Research Participants’ Method in Overcoming Learning Styles
67
I think the materials are quite boring because we ever found some of the supplied topics in Reading I and Reading II courses. The difference is that
we have to work harder in Extensive Reading II since we not only have to read thoroughly but also to make an argumentative composition about it.
Therefore, I sometimes do not really keen on the given topics in the classroom. RA2:I
Instead of carrying out the assigned tasks independently and confidently, she turned up to mostly work cooperatively with her peers in the given tasks.
Moreover, she occasionally forgot the course objectives because she was unable to concentrate due to the available distraction that interested her more. In
conclusion, research participants who generally perceived the course negatively, such as considering the topics available for discussion and classroom activities
boring, and viewing the topics available for discussion impractical, frequently exhibited ineffective emotional, conduct, and learning behaviours.
On the other hand, analytic learners would discern a situation as a collection of parts and will often focus on one or two aspects of the situation at a
time. Since analytic learners had tendency to focus on just one aspect of the whole at a time, this may have the effect of distorting, exaggerating, or making the
details more prominent than the rest segments of a general point of view. Thus, there is a possibility that the information is out of proportion to the total situation.
For the analytics, the positive aspect is that they can analyze a situation into parts and this allows them to come quickly to the heart of any problems. Besides, they
may also focus merely on one aspect of a situation excluding the others and broaden it out of its proper proportion. This was evidently perceptible from
research participant B2.
68
In my opinion, I can do the assignments even though I am not really keen on it. There are two major obstacles that hinder me to do the assignments
excellently. First, it is the very limited time available for consultation with the lecturer. Second, I had difficulty in relating my topic, which is about
dream, to the final assignment. RB2:I
He considered that the topics available for discussion not interesting and classroom activities boring. However, he attempted to focus on and put much
effort in his projects presentation. In other words, he managed to handle his part successfully but he did not do well in relating his work to the broad context of the
course. Besides subject matter and topics available for discussion, the classroom
activities also appeared to influence research participants’ interest. As a result, there were some research participants who skipped the assigned tasks and did
other activities irrelevant to the lesson. For example, research participant A3 considered that the topics available for discussion were interesting but they were
also impractical. She not only perceived the repetitive classroom activities boring but also displayed occasional inattention to the lesson. This circumstance was
apparently prevented by her nature of analytic learner. It was clearly seen that sometimes she did not well-attend the lesson and was distracted both verbally and
nonverbally by other pupils. However, she tried to remain on-task during the lesson because she was encouraged to undertake trial and error in carrying out the
course objectives. The assignments are quite challenging. I still can do it but it really takes
much effort. However, what burdens me much was that I sometimes don’t obtain any turns for consultation whereas I really need much assistance in
completing the tasks. RA1:I
69
Another extreme example was also observable from research participants belonging to group B. As what was mentioned previously, the primary difference
between research participants belonging to group A and research participants belonging to group B was the persistence in carrying out the course objectives
during the lesson. Most research participants belonging to group B apparently encountered problems with self concentration. For instance, research participants
B1 and B2 who were analytic learners exhibited significant ineffective emotional, conduct, and learning behaviours. They frequently provided verbal and nonverbal
distractions as well as physical aggressions for other pupils. Therefore, their concentrations split among the lecturer’s explanations, the course objectives, and
their peers. Nonetheless, research participant B2 considerably put much more effort in his work than research participant B1 did. It was seen from the individual
projects presentation of research participant B2 that resulted much better from what research participant B1 attained.
Relating these two dimensions of learning styles to behaviour, there were several variances that occured during the classroom observations. In general, it is
believed that wholistic learners are likely to be unstructured in their thinking and thus have poor behavioural control Riding, 2002: 58. Accordingly, wholistic
learners generally demonstrated immature, disruptive, and verbally aggressive behaviours such as seen in the observation sheets. In contrast, generally it was
believed that analytic learners were structured and produced behaviours that were more controlled. Nonetheless, it could lead the learners to fatigue since they had
to keep on task continuously. These were also seen in the observation sheets. In
70
conclusion, analytic learners are more likely to be individual, lack of empathy and appreciation, and physically aggressive. Regardless typical behaviours that were
exhibited by both wholistic and analytic learners, each of these learners demonstrated fairly discrepant behaviours from what they were supposed to
behave. In the research, there were three research participants with wholistic
learning style; they were research participants A1, A2, B4. The rest were analytic learners; they were research participants A3, A4, B1, B2, and B3. In line with
motivation which resulted in various responses among the involved research participants, the same notion applied to learning styles preference. In other words,
learning styles could also be influenced by a number of factors and, therefore, it resulted in diverse responses among the concerned research participants.
Referring to Table 4.20, the typical characteristic of wholistic learners in terms of classroom behaviours was noticed. Their preference of verbal
explanation over written explanation led them to avoid writing while listening. Frequently, they listened to the lecturer’s explanation at one time and later on
summarized the explanation based on their own understanding. Furthermore, referring to research participant A2, she did not appear to take notes frequently
since she already knew what the core of the assigned objectives was. This conclusion could be drawn from the observation results, interview, and tasks
accomplishment from research participant A2. Move on to research participant B4, it was quite clear that she sometimes had difficulties in concentrating and
focusing on the given verbal explanations. Further investigation through interview
71
figured out that she suffered loss of concentration due to overwhelming homework that was given to her.
I sometimes feel burdened with the assignments because there are also other assignments form other courses that have the same deadlines. So,
sometimes I attend one lesson but I think about another lesson and, therefore, I miss the lecturer’s explanations and directions for the
assignments. RB4:I
At this point, mostly she lost her concentration on the given verbal explanation and, therefore, she frequently preferred written direction due to lack of focus
during the on-going lesson. Regarding their classroom performance and classroom presentation,
mostly they could achieve a higher level of clarity than that of analytic learners. It meant that the wholistic learners, whose preference was generally verbal
explanation, were occasionally poor in performing written assignments but they excellently performed classroom presentations. Their habit of unstructured
learning in which they listened and took notes based on their own thoughts or understanding led them to be very general in arranging their compositions.
However, when these wholistic learners were told to deliver a presentation about their papers, they presented a well arranged and clear explanation. Based on the
repeated classroom observations, it revealed that wholistic research participants considerably demonstrated higher level of self assurance andor self confidence
during delivering their presentations. Regardless of the strengths of wholistic learners, their drawbacks were also apparently noticeable. After taking a look at
their works and comparing them to the works of research participants who were
72
analytic learners, they generated implicit and indirect composition due to their preference of verbal explanation.
On the other hand, exposing the classroom performance of analytic learners, it was obviously different. Compared to the wholistic learners whose
preference was verbal explanation, the analytic learners were good at understanding written direction. This could be inferred from repeatedly occurring
observable behaviour throughout the lesson such as writing while listening. These analytic learners could fairly understand both verbal and written explanation well.
Nevertheless, they sometimes could not make general inference based on the verbal instructions given by the lecturer. In other words, they relied on the notes
provided by the lecturer andor copied their tablemate’s notes on the lecturer’s directions.
Complete notes on the lecturer’s explanations during the lesson and directions for the assignments are really helpful for me. When it happens
that I forobtain the instructions, I just need to take a look at my notes and try to recall them. If only my notes are not really complete, I will borrow
my friends’ notes to copy. RB1:I
In conclusion, the analytic learners were significantly better in performing written tasks over the verbal presentation. Their compositions were structured starting
from the broad topic and moved towards the narrow one. However, the analytic learners were mostly having troubles when they tried to deliver their opinion
verbally. Most of the times, these learners demonstrated significantly low level of self-confidence in delivering their presentations. This could be inferred through
the frequently occurring speech defects such as short pauses, hesitation, and losing their ‘train of thoughts’. This circumstance was primarily caused by their
73
habit of being specific. In their presentations, they only stated the fine points of their compositions so that they became nervous and anxious when other pupils
inquired the relevance of the details to the broad topic of the course. Similar to wholistic learners, analytic learners also exhibited several
drawbacks. It revealed that their writing appeared to be much clearer than their presentation due to the low level of self confidence during delivering their
presentations. This could be seen from the frequently occurring speech defects such as short pauses, uncertainty in expressing their opinion, and hesitation in
answering the available questions. Regarding all their works which were considerably more comprehensive than those of wholistic learners, their
performance in classroom presentation was fairly mediocre. In accordance with the nature of learning styles, the strengths of both
wholistic and analytic learners could facilitate a better learning and, thereby, these learners could come to the productive habit of mind. However, the existing
weaknesses from both wholistic and analytic learners fairly hindered them to attain a more meaningful and applicable learning experience. Moreover, the
continuing circumstance in which wholistic learners were considerably poor in accomplishing their written assignments whereas analytic learners were
significantly poor in delivering verbal explanations could actually be prevented. However, research participants also had solutions that apparently quite useful in
assisting them to achieve a better classroom performance. Some of the research participants would work cooperatively with their peers. This allowed them to
74
obtain feedback on their works. Some other research participants would seek help to their peers only if it was necessary.
The results exposed that some research participants shared similar individual characteristics; they were intrinsically motivated and either considered
as wholistic or analytic learners. Nevertheless, their application in the classroom varied from one to another. In most circumstances, research participants would
manage a group discussion outside the class in order to bring down the existing internal drawbacks.
75