The impact of learning styles on instructional method preferences
by Robatin, Ann K., Ph.D., CAPELLA UNIVERSITY, 2009, 104 pages; 3352382

Abstract:

Several research studies show that companies spend millions of dollars each year on training their employees. However, because learners have different learning styles, these companies often do not get a return on their training investment because the instructional methods they use do not always accommodate the needs of their employees. Taking learning style into consideration when developing training would please learners and promote their desire to learn. Potentially, this shift in methodology could promote knowledge retention and enduring on-the-job behavior change. A mismatch between learning style and instructional methodology can lead to wasted time and money for any organization. The study was based on the research question, “What types of training do learners with a particular learning style prefer?” To answer this question, the researcher employed a mixed-methods correlation approach consisting of survey and interview research to investigate the relationship between participants’ learning style and their preferred training delivery method. The findings of the study can be used to make recommendations for future training programs. This study was comprised of 5 hypotheses, each testing the relationship between learning style and the respondent’s instructional method preference. For each hypothesis, the chi-square test of independence resulted in the researcher’s inability to reject the null hypotheses. Therefore, the researcher concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish a relationship between highest level of education completed and preference for instructional method. However, trends in responses did indicate that with a larger sample size, a relationship may exist.

 
AdviserMichael H. McGivern
SchoolCAPELLA UNIVERSITY
SourceDAI/A 70-04, p. , May 2009
Source TypeDissertation
SubjectsAdult education; Labor relations; Curriculum development
Publication Number3352382
Adobe PDF Access the complete dissertation:
 

» Find an electronic copy at your library.
  Use the link below to access a full citation record of this graduate work:
  http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl%3furl_ver=Z39.88-2004%26res_dat=xri:pqdiss%26rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation%26rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3352382
  If your library subscribes to the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database, you may be entitled to a free electronic version of this graduate work. If not, you will have the option to purchase one, and access a 24 page preview for free (if available).

About ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
With over 2.3 million records, the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database is the most comprehensive collection of dissertations and theses in the world. It is the database of record for graduate research.

The database includes citations of graduate works ranging from the first U.S. dissertation, accepted in 1861, to those accepted as recently as last semester. Of the 2.3 million graduate works included in the database, ProQuest offers more than 1.9 million in full text formats. Of those, over 860,000 are available in PDF format. More than 60,000 dissertations and theses are added to the database each year.

If you have questions, please feel free to visit the ProQuest Web site - http://www.proquest.com - or call ProQuest Hotline Customer Support at 1-800-521-3042.