditional students studied 738 students and employed Reid (1987)
showed that they strongly agreed with visual and individual questionnaire. The Park study reported a significant
learning styles than nontraditional students. difference in the PLSP of Southeast Asian and White’s
students. The study also showed that Southeast Asian
Other comparative studies examined learning styles students preferred Visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and tactile
among students majoring different fields. For instance, as their major and minor perceptual learning style
Cythan (2008) studied on Preferred Learning Styles of preference as well as group learning. The strong preference
(N=20) students of Sciences and Art classes. The researcher for group learning style supports the notion that Asian
utilized the Perceptual learning style preference (PLSPQ) as students are more collaborative in their learning
an instrument to collect the data. The findings of this study (Ramburuth& McCormick, 2001).
showed that the minor learning styles for art students were
more variable compared to the science students. However, 8. Review of Previous Studies on the
those students did not prefer to study alone as proven by the Relationship between Gender and Learning
data collected. Shakarami and Mordziha(2009) investigated
30 graduate students from Industrial Management Styles
Engineering(IME) and Political Science(PS) at University
Putra Malaysia(UPM). The results showed that PS students Another important domain in which previous studies on
preferred tactile, auditory, group and kinesthetic learning as learning styles have significantly and greatly contributed to
their major learning styles, while visual, tactile, group, and assisted in increasing our understanding and enhancing
kinesthetic, and individual were the major learning styles of our knowledge of the importance of exploring and
IME students. Visual and individual learning were the identifying learners’ learning styles was the correlative
minor learning styles of PS students, whereas the minor body of research which has focused the attention on
learning style of IME students was auditory learning. investigating learning styles in relation or in correlation
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 446

with gender differences among learners. Such studies, Taiwan, Tai (1999a) found out that male and female
though, have been conducted to achieve the same aim; they traditional EFL junior college students differ in their
have obtained different results, thus, coming up with preferred learning styles; besides the auditory style, female
different conclusions. Some provided evidence of the students preferred the kinesthetic style, while male students
existing significant differences in learning styles according preferred group learning style. Generally, female
to their gender factor, and as reported by other studies, such nontraditional EFL junior college students preferred all
learning style did not differ significantly between males and learning styles more than male students. Dunn et al. (2001)
females. However, a few studies reported that gender did declared that learning styles of students will be different
not lead to any differences in using learning styles or both according to their gender. Summarizing their findings,
males and females were found to be using or applying Honigsfeld and Dunn (2006:3) stated, “globally speaking,
almost similar learning styles. Thus, this section of the in almost every study, the following results were revealed:
literature review is concerned with presenting and Adult males and females had significantly different learning
discussing the most important findings obtained by a styles from each other. For example, female students in
number of previous studies aiming at assessing the impact every nation were more auditory, motivated, persistent and
of gender on learners’preferred learning styles in different responsible (conforming) than their male counterparts”.
learning contexts. Similarly, Wehrwein (2007) also studied the learning styles
of physiology students (N=86) according to VARK. It
Almost most of these studies examining learning showed 87.5% of male students are multimodal, whereas
styles between males and females have revealed the only 45.8% of female students preferred multimodal.
existence of significant differences in learning styles Alumran (2008) investigated 877 college students at a
employed or utilized by the two different groups in Bahraini university for finding the relation between gender
different learning contexts. Dorsey and Pierson (1984) used and learning style preference. His sample included 265
Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory and found a major (30.2%) males and 610 (69.6%) females. Alumran
difference between male and female students learning style (2008:303) stated that “there were significant differences in
preferences. They studied 513 nontraditional students in learning styles according to gender. Males were more
Southwest Texas State University in the fall of 1982 and intuitive learners, whereas females were more sensing
understood that the dominant learning ability for males was learners”. Alsafi (2010) studied 90 Saudi Second-year
abstract conceptualization (AC) and for females was active medical students at King Abdul-Aziz University and used
experimentation (AE). Pettigrew and Zakrajesk (1984) Reid. The results revealed that male students preferred
indicated that male students preferred hands-on learning kinesthetic and auditory learning styles, while female
tasks, whereas female students preferred a well-organized students preferred visual, auditory, tactile, kinesthetic, and
presentation of course material. Yong and McIntyre (1992) group learning styles but no individual. Male students
used the Learning Style Inventory (LSI) based on Dunn and preferred visual, tactile, group and individual learning style
Dunn’s model to determine whether gender effect on the as their minor learning styles preferences.
learning style of learning disabled and gifted students in
grades 10-12. There were 53 learning disable students The second largest group of such studies examining
(28males and 25 females) and 64 gifted students (29 males learning styles between males and females have revealed
and 35 females). The results revealed that gender that the differences in learning styles employed or utilized
differences were found in preferences for mobility and by males and females in different learning contexts were
afternoon learning. In addition, Dunn (1993) found that not significant, but they were little or minor differences.
gender influence on learning styles preferences of Mexican According to Reid (1987), male students preferred tactile
and Anglo-American children in elementary schools. The and visual learning styles more than females. Isemonger
result revealed that Anglo-American and Mexican male and Sheppard (2003) following Reid (1987) and they have
students didn’t like auditory learning style. They preferred used a translate version of PLSPQ for 710 Korean students
to learn by tactile learning style, while female students at the Pusan University of Foreign Studies. Following
didn’t prefer this style. Other two studies by Philbin and Reid’s study, Melton in 1990 investigated 331 students'
Meier (1995) and Matthews and Hamby (1995) revealed learning style preferences at five schools in The People's
that there were significant differences in learning styles Republic of China (PRC).one of the learning style variables
between male and female students (Philbin and Meier was the students’ gender in this research. The results
1995), and that male learner’s preferred traditional revealed that female students were much more auditory
analytical learning, while female learners preferred than male students. Also, male students preferred tactile
nontraditional learning (concrete experience Matthews and (related to “hands on” activities, touching, drawing) and
Hamby (1995). The same two latter researchers also kinesthetic (doing activities, role playing) learning styles
concluded that male students preferred abstract and active more than female students. In the research of learning style
experimentation, while females preferred to generate ideas. preferences of Korean American, American, Anglo-
American, and Mexican students in secondary school, Park
In examining the gender impact on learning styles (1997b) found that among these groups, female students
among 209 traditional and nontraditional EFL students in strongly agreed with kinesthetic learning style more than
junior colleges from five randomly selected schools in male students.
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 447

stated that female students, in general were auditory and

Similar to these are the results by Thomas Young Tachie kinesthetic.
(2010) obtained from 1334 Junior High Schools students in
Ghana since it was found out that the female students A few studies supported the evidence of the existence of
preferred auditory learning style more than the male such minor or little differences in learning styles between
students, while the male students liked visual learning style males and females. Dobson (2009) studied the learning
more than the female students. Furthermore, testing style preferences of 1,037 undergraduate physiology
relationship between perceptual learning styles and some students by using VARK test. The results displayed that
factors that one of them was gender, Isemonger and male and female students were different in their learning
Sheppard (2003) revealed that female Korean students style preferences. Females preferred Visual (46%),
prefer group work and kinesthetic learning styles more than followed by Aural (27%), Read/write (23%, and
male students. Another study addressing the correlation Kinesthetic (4%), whereas, males preferred Visual at a
between gender and learning style is the study by Riazi and higher rate (49%), followed by Read/write (29%), Aural
Mansorian (2008) in which the data was collected by using (17%), and Kinesthetic (5%). In addition, Breckler and
Reid’s questionnaire (PLSPQ, 1987). The sample consisted others (2009) used VARK and found in their California
of 300 students that studying English at EFL institute. The study of physiology students (N=218) that there was very
results showed that male and female students had minor little difference between male and female learning styles.
preferences towards individual and group learning styles Generally, Visual (50.5%), Auditory (48.6%), Read/Write
and major preferences for auditory, visual, kinesthetic, and (64.7%, and Kinesthetic (69.3%) learning styles were as
tactile learning styles. Male students were interested in their preferred learning styles.
group learning style, while female students represented less
preference for these two learning styles specially the group The last category of such studies represents these few or
work. According to the results by PungWunChiew et al limited studies on learning styles in terms of gender impact
(2009) from Form 4 Arts male and female students, which have proved there were no differences in learning
auditory, group, and kinesthetic learning styles were styles between males and females or both groups employed
selected by female students whereas no major learning almost equal or similar types of learning styles. The first
styles were preferred by males. Partly as opposed to Park study standing out most obviously is the study by Baxter
(1997b), Mulalic et al. (2009a), adopting Reid’s PLSPQ Magolda (1992:217) which was carried out among 101
among (N=160) students in Department of Language and freshman (51 female and 50 male) students at a large mid-
Communication at University TenagaNasional, showed that western state university by using the Kolb Learning Style
male students preferred kinesthetic and auditory learning Inventory (LSI) found that” the percentage of men and
styles more than female students. women preferring each style was nearly equal and chi-
square analysis revealed no significant differences in
Carrying out his study among 693 college students learning style by gender”. In addition, Abdul Halim (2006)
(50.5% were male and 45.5% were female), Keri (2002) investigated (N=40) second year students of SMP
showed that male and female students do learn differently. Muhammadiyah andBatu. Based on the findings of the
Female students were more relational learners, while male research, there were three learning styles for females
students were more independents learners. Employing including group, individual, and tactile and group,
Canfield’s Learning Style Inventory (Canfield & Cafferty, kinesthetic, and individual learning styles for males.
1988:433),”most of the male students preferred to learn by Bidabadi and Yamat (2010) investigated 90 Iranian English
applied learning style (i.e., using everyday-life experiences as foreign language (EFL) Freshman University students.
as a basis for learning), whereas most of the female students They found that there was no significant difference between
liked abstract (i.e., where copious reading assignments are male and female students’learning style preferences. The
required, learning materials are organized ,and teachers’ last study is the same study by PungWunChiew et al (2009)
demonstrate knowledge)”. Keri (2002:437) concluded, which revealed that the least preferred learning style of both
“The common interest in terms of learning preferences males and females was individual learning. Honigsfeld and
between males and females is social; that is males and Dunn (2003) considered the effect of gender on learning
females (both) prefer to work with people, and associate styles of 1.637 countries such as Bermuda, Brunei,
with others on learning tasks” Reese and Dunn (2007) Hungary, Sweden, and New Zealand. They decided to
surveyed 1500 students in a private metropolitan university explore whether there were important main effects for
and used the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model. The gender and nationality, whether there were important
findings revealed that the students had statistical differences interactions between gender and nationality, and whether
in Sound, Light, Temperature, Motivation, and there were important country-specific differences in
Responsibility elements. The female students preferred learning styles by gender. The participants attended Grades
bright, light, warm temperature, formal seating, motivation, 7 through 13, depending on the local school system in their
and learning alone or with peers. They stated that male country or residence. In every nation except Brunei, they
students were more visual and needed more structure, sampled from typical middle-class schools.
mobility, and liked to study in afternoon and also they
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 448

In Brunei, there are different types of schools that design more self-motivated and responsible. Generally, male
by government. The numbers of high and low students preferred kinesthetic and peer oriented more than
socioeconomic schools were the same. In Bermuda, one female students and female students liked to be self
private and three government schools were selected. In motivated, persistent, comfortable and needed warmer
Hungary, New Zealand, and Sweden, public schools were temperatures, parent, and teacher motivation.
included. The researchers used the English or appropriate
foreign language (Hungarian, Malay, and Swedish) 9. Pedagogical Implications
versions of the Learning Style Inventory (LSI) for grades 5-
12 identified the learning style preferences of participants Different researchers have attempted to investigate
in the following subscales: Sound, Light, Temperature, learning style in their own context and the factors that
Design, Self-Motivation, Persistence, Responsibility, might promote students’learning. What can be concluded
Structure, Alone/Peers; Authority Figures, Several Ways, from the literature is that the researchers working in this
Auditory, Visual, Tactual, Kinesthetic, Intake (the need for area have reached a consensus on the importance of
food or drink); and Morning Versus Evening, Late learning styles and the key role it can play in fostering
Morning, Afternoon, Mobility, Parent Motivation, and one’s ability. Every learning style raises the success rate of
Teacher Motivation. To study whether there would be main each student especially when it matches with individual
effects for gender differences, main effects for country need. There are growing proofs in literature demonstrating
differences, and interaction effects for gender by country. that learning styles are one of the components of language
According to the MANOVA results, there were significant learning procedures (e.g., Cohen 2003; Ehrman & Leaver
effects on gender. 2003; Ehrman, Leaver & Oxford 2003; Oxford 1999;
Oxford, Ehrman & Lavine 1991).
The results of the compared female and male students
showed that male students preferred more peer interaction The more that teachers know about their students' style
rather than learning alone and more kinesthetic activities, preferences, the more effectively they can orient their L2
while female students on average needed higher instruction, as well as the strategy teaching that can be
temperatures and more self-motivated, parent motivated, interwoven into language instruction, matched to those
and teacher motivated; more persistent; and more style preferences. Some learners might need instruction
responsible or confronting. When adolescents’ learning presented more visually, while others might require more
styles were compared by country, significant and more auditory, kinesthetic, or tactile types of instruction. Without
substantial differences emerged for all learning style adequate knowledge about their individual students’style
variables except for auditory learning style. preferences, teachers cannot systematically provide the
needed instructional variety.
As a follow-up to the main effect and interaction
procedures, the researchers conducted tests of simple main In order to understand the importance in determining
effects for country and gender to identify the differences students’ learning styles, and also to accommodate for
within the levels of the other variable. Post hoc tests different learning styles in the classrooms, students should
confirmed that there were larger country differences complete a learning style instrument early in their course.
between the two genders than there were gender differences This would enable students to understand their own
among the five countries. The results revealed that male learning style as well as those of their classmates. Teachers
Bermuda students were tactual, kinesthetic, and peer should be aware that students learn differently, which
oriented, whereas female Bermuda students were self- should make them aware that they have to approach
motivated, teacher motivate, and persistent. Male Brunei teaching from different perspectives.
students liked to have more energy in the late morning,
whereas female Brunei students preferred to be more If learning styles theory applied in the schools and
parents motivated and auditory, more variety, and felt more universities curriculum can significantly improve student’s
energetic in the afternoon. academic achievement as have been shown in the review
of literature about learning styles. In today’s competitive
Male Hungarian students preferred background sound, learning environment it is vital that more holistic approach
whereas female Hungarian students liked to be more self- be employed to enhance student’s learning and as a result
motivated, teacher motivated, persistent, responsible, and improves student’s academic achievement.
authority-figure oriented. Male New Zealand students
preferred kinesthetic experiences, whereas female New 10. Conclusion and Areas for Further
Zealand students liked brighter illumination, warmer
temperatures, more responsible, and enjoyed learning Research
through a variety of ways more than their male
counterparts. In conclusion, teachers should take into consideration
the differences in learning styles among students and
Finally, male Swedish students preferred kinesthetic enhance students’learning strategies for their successful
learning style, whereas female Swedish students liked to be learning. When teachers are aware of the importance of
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 449

learning styles, they can provide a good map to their Akgün,I. 2002. ngilizce Kurslarına Devam Eden Kursiyerlerin Ö_renme
students. Moreover, it is important to enable students to be Stilleri, MA thesis. Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Alatis, J.E. 1980. TESOL: Teaching English to speakers of other
self-aware of both style and strategies. According to languages. In Grittner,F.M. (ED.), Learning a second language.
Stebbine (1995), students who know their learning style Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 88-103.
preferences are able to build their self-confidence that can Alsafi, A. 2010. Learning style preferences of Saudi Medical students.
Master thesis. Essex University. (online)
reinforce their willingness to be risk- takers.
http://www.essex.ac.uk/linguistics/dissertations/2010/docs/Alsafi.pdf
(19 August 2011).
The results of the research have shown that differences Alumran, J. 2008. Learning styles in relation to gender, field of study, and
do exist in learning styles among the students from different academic achievement for Bahraini University students. Individual
gender and such differences should be taken into account Differences Research 6(4): 303-316.
Arbaugh, J. B. 2000. ‘An exploratory study of the effects of gender on
when teaching foreign languages. Students have particular student learning and class participation in an Internet-based MBA
learning style preferences and these preferences may be course’. Management Learning 31 (4): 503-519.
different between male and female students. Some studies Arslan, B. 2003. A descriptive study on learning style preferences of the
provided evidence of the existing significant differences in Engineering students at METU, MA thesis. Middle East Technical
University, Ankara, Turkey.(online)
learning styles according to their gender factor. However, a http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12605465/index.pdf (5 July 2011).
few studies reported that gender did not lead to any Baxter, M.B. 1992. Knowing and reasoning in college: gender-related
differences in using learning styles or both males and patterns in students’ Intellectual Development. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
females were found to be using or applying almost similar
Benati,A.& VanPatten, B. 2010. Key terms in second language
learning styles. Although there are many factors that acquisition. London: Continuum.
influence learning styles, the role of gender is important for Bennnett, R. E., Gottesman, R. L., Rock, D. A. and Cerullo, F. 1993.
many researchers. Influence of behaviour perceptions and gender on teacher’s
judgments of student’s academic skill. Journal of Educational
Psychology 85(2): 347-356.
Despite the plethora of studies conducted on learning Bidabadi, F. & Yamat, H .2010. Learning style preferences by Iranian
styles, there are still some problems that need to be tackled EFL Freshman University students. Master thesis. Bangi: University
and some gaps can be seen in the literature which gives Kebangsaan Malaysia. (online)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281002035
avenue for further research in the area. One important point
5 (26 April 2011).
that is worth discussing is that in most of the research Breckler, J., Joun, D., &Ngo, H.2009. Learning styles of physiology
reviewed in the past studies, the researchers have employed students interested in the health professions. Adv Physiol Educ 33:
the Reid’s PLSPQ. Too much reliance on one single 30–36.
instrument and the overuse of this rather old instrument can Canfield, A. & Cafferty,J. 1988. Learning style inventory manual. Los
Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
be a cause for concern among those working in this area of Chamot, A.U. 2004. Issues in Language Learning Strategy Research and
research. Teaching. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 1(1):
14-16.
As well as students, teachers play a critical role in the Cythan, J. 2008. Preferred learning styles of form five students in SMK
Tambunan, Sabah, Bachelor Thesis. Universiti Kebangsaan
teaching/learning process. The researcher recommended Malaysia.
further investigation into teaching and learning styles. Cody, C. 1983. Learning styles, including hemispheric dominance: A
There is also a lack of research on high school students’ comparative study of average, gifted, and highly gifted students in
language learning styles. Further research related to their grades five through twelve. Doctoral dissertation, Temple University.
Cohen, A. D. 2003. The learner’s side of foreign language learning:
classroom learning styles should be done in order to Where do styles, strategies, and tasks meet? IRAL, International
improve the quality of high school education. Furthermore, Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 41(4): 279-
additional variables could also be investigated, while most 292.
of the previously presented and discussed studies on Dobson,J.2009. Learning style preferences and course performance in an
undergraduate physiology class. Adv Physiol Educ 33:308-314.
learning styles focused on categorizing learners into groups Dörnyei, Z. 2005. The psychology of the language learner: individual
based on their college majors, a few studies examining differences in second language acquisition. London: Lawrence
learning styles concentrated on another criterion of group Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Dunn, R. 1983. Learning style and its relation to exceptionality at both
categorization of the participating learners. Finally, there
ends of the spectrum. Exceptional Children 29: 496-506.
are some research studies that showed both group and Dunn, R. 1984. Learning style: State of the scene. Theory Into Practice 23:
individual learning styles are minor learning styles. This 10-19.
may reveal that students have unsure approaches towards Dunn, R. 1988. Teaching students through their perceptual strength or
the mentioned learning styles. Finding students’preferences preferences. Journal of Reading 31:304-309.
Dunn, R. 1999. How to implement and supervise a learning style program
towards both individual and group learning styles can be (On-line)
done in further studies. http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/1996dunn/1996dunntoc.htm
l (13 July 2011)
Dunn, R. & Dunn, K. 1978. Teaching students through their individual
References learning styles: A practical approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Reston
Book.
Ahmad,A. 2011. Language learning style preferences of Low English Dunn, R., Griggs, S., Olsen, J., Beasley, M., & Gorman, B. 1995. A meta-
proficiency (LEP) students in a tertiary institution. Malaysian analytic validation of the Dunn and Dunn model of learning style
Journal of ELT Research 7 (2): 33-62. preferences. The Journal of Educational Research 88(6):353-361.
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 450

Dunn, R. & Griggs, S.A. 1998. Multiculturalism and Learning Style: Oxford, R.L. 2003. Language learning styles and strategies: An overview.
Teaching and Counseling Adolescents. The USA: Greenwood Learning Styles & Strategies/Oxford,GALA.
Publishing Group, Inc. Oxford, R. L., Ehrman, M. E., & Lavine, R. Z. 1991. “Style wars”:
Dunn. R., Thies, A. P., & Honigsfeld, A. 2001. Synthesis of the Dunn and Teacher student style conflicts in the language classroom. In S.
Dunn learning-style model research: Analysis from a Magnan (Ed.), Challenges in the 1990s for college foreign language
neuropsychological perspective. Jamaica, NY: St. John's University. programs . Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. pp. 1- 25.
Center for the Study of Learning and Teaching Styles. Park,C.C. 1997b. Learning style preferences of Korean, Mexican,
Felder, R. 1996. Matters of Style. ASEE Prism 6 (4): 18-23 (On-line) ArmenianAmerican and Anglo-students in secondary schools.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/LS- National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP)
Prism.htm (15 August 2011). Bulletin 81(585): 103-111.
Felder, R. & Brent, R. 2005. Understanding student differences. Journal of Park, C. C. 2000. Learning style preferences of South-East Asian students.
Engineering Education 94(1): 57-72. Urban Education 35:245-268.
Felder, R. & Henriques, E. R. 1995. Learning and teaching styles in Pettigrew, F. & Zakrajesk, D. 1984. A profile of learning style preferences
foreign and second language education. Foreign Language Annals among physical education majors. Physical Educator 41(2): 85-89.
28(1): 21-31. Philbin, M. & Meier, E. 1995. A survey of gender and learning styles. Sex
Fleming, N. 2001. Teaching and learning styles: VARK strategies. Roles: A journal of research 32(7/8): 485-494.
Christchurch, New Zealand: N.D. Fleming. Philbin, M., Meier, E., & Huffmann, S. 1995. A survey of gender and
Garcia, R. 2002. Perceptual learning style preferences in the college learning styles. Sex Roles 7/8: 491.
English classroom. Master thesis. Mayaguez: University of Puerto Printrich , P. R.& Schunk, D. H. 2002. Motivation in education: theory,
Rico, (online) research, and application. (2nd Ed.). New Jersey: Merrill Prentice
http://search.proquest.com.www.ezplib.ukm.my/docview/230950985 Hall.
?accountid=41453 (20 June 2011). Pung Wun Chiew., Rosnah Mustaffa., & Faridah Rinong. 2009. Learning
Garger, S. & Guild, p. 1984. Learning style: The crucial differences. style preferences among Form 4 male and female Art students in two
Curriculum Review 23: 9-12. urban schools XXXVIII: 122-132.
Garland,K.J., Anderson, S.J., & Noyes JM. 1998. ‘The Internet as a Ramburuth, P. & McCormick, J. 2001. Learning diversity in higher
Learning Tool: A Preliminary Study’ paper given at the Iriss education: A comparative study of Asian international and
National Conference March 1998, Bristol. Australian students. Higher Education 4: 333-350.
Halim,A. 2006. The Differences of learning style preferences based on the Reese, V. & Dunn, R. 2007. Learning-style preferences of a diverse
gender in learning English at SMP Muhammadiyah & Batu. freshman population in a large private metropolitan university by
Undergraduate Thesis. University Muhammadiyah Malang. gender. J. Col Stu Retent 9(1): 95-112.
Harasyrm, P. H., Leong, E. J., Lucier, G. E., & Lorsheider, F. L. 1995. Reid, J. M. 1987. The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL
Gregoric learning styles and achievement in anatomy and Quarterly 21(1):87-111.
physiology. Advances in Physiology Education 13(1):s56-s61. Reid, M. J. 1987. Perceptual learning style preference questionnaire.
Hariharan ,N. Krishnasamy & Ismail Ibrahim .2003. Learning style Reid, J.M. (ed.) 1995. Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Boston:
preferences of Kedah secondary school students. research report, Heinle and Heinle.
UUM. Reinert, H. 1970. The Edmonds learning style identification exercise.
Honigsfeld, A. M. 2001. A comparative analysis of the learning styles of Edmonds, EA: Edmonds School District.
adolescents from diverse nations by age, gender, academic Riazi, A. & Mansoorian, M. A. 2008. Learning style preferences among
achievement level and nationality. Ph.D dissertation, Dissert Abstr Iranian male
Int, 62, 969. and female EFL students. The Iranian EFL Journal Quarterly 2: 88-100.
Honigsfeld, A.M. & Dunn, R. 2003. High school male and female (online)http://www.iranian-efl-journal.com/Iranian-EFL-Journal-
learning-style similarities and differences in diverse nations. The second-edition.pdf (20 June 2011).
Journal of Educational Research 96 (4): 195-204. Rosniah Mustaffa. 2007. “Stretching” ESL Learners Learning Styles: a
Honigsfeld, A.M. & Dunn, R. 2006. Learning-style characteristics of adult case studuy of first year undergraduates at UKM.GEMA Online
learners. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, (Winter) 72(2): 14-31. Journal of Language
Hyland, K. 1993. Culture and learning: a study of the learning style Studies.Vol.7(1).(online)http://www.ukm.my/ppbl/GEMA%20vol%
preferences of Japanese students. RELC Journal 24 (2): 69-91. 207%20(1)%202007/abs%20p1_32_v7(1).pdf(15 September 2011).
Isemonger, I. & Sheppard, C. 2003. Learning Styles. RELC Journal 34 (2): Rossi, L. 1995. Learning styles and strategies in adult immigrant ESL
195-222. students. In J.M. Reid (ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL
Jones, N.B. 1997. Applying learning styles research to improve writing classroom. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. pp.119-25.
instruction. Paper presented at RELC Seminar on Learners and Shakarami, A. & Mardziha, H. A. 2009. Language learning strategies and
Language Learning, Singapore, April 1997. styles among Iranian engineering and political science graduate
Kara, S. 2009. Learning Styles and Teaching Styles: a case study in students studying abroad. Academic Journals 5(2):035-045.
foreign language classroom. Turkey, Anadolu University. Sharifah Azizah Syed Sahil .& Wan Zalina Wan Din .1995. Students’
Keri, G. 2002. Male and female college students’learning styles differ: An preferential learning styles. research report , UUM.
opportunity for instructional diversification. College Student Journal Shouhong Zhang. 2002. Students’perceptions of multimedia classrooms at
36(3): 433-441. East Tennessee State University. Ph.D Dissertation, East Tennessee
Landry,J. M.2001. Learning Styles of Low Enforcement officers. Ph.D State
thesis, Capella University. University.(online)http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jses
LDPride.2010. Learning Styles and Multiple Intelligence (online) sionid=8A4DA28A1797DB9EE8F46(29 October 2011).
http://www.ldpride.net/html (30 May 2011) Stebbins, C. 1993. Culture specific perceptual learning style preferences
Matthews, D. B. & Hamby, J. V. 1995. A comparison of learning styles of of Post- Secondary students of English as a second language
high school and college/university students. The Clearing House (Master‟s Thesis, University of Wyoming).
68(4): 257-265. Sunderland, J. 1992. Gender in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal, 46, 81–
Melton, C.D. 1990. Bridging the cultural gap: a study of Chinese students' 91.
learning style preferences. RELC Journal 21 (1): 29-54. Syafawani Halim. 2009. The learning styles preferences of first year
Mulalic, A., Shah, P., & Ahmad , F. 2009a. Learning- style preference of students from the faculties of arts and sciences in UKM. Bachelor
ESL students. Asean Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Thesis. Universiti Kebagsaan Malaysia.
Education 1(2):9-17. Tai, F.M.1999. Preferred teaching styles of Taiwanese EFL teachers and
Ong, A., Rajendram, S., and Yusof, M. 2006. Learning style preferences preferred learning styles of traditional and nontraditional EFL
and English proficiency among Cohort 3 Students in IPBA students (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Dakota).(online)
(online)http://apps.emoe.gov.my/ipba/ResearchPaper/stdntseminar/p http://ir.lib.ksu.edu.tw/bitstream/987654321/3032/1/%25E8%25AB%2596
g23to36.pdf(7 July 2011) %25E6%2596%2587.pdf (11 may 2011)
Reza Vaseghi, et al., AASS, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 441-451, 2012 451

Thomas Young Tachie. 2010. Learning style preferences as predictor of

performance in science in public junior secondary schools in Ghana.
Thesis Master, University of Education, Winneba, Ghana.
Trinidad, O.C. 2008. Demographics and learning styles of Automotive
Technology Students. Thesis Master, South Illinois University.
Wehrwein,E.V.2007. Gender differences in learning style preferences
among undergraduate physiology students. Adv Physiol Educ 31:
153–157.
Willing, K. 1988. Learning styles in Adult Migrant education. Adelaide,
Australia: NCRC/AMEP.
Yong, F.L. & McIntyre, J.D. 1992. A comparative study of the learning Reza Vaseghi is currently pursuing his
styles preferences of students with learning disabilities and students Ph.D. degree in TESL at UPM. He taught English at language
who are gifted. Journal of Learning Disabilities 25(2): 124-132. schools in Iran. He also worked as a TA at Maziyar University and
(Online) http://ldx.sagepub.com/content/25/2/124.short (1 October lectured at Islamic Azad University of Amol. He serves as an
2011) editor and a reviewer for various journals and conferences. He has
Young Tachie, T. 2001. Learning style preferences as predictor of also published journal and conference papers and presented at
performance in Science in Public Junior Secondary schools in
national and international levels.
Ghana. Department of Science Education. University of Education,
Winneba, Ghana.