THE CAN THO UNIVERSTIY ENGLISH MAJORED FRESHMEN’ LEARNING STYLES AND THEIR TEACHERS’ TEACHING STYLES

CAN THO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

***

THE CAN THO UNIVERSTIY ENGLISH-MAJORED
FRESHMEN’ LEARNING STYLES AND THEIR
TEACHERS’ TEACHING STYLES

B.A. Thesis
Field of study: English Language Teaching

Supervisor
Nguyen Thanh Tung, M.A

Student
Nguyen Ngoc Cat Khuyen
Student’s Code: 7062944
Class: NN0652A2
Course: 32

Can Tho, April 2010


CONTENTS
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………. i
Abstracts…………………………………………………………………………….ii
List of tables ……………………………………………………………………...iii
List of figures………………………………………………………………………..v
Chapter 1: Introduction............................................................................................1

1.1. General statement of the problem .........................................................................1
1.2. Statement of research questions............................................................................3
1.2.1 Research aim ...............................................................................................3
1.2.2. Research question.......................................................................................3
1.2.3 Research hypotheses....................................................................................3
1.3. Definition of terms ...............................................................................................3
1.3.1. Learning styles ...........................................................................................3
1.3.2. Teaching styles...........................................................................................5
1.4. General organization and coverage of the study ...................................................5
Chapter 2: Literature Review ..................................................................................6
2.1. Related literature ..................................................................................................6
2.1.1. An Overview of learning styles and teaching styles ....................................6
Learning styles............................................................................................6
Teaching styles..........................................................................................11
2.2 Related studies ....................................................................................................12
2.2.1 Congruence between learning styles and teaching styles.............................12
The effects of match and mismatch between teaching styles and learning
style on students’ learning ...................................................................................12
The researchers’ remarks on the effects of the match or mismatch between
learning styles and teaching ones on students’ success in learning ............................13


Suggestion on overcoming of the mismatch between teaching styles and
learning styles ...........................................................................................................15
2.3. Justification of the present study ........................................................................17
Chapter 3: Research Methodology.........................................................................19
3.1. Research design .................................................................................................19
3.2. Description of subjects, instruments, and materials ............................................19
3.2.1. Subjects ....................................................................................................19
3.2.2. Research instruments................................................................................19

3.2.3. Questionnaires..........................................................................................20
3.2.4. Interviews.................................................................................................20
3.2.5. Pilot the questionnaire ..............................................................................21
3.3. Research Procedures ..........................................................................................21
3.3.1. Questionnaires..........................................................................................21
3.3.2. Interviews.................................................................................................22
3.4. Description of measures employed .....................................................................22
3.4.1.Data Analysis..................................................................................................22
Chapter 4: Results...................................................................................................23
4.1. The results of learning styles and teaching styles................................................23
4.1.1. Learning styles .........................................................................................23
The visual learning style...........................................................................25
The verbal learning style ..........................................................................26
The logical learning style..........................................................................27
The physical learning style .......................................................................28
The social learning style ...........................................................................29
The solitary learning style.........................................................................30
The auditory-music learning style.............................................................31
4.1.2. Interview questions about learning styles..................................................31


4.1.3. Teaching styles.........................................................................................32
The visual teaching style ..........................................................................33
The verbal teaching style ..........................................................................34
The logical teaching style .........................................................................35
The physical teaching style.......................................................................36
The social teaching style...........................................................................37
The solitary teaching style ........................................................................38
The auditory-music teaching style ............................................................38
4.1.4. Interview questions about teaching styles ................................................39

4.2. Description of the results pertinent to research questions....................................40
4.3. Other findings ....................................................................................................41
Chapter 5: Discussion, Implications and suggestion for further research and
Conclusion ...............................................................................................................43
5.1. Discussion .........................................................................................................43
5.2. Implications .......................................................................................................44
5.3. Recommendations ..............................................................................................45
5.4. Limitations and Suggestion for Further Research ...............................................46
5.4.1. Limitations ...............................................................................................46
5.4.2. Suggestion for Further Researches............................................................46
5.5. Conclusions........................................................................................................47
Appendices ...............................................................................................................48
Appendix 1.....................................................................................................48
Appendix 2.....................................................................................................54
References ................................................................................................................59


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my appreciation to a number of people who helped
me to complete this study through their advice, encouragement, criticism and
suggestion.
I would like to offer my profound and greatest indebtedness to my thesis
advisor, Mr. Nguyen Thanh Tung, for his valuable comments, corrections and
constant encouragement in completing my thesis. Without his help, this study
would have hardly been made possible.
I am also thankful to my subjects, the teachers from English Departments and the
freshmen of bachelor of English Education, class 01 and 02, the freshmen of
bachelor of English Studies, classes 01, 02, 03, and 04. Without their help during
the data collection process, the research will never be finished.
Last but not least, I would like to show my deepest appreciation to my family

and my close friends, whose support and encouragement made me overcome all
difficulties in carrying out the thesis.


ABSTRACT
This study “the Can Tho University English-majored freshmen’s learning styles and
their teachers’ teaching styles” aims at identifying the most favorite learning styles
of the Can Tho University English-majored freshmen, the most favorite teaching
styles of their teachers, and the match or mismatch between the learning and
teaching styles. The subjects include 153 English majors at Can Tho University and
10 teachers who teach these classes (teach writing, speaking and listening, and
reading). The data were gathered from the questionnaires and interview questions.
It was found that the most favorite learning styles are the music-auditory, social and
verbal learning style, and the most favorite teaching styles are the social, logical and
solitary teaching style. Actually, the students and teachers all have the match
between the five teaching and learning styles including visual, verbal, physical,
logical and social style. The solitary and auditory –music style have the mismatch
between learning and teaching styles, in fact, this mismatch does not cause a big
problem. As a result, the Can Tho University English- majored freshmen’s learning
styles match with their teachers’ teaching styles. However, the mismatch (between
auditory-musical and solitary teaching and learning styles) needs to be considered.


TÓM LƯỢC
Bài nghiên cứu- sự phù hợp hoặc không phù hợp giữa phong cách học và phong
cách dạy của sinh viên chuyên Anh văn năm nhất và giáo viên dạy các sinh viên ñó.
Bài nghiên cứu này nhằm khảo sát phong cách học sinh viên ủng hộ nhiều nhất và
phong cách dạy mà giáo viên ủng hộ nhiều nhất. Dựa trên kết quả nghiên cứu thu
ñược, bài nghiên cứu còn tìm ra sự phù hợp không phù hợp giữa phong cách dạy và
học của giáo viên và sinh viên. ðối tượng nghiên cứu là 153 sinh viên năm nhất

khóa 35 chuyên ngành Anh Văn tại ðại Học Cần Thơ và những giáo viên dạy viết,
nghe-nói, và ñọc hiểu cho các lớp ñó. Người nghiên cứu ñã sử dụng bản câu hỏi lựa
chọn và những câu hỏi phỏng vấn ñể thực hiện nghiên cứu. Kết quả cho thấy, phong
cách học sinh viên ủng hộ nhiều nhất là phong cách âm nhạc- sự lắng nghe (musicauditory), xã hội (social) và ngôn ngữ học (verbal). Phong cách dạy giáo viên sử
dụng nhiều nhất là các phong cách xã hội (social), theo logic (logical) and ñộc lập
(solitary). Kết quả cho thấy mức ñộ ñồng ý ủng hộ các phong cách visual, ngôn ngữ
(verbal), thuộc hoạt ñộng cơ thể (physical), theo logic (logical) và xã hội (social)
giữa giáo viên và sinh viên nhìn chung là tương ñương nhau, chỉ có phong cách ñộc
lập (solitary) và âm nhạc- sự lắng nghe (music-auditory), là mức ñộ ñồng ý sử dụng
không phù hợp với nhau. Tuy nhiên sự không phù hợp này cũng không quá lớn. Do
ñó, có thể kết luận rằng phong cách dạy và học của giáo viên và học sinh tương ñối
phù hợp với nhau mặc dầu sự không phù hợp (phong cách âm nhạc- sự lắng nghe và
phong cách ñộc lập của giáo viên và học sinh) khá nhỏ nhưng cũng cần ñược chú ý.


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of learning style
Table 2: Descriptive statistic of visual learning style
Table 3: Descriptive Statistics of the verbal learning style
Table 4: Descriptive Statistics of the logical learning style
Table 5: Descriptive Statistics of the physical learning style
Table 6: Descriptive Statistics the of social learning style
Table 7: Descriptive Statistics of the solitary learning style
Table 8: Descriptive Statistics of the music- auditory learning style
Table 1’: Descriptive Statistics of teaching styles
Table 2’: Descriptive statistic of visual teaching style
Table 3’: Descriptive Statistics of the verbal teaching style
Table 4’: Descriptive Statistics of the logical teaching style
Table 5’: Descriptive Statistics of the physical teaching style

Table 6’: Descriptive Statistics the of social teaching style
Table 7’: Descriptive Statistics of the solitary teaching style
Table 8’: Descriptive Statistics of the music- auditory teaching style
Table 9: The comparison between teaching and learning styles


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: the chart of the learning styles
Figure 2: the chart of the teaching styles


CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In this part, the general statement of the problem will be first addressed. Then, statement of
the research questions, definition of terms, and general organization and coverage will be
presented.

1. 1 General statement of the problem
Each language learner has his or her own ways of learning and understanding new
information that the teachers give him or her. Moreover, each of them prefers different
methods for learning. And, the methods are often originated from their habits, their
schools or their families. In fact, the ways or methods of individuals have been
gradually subjected to a great deal of attention. Since Reid’s research on the topic of
learning styles was published in 1987, more and more researchers have paid much
attention to learning styles and discovered aspects related to ones, especially there are
a lot of studies about second language on this topic.
The studies on learning styles indicate that it is very helpful as well as useful
for teachers and students to take a different view of learning. Therefore, teachers can
use knowledge of learning styles in these studies for their classes. Among the

researchers, there are some famous ones such as Reid (1987), Rita and Dunn (1993),
and Felder (1995), Peacock (2001) and Zhenhui (2001).
In general, the teaching practices nowadays seem to have idealized view from
pedagogical aspects; however, the truth is that most of teachers are hardly aware of
their students’ learning styles. The teachers just focus on the way of giving lectures to
their students. Although establishing and identifying learning styles play an important
role in teaching, the teachers seldom identify how the students get their lessons, and
what ways they use to get knowledge from their lectures. Therefore, their unawareness
of learning styles causes some unanticipated consequences in students’ learning.
In general, students’ learning styles are considered as an insignificant factor in
teaching. However, without an evaluation, experienced teachers may misinterpret
students’ behaviors such as hyperactivity or inattentiveness. Hence, it’s very necessary
to obviously assess learning styles of students to accommodate different learners.

1


According to Felder (1996), when students learn in class, they partially prove
their abilities. In addition, they show their learning styles quite clearly when studying.
Besides, the results of their studying often indicate the learning styles as well as the
lecturers’ teaching styles. For many years, the researchers have studied the
relationship between teaching and learning styles. They have proved the effects of
match and mismatch between the teaching and learning styles on students’ learning.
Among the researchers who had views regarding this aspect, Peacock (2001)
determines that a mismatch causes learning frustration, failure and demotivation. In a
class where a mismatch occurs, the students get bored and inattentive. Thus, they do
not get good results on the tests, and they even quit the course. Furthermore, the
teachers may feel disappointed with their students, and may suppose that they do not
have good ability in teaching (Oxford et al, 1991). Besides, other researchers have
claimed that matching teaching and learning style improves learning, attitudes,

behavior, and motivation (Willing 1980; Reid 1987, Spolsky 1989; Hyland 1993;
Felder 1995; Oxford et al. 1991; Kinsella 1995; Nelson 1995; Tudor 1996 and Jones
1997). For some research above, the researchers partly showed the consequences or
effect of mismatch between students’ learning styles and teachers’ teaching styles. To
conclude, the mismatch and match between teaching and learning styles play an
important role to determine students’ learning success.
The educators have paid lots of attention to the relationship of teaching and
learning styles. However, except for some researchers such as Peacock (2001), Maria
and Mahela (2007), for many research about learning styles, the majority of
researchers such as Almasa, Parilah and Fauziah (1985), or Almasa, Parilah Mohd and
Fauziah (2009) principally focus on the students’ learning styles, and investigate the
origin of learning styles titled Perceptual of Learning Style of ESL Students. Also,
Reid (1987) did a research named The Learning Style Preferences of ELS Students.
The limitation of these studies above was that they didn’t mention the match between
teaching and learning styles meanwhile the match plays an important role to decide
the students’ results of studying.
Can Tho University has recently applied the credit-based curriculum. With this
system, the students are considered to be centered in their learning process. Thus, they
need to find out their good points, that is, what styles belong to them. Especially, if
the first- year students can find out and know their own learning styles at the
beginning of their course, the teachers can base on students’ learning styles to apply
2


suitable teaching methods and motivate students to learn. As a result, the mismatch
between teaching and learning styles can be avoided, so we can also stay away from
some bad results that the mismatch causes.
For those reasons above, the researcher would like to conduct a research on the
learning styles, teaching styles and the match between them. And I name my research
as “The CTU English-majored freshmen’s learning styles and their teachers’

teaching styles”.

1.2 Statement of research questions
1. 2.1 Research aims
In this research, I want to investigate (1) learning styles that are mostly
favored by the CTU English-majored freshmen, and (2) teaching styles that are mostly
favored by their teachers. Also, I want to answer the question (3) Do the CTU
English-majored freshmen’s learning styles match or mismatch with their teachers’
teaching styles?
1.2.2 Research questions
-

Which learning styles are mostly favored by the CTU English-majored
freshmen?

- Which teaching styles are mostly favored by the CTU English-majored
freshmen’s teachers ?
- Do the CTU English-majored freshmen’s learning styles match or mismatch
with their teachers’ teaching styles?
1.2.3 Hypotheses
In this study, I hypothesize that (1) social learning style, physical learning style
and visual learning style are mostly favored by the CTU English- majored freshmen,
(2) social teaching style, physical learning styles and solitary teaching style are mostly
favored by the CTU English-majored freshmen’s teachers, and (3) the CTU Englishmajored freshmen’s learning styles match with their teachers’ teaching styles.

1.3 Definition of terms
1.3.1 Learning styles

3

There are numerous definitions about “learning styles”. According to Reid
(1995) cited in Maria (2007), learning style is said to be internally based
characteristics of individuals for intake of understanding of new information.
In other words, each language learner has his or her own peculiarity when he or
she studies. The peculiarity relates to the learning process that he or she acquired from
time to time. Perhaps, this person prefer visual presentation while that person likes to
take part in role-plays or do experiments to study, even others tend to work in groups
to discuss or work individually to study. Although they all have different learning
styles, they all expect to get good results for their studying. Besides, Reid (1995) also
cited in Peacock (2001) that learning styles are a student’s natural, habitual, and
preferred way(s) of absorbing, processing, and retaining new information and skills.
This definition is the most common one during the time. This definition indicates that
the origin of learning styles, habits, natural available features and preferred ways were
incorporated during the studying process.
According to Arthur (1993), learning styles are mental processes and
instructional settings that every student uses effectively when he or she learns. He
mentioned that learning styles were the mental processes and instructional settings
which helped students gain good effects on studying. Besides, Irvinc & York(1995)
cited in Suleiman, Mahmoud (1996) that the term learning styles was a generic term
that included three distinct styles or substyles: cognitive, affective, and physiological.
According to Adey, Fairbrother et al. (1999) cited in Cheng-Yi (2004), learning
styles were thoughts of as persistent learning strategies which were operated across all
subjects’ areas.
Moreover, Keffe (1979), Willing (1988) and Spolsky (1989) once stated that:
Learning styles were cognitive and affective traits that were relatively stable indicators of
how learners perceived, interacted with, and responded to the learning environment; learning
styles are natural, habitual, and preferred ways of learning. Learning styles are a clear,
comprehensible and coherent set of likes and dislikes; learning styles were identifiable
individual approaches to learning situations.

In other words, learning styles are the cognitive and affective ways that
students have from nature or their habit or even preferred ways; and they are also the
ways that they found approach to their studying.

4


Learning styles, defined by researchers, are the students’ preferred ways
originated from their habit or characteristics. Also, learning styles are the preferred
ways which are suitable for students or their ability. Hence, the students themselves
get lessons easily with their own ways when studying.
For those definitions above, it is noted that all definitions of learning styles are
equally significant in meeting the unique demands of the learning/teaching situation.
If teachers are aware of the variables affecting learning, it is useful for educators and
teachers.
1.3.2 Teaching styles
There are some definitions related to teaching styles.
According to Galton et al. (1980), teaching styles are a set of teaching tactics.
Similarly, Seidentop (1991) defines that teaching styles are instructional format.
Physical Education also states that teaching styles are the general pattern created by
using a particular set of strategies (from Teaching Styles in Physical Education and
Mosston’s Spectrum, retrieved 15:43, 111 August 2007 (MEST). It is obvious that
these definitions of teaching styles are slightly different in the way they are stated, but
not the nature itself. Therefore, it can be concluded that teaching style refers to
teaching styles as a set of teaching tactics.
Thanks to the researchers’ ideas, teaching styles can be understood as
follows. Teaching styles depend on teachers, each of whom has his own teaching
styles that he experienced from the way he learned best, or he believes he can help
their students get lessons well.

1.4 General organization and coverage of the study
This thesis consists of five chapters.
Chapter 1 covers the general statement of the problem, the research aims, the
research questions and the hypotheses as well as the organization of the thesis.
Chapter 2 presents related readings, related literature, related studies, and
justification of the present study.
Chapter 3 provides the research design, subjects, research instruments, and
procedures of the study description of measures employed.
Chapter 4 addresses the analysis and synthesis collected from the instruments.
Chapter 5 includes discussions, limitations, pedagogical implications,
recommendations, suggestions for further research, and conclusions.

5


CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter will be about related literature, related studies, and justification of the
present study.

2.1 Related literature
2.1.1 An Overview of learning styles and teaching styles
Learning styles
There are three theories about learning styles by Gardner (1983), Reid (1987),
and Felder and Silverman’s.
Gardner (1983) asserts that there are at least seven modalities or intelligences
that link to our individual styles. He suggests that humans can be verbal/linguistic,
logical/mathematical, visual/spatial, bodily/kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, and

intrapersonal intelligence. He believes that these seven intelligences are independent;
they develop at different times and to different degrees in different individuals. In fact,
the strongest skills of many students lie in these seven areas. If students have chances
to learn through their strengths, they may get successful in learning all subjects even
“basic skills”.
Actually, this theory was originally designed for Multiple Intelligences in
humans generally not in a classroom application. However, it not only was supported
by a lot of educators but also got large adaptation in educational settings.
In general, each student has his or her own strengths and weaknesses in the
classroom. Gardner’s research enabled to point out that and helped to improve
students’ ability in any given intelligence. On the basis of his theory, many schools
have documented the use of MI (i.e., Multiple Intelligences) in their instructional
design to adapt their lesson plans and classroom activities to accommodate these
various styles. One specific school is the Key Learning Community, formerly known
as the Key School, a part of the Indianapolis Public School. Gardner (1983) was wellregarded for his theory of different learning styles. He developed a theory on the
different ways that individuals learned and processed information. According to his
theory of Multiple Intelligences, students may show stronger learning skills in any of

6


seven different style categories. Besides, some people have strengths in several areas,
while others may find that they learn predominantly through a single style.
In combination with Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences,
Memletic Learning Styles Inventory has been prepared in Memletics Accelerated
Learning Manual book by Sean Whiteley published by advanogy.com 2003). It also
differentiates seven learning styles according to the types of the theory of multiple
intelligences including visual (spatial), aural (auditory-musical), verbal (linguistic),
physical (kinesthetic), logical (mathematical), social (interpersonal) and solitary
(intrapersonal).

To understand clearly about these learning styles, the researcher give a small
summary of learning styles by basing on the theory of these learning styles from
theory of Multiple Intelligences.
(1) Visual/spatial: learners of this style prefer using pictures, images, and
spatial understanding. These learners are able to acquire maps, reading, charts,
drawing, mazes, puzzles, imagining things and visualization well. Therefore, they
prefer drawing, building, and designing, creating and looking at pictures. They learn
best through working with pictures and colors, visualizing, using the mind’s eye and
drawing. Legos, videos, movies, slides, art, imagination games, mazes, puzzles, and
illustrated books are required to help these learners study well.
(2) Verbal/linguistic: learners of this style prefer using words both in speech
and writing. These learners are able to acquire lessons by writing, reading,
memorizing dates, thinking in words, telling stories well. Therefore, they prefer
writing, reading, telling stories, talking, memorizing, and working at solving puzzles.
Besides, they learn best through hearing and seeing words, speaking, reading, and
writing, discussing and debating. Books, tapes, paper diaries, writing tools, dialogues,
discussion, debate, and stories are necessitated to help these learners study well.
(3) Auditory/musical: learners of this style prefer using sound and music. These
learners are able to acquire sounds, melodies, rhythms and songs, lectures. Therefore,
they prefer singing, playing an instrument, listening to music. Besides, they learn best
through rhythm, singing, melody, listening to music and melodies. Moreover, they
tend to listen in classes, they learn best through listening to the instructions from
teachers. These learners need songs, lectures, and instructions to study well.

7


(4) Logical/mathematical: learners of this style prefer using logic, reasoning
and systems. These learners are able to acquire lessons well through math, logic,
problem-solving, reasons, and patterns. Therefore, they prefer questioning, working

with numbers, experimenting and solving problems. Besides, they learn best through
working with relationships and patterns, classifying, categorizing, and working with
the abstract. They demand for things to think about and explore such as science
materials, manipulative and so on.
(5) Bodily/kinesthetic: learners of this style prefer to use body language, hands
and sense of touch. These learners are able to acquire lessons well by acting, taking
part in activities such as role-plays, dramas. Therefore, they prefer moving around,
touching, talking and using body language. Besides, they learn best through touching,
moving, knowledge through bodily sensations, processing. Role-plays, dramas,
movement, sports and physical games, tactile experiences, and hands-on learning are
required to help them study well.
(6) Social/interpersonal: learners of this style prefer to learn in groups. These
learners are able to lead, organize, understand people, communicate and resolve
conflicts. Therefore, they like to talk to people, have friends, and join in groups.
Besides, they learn best through comparing, relating, sharing, interviewing and
cooperating. Group work, group games, social gatherings, community events, clubs,
mentors/apprenticeship are necessitated to help them study well.
(7) Solitary/intrapersonal: learners of this style prefer to work alone and use
self- study. These learners are able to recognize their own strengths and weaknesses,
set goals and understand themselves. Therefore, they prefer working alone, pursue
interests. Besides, they learn best through working alone, having space, reflecting,
doing self-paced projects. They need secret places, time alone, self-paced projects,
and choices to help them study.
According to Reid (1987), learning styles are of six types:
(1) Visual learners prefer seeing words or ideas in writing, e.g. reading
handouts or from the board or in workbook. It is better for them to understand
information and instructions by reading them. These learners don’t need as much oral
explanation as auditory learners, and they can learn by themselves with their books.
Taking notes of lectures and oral directions is helpful for them to remember
information.

8


(2) Auditory learners prefer listening, that is, oral explanation, discussions, or
debates. They may read aloud to remember information, especially when they learn
new materials. They learn best through hearing audio tapes, lectures, discussing and
making tapes to listen to, and conversing with their teachers.
(3) Kinesthetic learners prefer active participation/experiences; that is, dramas
and role-plays. They learn best through classroom experiences. When they actively
take part in activities such as role- plays or dramas in the classroom, they can
remember information well. A combination of stimuli helps them learn better. For
example, an audiotape combined with an activity will help them understand new
materials.
(4) Tactile learners prefer hands-on work; that is, handling materials or taking
notes. They can learn best through hands-on experiences with materials. They can
show their strengths when working on experiments in a laboratory, handling and
building models, touching and working with materials. Besides, they can remember
information better by writing notes or instructions. Moreover, making something for
class projects, building something and involving in related activities help them
understand new information.
(5) Group learners prefer studying with others. Group interactions help them
learn better. They learn more easily when they study with at least one other student,
and they learn best through working with others. They value both group interaction
and class work with other students.
(6) Individual learners prefer studying alone, that is, self-directed study or
independent reading and study. They learn best through working alone. The successful
learning situations for them are to think and work by themselves. They understand
information and make better progress in learning when they work by themselves.
According to Felder and Silverman, there are eight learning styles: sensory,

intuitive, visual, verbal, active, reflective, sequential and global.
(1) Sensory learners prefer concrete, practical, and procedural information.
They look for the facts.
(2) Intuitive learners prefer conceptual, innovative, and theoretical information.
They look for the meanings.

9


(3) Visual learners prefer graphs, pictures, and diagrams. They look for visual
representations of information.
(4) Verbal learners prefer to hear or read information. They look for
explanation with words.
(5) Active learners prefer to manipulate objects, do physical experiments, and
learn by trying. They enjoy working in groups to figure out problems.
(6) Reflective learners prefer to think things through, to evaluate options, and
learn by analysis. They enjoy figuring out a problem on their own.
(7) Sequential learners prefer to have information presented linearly and in and
orderly manner. They tend to put together the details in order to understand the big
picture emerges.
(8) Global learners prefer a holistic and systematic approach. They see the big
pictures first and then fill in the details.
From the above theories, there are different researchers with various theories of
learning styles. Gardner’s (1983) theory and Reid’s (1987) theory are similar to each
other. Although they use the different terms for determining learning styles, both of
them mentioned visual, auditory (musical), kinesthetic (bodily), individual
(intrapersonal) and group (interpersonal). However, Gardner’s theory is more
comprehensive than Reid’s because Gardner adds two more learning styles about
logical (mathematical) and verbal (linguistic). Reid does not mention these learning
styles. In Reid’s theory about learning styles, she specifies tactile and kinesthetic

learners as two types of learning styles, in fact, they are similar as one. Actually,
tactile and kinesthetic are also connected with the sense of touch; learners with these
two learning styles all prefer active participation, experiences or hand on works. Reid
(1987) distinguishes learning styles into six types; however, they nearly include five
types because the tactile and kinesthetic are as in one. In general, both Reid and
Gardner’ theories help students or learners identify their strengths or weaknesses to
learn best. In addition, the teachers can base on their learning styles to accommodate
with teaching styles. Nevertheless, Gardner’s theory is more comprehensive and
idealized with 7 learning styles than Reid’s. Felder and Silverman’s theory is rather
strange; this theory is not as common as the two theories above.

10


Teaching styles
Not all professors approach teaching in the same way. Major differences exist
depending upon academic discipline, class size, and on individual instructor
preferences. The Indiana State University Center for Teaching and Learning has
identified four teaching styles:
a) Formal teachers are those who have a formal authority teaching style and
tend to focus on content. This style is generally teacher-centered, where the teacher
feels responsible for providing and controlling the flow of the content and students are
expected to receive the content. Teachers of this style are not as concerned with
building relationships with their students. They don’t care that their students form
relationships with other students. These teachers do not usually require much
students’ participation in class.
b) Demonstrator teachers are those who tend to run teacher-centered classes
with an emphasis on demonstrating and modeling. Teachers of this type act as a role
model by demonstrating skills and processing and then as a guide in helping students
develop and apply these skills and knowledge. Teachers with this teaching style are

interested in encouraging students to participate in and adapt their presentation to
include various learning.
c) Facilitator teachers are those who have a facilitator model teaching style and
tend to focus on activities. This teaching style emphasizes on students-centered
learning. Teachers typically design group activities which necessitate active learning,
student-to-student collaboration and problem solving. These teachers often design
learning situations and activities that certainly require students to process and apply in
creative and origin ways.
d) Delegator teachers are those who have a delegator teaching style and tend to
place much control and responsibility for learning on individuals or groups of
students. They will give students a choice designing and implementing their own
complex learning projects and act in a consultative role. Students are often to ask to
work independently or in groups. And, they must be able to maintain motivation and
focus for complex projects.
However, the researchers have suggested that teachers often have their own
teaching preference, influenced by their own learning style preference. Both Reid
(1995) and Willing (1988, p.6) cited in Peacock (2001) suggest that all teachers have
11


their own teaching styles, which can be identified. On the origin of teaching styles, it
has been proposed that teachers teach in the way they were taught and learned best
(Chu et al. (1997)) or emulate teachers they admired (Peacock (2001)).
All in all, teaching styles depend on teachers, they has their own teaching styles
that they experienced from the way they learned best, or they believe they can help
their students get lesson well.

2.2 Related studies
2.2.1 Congruence between learning styles and teaching styles
The effects of match and mismatch between teaching styles and learning

styles on students’ learning
During times, the researchers have done a lot of studies to investigate the
reasons of bad results in students’ studying. For example, the tests are too difficult or
the teachers give bad lectures or the study program is not suitable for the students'
degrees. Beside those reasons above, another reason found by other researchers is the
match between learning and teaching styles. This problem is quite strange and a little
bit delicate because it related to the teachers’ teaching. In fact, teachers have their own
teaching styles. They mostly believe that their teaching styles are useful for their
students. However, they do not suspect that their teaching styles may not match with
their students’ learning styles. The problem may arise when the mismatch between the
teaching styles and learning styles occurs. Thus, the effects of the match or mismatch
between learning and teaching styles were indicated by some researchers.
Among the authors that have done studies related to this topic are:
Peacock (2001) studied the correlation between learning and teaching styles
based on Reid’s hypothesis. Also, he found that learners favored kinesthetic and
auditory and disfavored individual and group styles, while teachers favored
kinesthetic, group and auditory styles. Besides, Peacock (2001) is one of the
significant and influential researchers who explored the match between teaching and
learning styles in the real setting. Especially, his study (2001) investigated whether the
second of Reid’s hypothesis “a mismatch between teaching and learning styles causes
learning failure, frustration, and demotivation” is right or not. For his work, by using
questionnaires combined with interviews, he proved this hypothesis to be right when
investigating 206 EFL students and 46 EFL teachers at Hong Kong University. He

12


determines that serious mismatches exist between students’ learning styles and
lecturers’ teaching styles. Moreover, his study was the basic foundation for other
researchers when they studied about the effects of match or mismatch between

learning and teaching styles.
Zhenhui (2001) analyzed the matching teaching styles with learning styles in
East Asian context. For his study, he diagnosed learning styles and developed selfaware EFL learners. Especially, he confirmed that if the teachers are aware of the
students' needs, abilities, and their learning styles, they can base on the ways which
students like to study and help them develop their strength by altering the teachings
styles to have a teacher-student style matching. Therefore, the effective matching
between teaching and learning styles can be achieved.
Maria and Mahela (2007) studied about the crossroad between learning and
teaching styles. For their study, they found that the learning styles of first level
students matched with their teachers’ teaching styles in a private university in
Colombia. This match was investigated by using questionnaires to identify the
learning and teaching styles, also other instruments. They also showed that the match
helped to motivate students’ process of learning.
These research above studied the congruence between learning styles and
teaching styles. The effects of match and mismatch between the learning styles of
students and the teaching styles of the instructors are also shown in these research. To
identify more about this point, the researcher can have a view of these following
researchers’ remarks related to the effects of the match or mismatch between learning
styles and teaching ones on students’ success in learning of other researchers.
The researchers’ remarks on the effects of the match or mismatch between
learning styles and teaching ones on students’ success in learning
Reid (1995) says that matching teaching styles with learning styles give all
learners an equal chance in the classroom and build students’ self- awareness. She also
determines that when teachers can balance their teaching styles with students’ learning
styles, students can get teachers’ methods suitable with their learning styles. It means
that teachers should provide students’ demands, and give an equal chance in
classrooms.
According to Oxford et al (1991), when mismatch occurs in class, students tend
to be bored and inattentive, do poorly on tests, and get discouraged about the course.
13

Hence, teachers may conclude that their students are not good at the subjects of the
course and they may want to give up teaching. As a result, the mismatch influences
students’ studying and teachers’ psychology. According to Kumaravadivelu (1991;
98) cited in Zhenhui (2001), if the students have chances to have interpretation in
class and the teachers try to pay attention to students’ desires, the results of students’
learning will be better. In other words, there is a match between teachers and learners
that leads to get expected outcomes in teaching and learning.
Brown (1994) confirms that when students’ learning styles are matched with
appropriate approaches in teaching, it’s helpful for students’ motivation in learning.
Therefore, the achievement will be increased. Basing on the result of a meta-analysis
of 42 experimental studies, Dunn et al. (1995) claims that students who were taught
by an approach compatible with their learning styles study better than those whose
learning styles were not matched with teaching styles. Students’ learning styles
suitable to teaching styles have better results than those who have unsuitable styles. If
the students can be taught in manner they preferred, it is easier for them to get lessons.
In a similar vein, Griggs and Dunn (1996) claimed that students get good results in
learning and have positive attitude towards learning if the methods were compatible
with their preferred learning styles. Similarly, Claudia and Regan (2008) stated that
students learn best when they are taught in ways that matched their ways of learning
(Stanberry & Azria, 2001; Mahlios, 2001; Ogden, 2003; Lovelace 2005). In brief, the
match between teaching styles and learning styles helps students learn best and obtain
better results. To conclude, teaching styles approach to learning styles or the match
between teaching and learning styles can motivate students in learning. Also, students
will have positive attitude towards learning.
Those remarks above are also a great deal of theoretical support for the idea “a
mismatch between teaching and learning styles causes learning failure, frustration, and
demotivation” (this is one of five Reid’s hypotheses (1987). It is also proved to be
right in Peacock (2001) which is cited above.

Besides, a number of authors propose that mismatches often occur and have
bad effects on students’ learning and attitudes to the classes (Reid, 1987; Cortazzi,
1990); Felder, 1995; Ehrman, 1996; Jones, 1997). Felder adds that students get bored,
do poorly on the tests, get low grades and even may quit the course. Many have also
claimed that matching teaching and learning styles improves learning, attitudes,

14


behavior, and motivation (Willing, 1980; Spolsky, 1989); Felder, 1995); Reid, 1987).
For all evidences above, the mismatch between teaching and learning styles not only
effect students’ learning attitudes but also the learning results.
Thanks to the researchers’ ideas, the effects of match and mismatch between
teaching and learning styles can be understood as follows. When mismatches exist
between learning styles of most students in a class and the teaching styles of the
professors, the students may become bored and inattentive in class. The students may
have bad results on their tests, get disappointed with the courses, and even want to
quit the course because they do not find any motivation to study. Furthermore, the
professors would face students’ boredom, low grades and unresponsive or hostile
classes, even dropouts and so on. As a result, teachers may have poor expression on
their students, or they also become bored and don’t want to pay attention on students’
learning. They even begin to wonder if they are in the right profession, whether they
have enough capability to teach. Most seriously, society loses potentially excellent
professionals. For those evidences above, we can affirm that the mismatch can cause
bad effects on students’ learning and their attitudes to the class, even the teachers also
get the consequences of their psychology as well as the students’ results in studying.
Suggestion on overcoming of the mismatch between teaching and learning
styles
For many unexpected consequences of mismatch between teaching and
learning styles, it’s very serious for the education generally if this situation

continuously happens and doesn’t have any ways to solve. However, some researchers
also give methods to avoid the mismatch, and to overcome the effects of mismatch
between learning styles and teaching styles on students’ success.
According to Felder (1995: 27), one method for overcoming mismatch is a
balanced teaching style. It means that teachers should accommodate all learning
styles. If teachers identify the students’ learning styles and control their teaching
methods or styles compatible with their students’ ones, the mismatch will be avoided
(Reid, 1987:101; Melton, 1990; Oxford et al., 1992; Hyland, 1993; Chu et al., 1997).
Also, to stay away from the conflicts between teachers and learners, Willing (1988:
88) agrees and asserts that teachers should balance teaching and try to give methods
approachable with learning styles. On the other hand, Ehrman (1966:129) suggests
gradually building and increasing array of options for class and homework, the

15


teachers should encourage their students with array of options. However, this option
might follow the arrangement that suits the students’ abilities, not too difficult or not
too easy to avoid students’ boredom or disregarding. To do this, teachers need to
identify the students’ learning styles and find the ways to match with them. Will
(1988: 23) warned that we had to respect teachers’ styles because adopting an
unfamiliar style can reduce effectiveness. Moreover, among many researchers, Reid
(1987) represented the importance of assessing the students learning styles. She
affirmed that learning a second language or a foreign language requires time, it’s a
meticulous process. Knowledge is built up for a long time not in a short time.
Therefore, the lecturers should be careful or patient in teaching to improve attitude
towards learning, and it’s very helpful for teachers to accommodate and encourage the
learning styles. The teachers should rely on their students' learning styles to apply to
teach in order to help them learn best with their own styles. Furthermore, the teachers’
responsibility is to create a favorable learning environment that will accommodate

learners with different learning styles.
Besides, Felder (1996) suggests the way to overcome the mismatch that
professors should balance instructional methods (i.e., try to teach students exclusively
according to his or her preferences). If there is the balance between teaching and
learning, students can be satisfied with the preferred methods teachers partly taught,
they will be motivated to study and get achievements. However, if the students are
taught partly in less preferred manner, they don't get the lesson well as the preferred
one.
In conclusion, the congruence is that when students and teacher styles are
better matched, students are likely to work harder both in and outside the classroom
and also to benefit much more from their EFL/ESL classes. Such studies have proved
that it’s necessary to match teaching styles of lecturers and learning styles of students
to increase competency of teaching and learning. The importance of the relationship
between teaching and learning is an active process, and they go hand in hand with
each other. It is realized that teachers themselves play an important role to be able to
enhance their effectiveness and enable students to achieve their full potential (Forest
(2004). Many researchers have studied the match between teaching and learning, they
assert that the mismatch between teaching and learning are continuous and also exits
in the education and training nowadays, and that makes a large influence on students’
attitudes and motivation.
16