Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students
- Autores
- Ventura, Ana Clara; Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria
- Año de publicación
- 2015
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- Knowledge of learning styles can enhance the ability of teachers to build on student experiences and construct new learning opportunities. This cross-sectional study examines the learning styles preferences of undergraduate Argentinean students and the differences in their learning styles according to Field of Study and Academics Years using Index of Learning Styles©. The sample consisted of 304 students from Psychology and Engineering enrolled on First, Third and Fifth Years. Results suggested that students in early years at university adopted learning styles that were similar to each other irrespective of main academic discipline. However, learning styles of students in upper division courses tended to be related to the Field of Study. Engineering students were found to be more Sensing, Active and Visual learners; whereas Psychology students preferred the opposite styles. In regard to Academic Years in Psychology, Fifth Year students were more Intuitive, Reflective, Verbal and Global than First Year students. Furthermore, Engineering Fifth Year students have consolidated Sensing, Visual and Sequential styles. Besides, this group showed greater Active preferences than the Engineering First Year students. These findings confirmed the hypothesis of educational specialization based on the association between learning styles and Fields of Study; these educational implications are discussed.
Fil: Ventura, Ana Clara. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte; Argentina
Fil: Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Rosario; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Rosario; Argentina - Materia
-
FELDER-SILVERMAN LEARNING STYLES MODEL
TEACHING
STYLISTIC SPECIALIZATION
HIGHER EDUCATION - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/57771
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_c583c1e62bd436fea3fbe8269afeae9f |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/57771 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate StudentsVentura, Ana ClaraMoscoloni, Nora Ana MariaFELDER-SILVERMAN LEARNING STYLES MODELTEACHINGSTYLISTIC SPECIALIZATIONHIGHER EDUCATIONhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.1https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5Knowledge of learning styles can enhance the ability of teachers to build on student experiences and construct new learning opportunities. This cross-sectional study examines the learning styles preferences of undergraduate Argentinean students and the differences in their learning styles according to Field of Study and Academics Years using Index of Learning Styles©. The sample consisted of 304 students from Psychology and Engineering enrolled on First, Third and Fifth Years. Results suggested that students in early years at university adopted learning styles that were similar to each other irrespective of main academic discipline. However, learning styles of students in upper division courses tended to be related to the Field of Study. Engineering students were found to be more Sensing, Active and Visual learners; whereas Psychology students preferred the opposite styles. In regard to Academic Years in Psychology, Fifth Year students were more Intuitive, Reflective, Verbal and Global than First Year students. Furthermore, Engineering Fifth Year students have consolidated Sensing, Visual and Sequential styles. Besides, this group showed greater Active preferences than the Engineering First Year students. These findings confirmed the hypothesis of educational specialization based on the association between learning styles and Fields of Study; these educational implications are discussed.Fil: Ventura, Ana Clara. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte; ArgentinaFil: Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Rosario; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Rosario; ArgentinaEngineering & Technology Publishing2015-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/57771Ventura, Ana Clara; Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria; Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students; Engineering & Technology Publishing; International Journal of Learning and Teaching; 1; 2; 1-12-2015; 88-932377-28912377-2905CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://www.ijlt.org/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=118&id=501info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.18178/ijlt.1.2.88-93info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-10-15T14:45:45Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/57771instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-10-15 14:45:45.652CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students |
title |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students |
spellingShingle |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students Ventura, Ana Clara FELDER-SILVERMAN LEARNING STYLES MODEL TEACHING STYLISTIC SPECIALIZATION HIGHER EDUCATION |
title_short |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students |
title_full |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students |
title_fullStr |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students |
title_full_unstemmed |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students |
title_sort |
Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Ventura, Ana Clara Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria |
author |
Ventura, Ana Clara |
author_facet |
Ventura, Ana Clara Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria |
author2_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
FELDER-SILVERMAN LEARNING STYLES MODEL TEACHING STYLISTIC SPECIALIZATION HIGHER EDUCATION |
topic |
FELDER-SILVERMAN LEARNING STYLES MODEL TEACHING STYLISTIC SPECIALIZATION HIGHER EDUCATION |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.1 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Knowledge of learning styles can enhance the ability of teachers to build on student experiences and construct new learning opportunities. This cross-sectional study examines the learning styles preferences of undergraduate Argentinean students and the differences in their learning styles according to Field of Study and Academics Years using Index of Learning Styles©. The sample consisted of 304 students from Psychology and Engineering enrolled on First, Third and Fifth Years. Results suggested that students in early years at university adopted learning styles that were similar to each other irrespective of main academic discipline. However, learning styles of students in upper division courses tended to be related to the Field of Study. Engineering students were found to be more Sensing, Active and Visual learners; whereas Psychology students preferred the opposite styles. In regard to Academic Years in Psychology, Fifth Year students were more Intuitive, Reflective, Verbal and Global than First Year students. Furthermore, Engineering Fifth Year students have consolidated Sensing, Visual and Sequential styles. Besides, this group showed greater Active preferences than the Engineering First Year students. These findings confirmed the hypothesis of educational specialization based on the association between learning styles and Fields of Study; these educational implications are discussed. Fil: Ventura, Ana Clara. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte; Argentina Fil: Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Rosario; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Rosario; Argentina |
description |
Knowledge of learning styles can enhance the ability of teachers to build on student experiences and construct new learning opportunities. This cross-sectional study examines the learning styles preferences of undergraduate Argentinean students and the differences in their learning styles according to Field of Study and Academics Years using Index of Learning Styles©. The sample consisted of 304 students from Psychology and Engineering enrolled on First, Third and Fifth Years. Results suggested that students in early years at university adopted learning styles that were similar to each other irrespective of main academic discipline. However, learning styles of students in upper division courses tended to be related to the Field of Study. Engineering students were found to be more Sensing, Active and Visual learners; whereas Psychology students preferred the opposite styles. In regard to Academic Years in Psychology, Fifth Year students were more Intuitive, Reflective, Verbal and Global than First Year students. Furthermore, Engineering Fifth Year students have consolidated Sensing, Visual and Sequential styles. Besides, this group showed greater Active preferences than the Engineering First Year students. These findings confirmed the hypothesis of educational specialization based on the association between learning styles and Fields of Study; these educational implications are discussed. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-12-01 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/57771 Ventura, Ana Clara; Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria; Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students; Engineering & Technology Publishing; International Journal of Learning and Teaching; 1; 2; 1-12-2015; 88-93 2377-2891 2377-2905 CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/57771 |
identifier_str_mv |
Ventura, Ana Clara; Moscoloni, Nora Ana Maria; Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study of Undergraduate Students; Engineering & Technology Publishing; International Journal of Learning and Teaching; 1; 2; 1-12-2015; 88-93 2377-2891 2377-2905 CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://www.ijlt.org/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=118&id=501 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.18178/ijlt.1.2.88-93 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Engineering & Technology Publishing |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Engineering & Technology Publishing |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1846082967610327040 |
score |
13.22299 |