CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents review of literature relevant to the present study. This

consists of related studies, related literature and conceptual framework.

Related Literature

Learning Styles. Each student is unique. They differ in countless ways,

including physical characteristics, personalities, backgrounds, cognitive abilities,

experiences, learning preferences, and social development. Teaching experience and

recent research tell us each brain is distinctively wired and impacted by previous

experiences. With this knowledge, effective teachers know that learners cannot be

placed through same education hoops. Experience and research continue to provide

insights about the human brain. Each student is different, they have had exclusive

opportunities, and their brains are wired uniquely. So it‟s only reasonable that everyone

learns differently and has different likes, interests, preferences, and needs (Gregory,

2013).

According to Heacox (2012), students‟ strengths and preferences affect not only

the ease with which they learn but also how they can best represent what they know

and understand. Increasing the likelihood of student success means knowing where

your students are on the learning continuum so you can modify and adjust your plans to

respond to their needs.

Students learn and produce with greater ease when they‟re using an area of

strength. But keep in mind that multiple intelligences can be developed through practice.

Asking students to work in ways in which they‟re less able helps them strengthen these
intelligences and widen their learning repertoire. Not every concept must be taught in

nine ways, nor do all learning tasks and assessments need to match each student‟s

thinking strengths. But the more variety you offer students in the ways you ask them to

learn and show what they have learned, the greater the likelihood of reaching more

students.

Kendra (2015) stated that learning styles are a popular concept in psychology

and education that are intended to identify how people learn best. The popularity of this

concept grew dramatically during the 1970s and 1980s, despite the evidence

suggesting that personal learning preferences have no actual influence on learning

results.

It also states that people are more motivated and perform better activities that

match their learning styles. Therefore, it is important for teachers to be aware of their

students‟ preferred styles in order to take advantage of opportunities for student

learning. Sternberg reminds us that when students reject or do poorly on an

assignment, we should not necessarily assume that they are unmotivated or lack ability.

Learners have different preferred pattern of learning in which their interpretation

of concept and understanding of new information becomes easier to grasp and

understand. It is how they learn best. Others may comprehend easier through audio

form while others need hands-on experience to fully absorb a new concept.

It refers to the variations of ability to accumulate and assimilate information. It is

the method that best allows gathering and using knowledge in specific manners. In most

cases, the characteristics of a learning style can even be observed at a relatively young
age. Learning style refers to an individual‟s preferred method for approaching learning

and gaining knowledge.

Surprisingly, learning styles and multiple intelligences are complementary.

Learning styles pertains to how an individual absorb information, process information

and evaluate results while Multiple Intelligences focuses on the content of learning and

its relation to other disciplines. Yet both work together to form an integrated model of

human intelligence and learning. It both pictures intelligence and at the same time,

diversity.

Gardner offers us eight alternative intelligences: first is the Verbal/Linguistic:

reading, writing, speaking and listening, second is Logical/Mathematical: working with

numbers and abstract patterns, third is Visual/Spatial: working with graphic images,

mind mapping, graphic organizers, visualizing, drawing, and exploring the world of color

and art, fourth is Musical/Rhythmic: using rhythm, melody, patterned sound, song, rap,

dance, fifth is Bodily/Kinesthetic: processing information through touch, movement,

dramatics, manipulative, and using a variety of fine and gross motor skills in everyday

life, sixth is Interpersonal: sharing, cooperating, interviewing, relating, and brainstorming

with others, seventh is Intrapersonal: working alone, self-paced instruction,

individualized projects, and metacognitive thinking and lastly, the Naturalist: spending

time outdoors, sorting, classifying, and noticing patterns in the world (Gregory, 2013).

Moreover, Kolb Learning Style as cited by McLeod (2013), states that learning in

relation to learning style involves the acquisition of abstract concept is provided by new

experiences. Experiential learning style theory is typically represented by a four stage

Experience it is a new experience of situation is page 12 or a reinterpretation of existing

experience. Second is the Reflective observation of the new experience. Of particular

importance are any inconsistencies between experience and understanding. Third is the

abstract conceptualization is the reflection gives rise to a new idea, or a modification of

an existing abstract concept. Lastly is the active experimentation, the learner applies

them to the world around them to see what results. According to Kolb, knowing a

person‟s learning style enables learning to be orientated according to the preferred

method. That said, everyone responds to and needs the stimulus of all types of learning

styles to one extent or another- its matter of using emphasis that fits best with the given

situation and a person‟s learning styles preferences. Kolb developed four learning style

base on the learning theory they are; Diverging (feeling and watching), Assimilating

(watching and thinking). Converging (doing and thinking) and Accommodating (doing

and feeling).

Diverging (feeling and watching). These people are able to look at things from

different perspectives. They are sensitive. They are preferred to watch rather than do,

tending to gather information and use imagination to solves problems. They are best at

viewing concrete situations at several different viewpoints. Kolb called this style

„diverging‟ because these people perform better in situations that require ideas-

generation, for example, brainstorming. People with diverging learning style have broad

cultural interests and like to gather information. They are interested in people, tend to be

imaginative and emotional, and tend to be strong in the arts. People with diverging style

prefer to work in groups, to listen with an open mind and to receive personal feedback.
 Assimilating (watching and thinking). The Assimilating learning preference is for a

concise, logical approach. Ideas and concepts are more important than people. These

people require good clear explanation rather than practical opportunity. They excel at

understanding wide-ranging information and organizing it in clear logical format. People

with an assimilating learning style are less focused on people and more interested in

ideas and abstract concepts. People with this style more attracted to logically sound

theories than approaches based on practical value. This learning style is important for

effectiveness in information and science careers. In formal learning situations, people

with this style prefer readings, lectures, exploring analytical models and having time to

think through.

Converging (doing and thinking). People with a converging style can solve

problems and will use their learning to find solutions to practical issues. They prefer

technical tasks and are less concerned with people and interpersonal aspects. People

with converging learning style are best at finding practical uses for ideas and theories.

They can solve problems and make decisions by finding solutions to questions and

problems. People with a converging learning style are more attracted to technical tasks

and problems than social or interpersonal issues. A converging learning style enables

specialist and technology abilities.

Accommodating (doing and feeling). The Accommodating learning style is

“hands-on”, and relies on intuition rather than logic. These people use other people‟s

analysis, and prefer to take a practical, experiential approach. They are attracted to new

challenges and experiences, and to carrying out plans. They are commonly act on “gut”

instinct rather than logical analysis. People with an accommodating learning style will
tend to rely on others for information than carry out their own analysis. This learning

style is prevalent within the general population. Kolb explains that different people

naturally prefer a certain single different learning style. Various factors influence a

person‟s preferred style: notably in his experiential learning theory model (ELT) Kolb

defined three stages of a person‟s development, and suggests that our propensity to

reconcile and successfully integrate the four different learning styles improves as we

mature through our development stages. The development stages that Kolb identified

are: Acquisition, it is the birth to adolescence, development of basic abilities and

“cognitive structure‟s, specialization, the schooling, early work and personal

experiences of adulthood where the development of a particular specialized learning

style‟ shaped by „social, educational, and organizational socialization, Integration, the

mid-career through to later life it is the expression of non-dominant learning style in

work and personal life.

Furthermore, Mobbs (2015) stated that learning styles were developed by Peter

Honey and Alan Mumford, based upon the work of Kolb, and they identified four distinct

learning styles or preference; activist, theorist, pragmatist and reflector. These are the

learning approaches that individuals naturally prefer and they recommend that in order

to maximize one‟s own personal learning, each learner ought to understand own

learning style and seek out opportunities to learn using those styles.

Activist. Activists are those people who learn by doing. Activists need to get their

hands dirty, to dive in with both feet first. Have an open-minded approach to learning;

activists involve themselves fully and without bias in new experiences. They enjoy the

here and now, and are happy to be dominated by immediate experiences. They are
open-minded, not skeptical, and this tends to make them enthusiastic about anything

new. Their philosophy is: “I‟ll try anything once”. They tend to act first and consider the

consequences afterwards. Their days are filled with activity. They tackle problems by

brainstorming. As soon as the excitement from one activity has died down they are busy

looking for the next. They tend to thrive on the challenge of new experiences but are

bored with implantation and longer term consolidation. They are gregarious people

constantly involving themselves with others but, in doing so, they seek to center all

activities around themselves.

Theorist. These learners like to understand the theory behind the actions. They

need models, concepts and facts in order to engage in the learning process. Prefer to

analyse and synthesize, drawing new information into a systematic and logical „theory‟.

Theorists adapt and integrate observations into complex but logically sound theories.

People think problems through in vertical, step-by-step logical way. They assimilate

desperate facts into coherent theories. They tend to be perfectionists who would not

rest easy until things are tidy and fit into a rational scheme. They are keen on basic

assumptions, principles, theories models and systems thinking. Their philosophy prizes

rationality and logic. “If it is logical it is good.” Questions they are frequently ask are:

“Does it make sense?” “How does this fit with that?” “What are the basic assumptions?”

They tend to be detached, analytical and dedicated to rational objectivity rather than

anything subjective or ambiguous. Their approach to problems is consistently logical.

This is their „mental set‟ and they rigidly reject anything that doesn‟t fit with it. They

prefer to maximize certainty and feel uncomfortable with subjective judgements, lateral

thinking and anything flippant.

see if they work in practice. They positively search out new ideas and take the first

opportunity to experiment with applications. They are the sort of people who return from

courses brimming with new ideas that they want to try out in practice. They like to get on

with things and act quickly and confidently on ideas that attract them. They tend to be

impatient with ruminating and open-ended discussions. They essentially practical, down

to earth people who like making practical decisions and solving problems. They respond

to problems and opportunities „as a challenge‟. Their philosophy is “There is always a

better way” and “If it works it is good”.

Reflector. Reflectors like to stand back to ponder experiences and observe them

from many different perspectives. They collect data, both first hand and from others,

and prefer to think about it thoroughly before coming to a conclusion. The thorough

collection and analysis of data about experiences and events is what counts so they

tend to postpone reaching definitive conclusions for as long as possible. Their

philosophy is to be cautious. They are thoughtful people who like to consider all

possible angles and implications before making a move. They prefer to take a back seat

in meetings and discussions. They enjoy observing other people in action. They listen to

others and get the drift of the discussion before making their own points. They tend to

adopt a low profile and have a slightly distant, tolerant unruffled air about them.

Learning Activities.

According to Acero, et.al. (2007), a teacher chooses the instructional aids best

adapted to a particular learning activity. These aids must suit the purpose intended, as
mastery of the subject matter, skills acquisition, and skills improvement and even

valuing. Instructional aids that serve the purpose for which they are intended are able to

contribute to motivating students understanding the lessons, reinforcing learning,

encouraging participation, and providing meaningful experiences.

A major consideration in the choice of instructional tools is meeting the needs of

learning situation to ensure their appropriateness and value. There are

different types of learning activities, they are: Introductory Activities. This is usually done

at the start of the school year or the start of every new lesson. Activities can come in the

form of games, action songs, energizers, anecdote, or story telling or posing a question

to the learners.

Heacox (2012) stressed that some students have had little experience with small

groups doing different activities. Some may have difficulty in adjusting to higher levels of

responsibility and independence. In planning for flexible instructional grouping, you

need to think about the learners in your classroom. They will vary in the amount of

direction and degree of instruction they need in order to learn and perform successfully

in groups. If you are aware of and plan for such differences, your flexible grouping will

run more smoothly. Keep this thought in mind as you plan: All students need new

content and skills presented to them. Students who learn quickly and easily tend to

need less information about how to go about their work and less teacher feedback

about their progress. Some students need more direction about what to do and how to

do it. They need specific, easy-to-understand directions and precise procedures for

completing an activity. Students with a strong preference for working independently may
resist being place in group. Some students and some age group need more supervision

than others. Some may have difficult time staying with an activity unless you‟re there to

encourage them. Some students love to socialize and may be easily side tracked into

conversations that are unrelated to the task at hand.

Related Studies

To fully understand the present study, the researchers collated different

researches related to the present study in the sense that most studies dealt with the

relationship of students profile with their learning style and learning activities.

Middleton (2013) presented in his study the percentages from the Inventory

Learning Style survey which measured participants‟ learning style preferences by sex.

His study found that most females have a reflective learning style, while most males

have an active learning style. The majority of both males and females indicated a

preference for sensing over intuitive, visual over verbal, and sequential over global.

The visual/verbal learning continuum displayed the most divergent results with

regard to gender. The odds of males preferring visual learning were much higher than

their female counterparts, and the odds of females preferring sequential learning were

bit higher than their male counterparts. Females do not need to see the big picture as

much when it comes to learning. They can complete problems within a vacuum,

whereas their male counterparts need to see how what they are doing relates to the

overall grand scheme. Significant relationships were found with respect to females‟

visual/verbal learning style preference and motivation with those females with a visual

learning style being more motivated about mathematics.

students when grouped according to sex. He found that there are significant differences

in learning styles between males and females. He also confirmed that females tend to

prefer accommodating or diverging learning, which focuses on concrete methods of

knowledge acquisition, whereas males prefer traditional and analytical learning, which

focuses on the use of abstraction.

His study indicated that sex had a great factor regarding their learning style. In

his study, females scored higher on the dimension related to concrete or sensing

learning styles. They tend to learn using their senses and to recognize problems more

when seen. On the other hand, males tended to prefer abstract conceptualization or

intuitive approaches to learning. They preferred to think abstractly and solve problems

using their reasoning.

Mapalad et al. (2009) conducted a research to identify if there is a difference in

the learning styles of teacher education students when grouped according to year level.

The data analysis found that there are no significant differences between the learning

styles of male and females. The higher year can learn facts as well as theories well; can

solve problems by well-established method and like innovation, like hands-on work and

better at grasping new concepts and like real world information as well as abstract

ideas. Moreover, higher years have more learning experience rather the lower year. The

study revealed that there are significant differences in sensing, intuitive, visual and

verbal learners when grouped according to year level. On the other hand, the year level

had no effect on the active, reflective, global and sequential learners.

thinking style when grouped according to sex. It only means that the level or way of a

male in acquiring and thinking as same as female does. Therefore, sex of the students

does not affect their learning styles. Teachers should consider their students learning

style in planning their lesson and using reading techniques to enhance students

learning.

Manalo et al. (2007) studied the learning style and teaching practices as

correlated to the academic performance of education students. The result revealed that

there were learners with only one dominant learning style while some had multiple

learning styles. Most of the respondents in each year level have divergent learning

style. This meant that they perceived information concretely and process them

reflectively. The respondents‟ perception towards their teachers teaching practices

showed that their teacher practiced teaching methods and techniques that met the

learning needs of the divergers, assimilators, convergers, and accommodators.

The study concluded that there was no significant relationship between the

perceived teaching practices of the teachers and the respondents academic

performance during the second semester of the school year 2006-2007. This

relationship meant that the application of the teaching practice that met the learning

needs of one particular learning style had no strong association with the academic

performance of the respondents.

The study of Gappi (2013) aimed to find out the relationship between learning

style preferences and academic performance of students. The research showed that

there were no significant difference between learning style preferences and the profile
variables of the students. This means that the profile of the students does not have any

effect on their learning style.

Further, the study concluded that there was no significant correlation between

the academic achievement and the learning style preferences of the participants. While

it as established that the learning styles preferences of the students were not correlated

to the academic achievement of students, large scale studies are recommended to

further investigate on the influence of the learning styles on the teaching-learning

progression.

Warn (2009) stated in his study that there is no significant association between

learning style and academic performance. His respondents were third year

undergraduate students who were pursuing accounting program. Two sets of learning

inventory were issued and the results showed. The dominant learning style for

Malaysian Taxation is converger while most of the respondents for financial strategy is

accommodator.

With this study, Warn stated that there are different learning styles for every

subject having different assessment. Teachers should assess the learning styles of their

students and adapt their classroom methods to best fit each student's learning needs.

He concluded that there could be other possible predictor of academic performance

such as study strategy, interest and failure to apply prior knowledge to new learning.

Synthesis

The review of related studies enhanced the researchers‟ perspective on the

different concepts related to learning styles of selected senior high school students.
Ideas of varied authors as well as research studies related to learning styles had a great

contribution to the context of the present study.

The study of Middleton and Orhun is similar to the present study in a way that

they delved on the relationship of learning style and sex of the students. Both stated

that sex is the greatest factor in examining the learning styles of the students.

Meanwhile, Mapalad et al. is similar to the present study since it determined the

profiles of the students in terms of year level and sex and how they are related to

learning style but showed these factors are not affecting the learning styles of each

student. And stated that sex has no effect in knowing the learning styles, contradicting

the study of Middleton and Orhun.

Manalo et al., and Gappi delved on the learning styles and academic

performance of students. These studies are similar on the present study as it delved on

the association of the academic performance and learning styles. On the other hand,

Warnn proposed that there is no significant relationship between learning styles and

academic performance of the students.