Does style matter? Considering the impact of learning styles in e-learning.

Little research has been conducted on the impact of personal learning style preferences in e-learning environments. Nor has research been conducted to contrast the learning style preferences of novice undergraduate students with those of graduate students, and educators who construct and/or teach in tertiary e-learning environments. The aim of this study was to investigate preferred styles of learning and how these relate to e-learning environments both qualitatively and quantitatively. Three research cohorts were of interest in this research, and following extensive invitations to participate in the research, forty-five undergraduate e-learners, nine graduate e-learners, and twenty-eight educators working in e-learning environments participated. Participants completed two research instruments. Quantitative data was obtained from the learning styles instrument Index of Learning Styles (ILS) (Felder & Soloman, 1991, 1994). The ILS assesses variations in individual learning style preferences across four dimensions or domains: Information Processing (active to reflective learning preferences), Information Perception (sensing/factual to intuitive/theoretical learning preferences), Information Reception (visual to verbal learning preferences), and Information Understanding (sequential to global learning preferences). Participants also completed a survey questionnaire which gathered further quantitative data (demographic data) and qualitative feedback (extended openended responses of their self-perceptions of the impact of learning styles within their specific e-learning environment in addition to snapshots of the participant’s e-learning environment). In summary, the statistical analysis of the quantitative data discerned that a mild preference existed across all three cohorts for active learning environments. A moderately strong preference existed across all three cohorts for visual learning environments. A statistically significant difference, however, was recorded in the data between undergraduate e-learners and the other cohorts on the two remaining learning style domains. Undergraduate e-learners scored a mild preference towards sensing (or factual) learning environments, while graduate e-learners and e-educators both scored a moderate preference towards intuitive (or theoretical) learning design. Additionally, undergraduate e-learners scored a mild preference for sequentially-structures e-learning environments, while graduate e-learners and e-educators both scored a mild preference for global e-learning designs. The results of this study indicated that learning style preferences between graduate e-learners and educators were aligned. The qualitative responses provided rich data on the impact of learning styles within e-learning environments. These findings suggest that learning styles do appear to be a consideration for both learners and educators in terms of learning (from the e-learner’s perspective), and in relation to the conception, design, and creation of effective e-learning environments (from the educator’s perspective). It concludes that in e-learning environments, just as in any other educational context, style does matter, and that a one-size-fits-all approach to learning design is at best inappropriate. The findings support a balanced multimodal approach to e-learning which is consistent with today’s media-rich world. The thesis concludes by recommending key principles for educators to consider in designing for, and teaching in, e-learning environments.