Computers and Education Open (Dec 2023)
Matching learning style to instructional format penalizes learning
Abstract
Experiments have failed to support the matching hypothesis that students’ learning style preferences should be matched to instructional modality to optimize learning. These studies have generally been restricted to considering sensory modality learning style dimensions. We extend this extant work by examining the matching hypothesis with regard to another learning styles model, one that distinguishes between active/reflective learning preferences (Felder & Silverman, 1988). Participants preferring each learning style were assigned to one of two versions of a digital-based Biology lesson (textbook chapter). The interactive version contained interactive exercises consisting of text and visuals. In the non-interactive version, the interactivity was removed, and participants watched while the identical exercises were completed by the computer. We assumed that an active learning style would align with the interactive lesson, whereas a reflective learning style would better align with the non-interactive lesson. For two learning tests (definition recall and multiple-choice questions) the nature of the lesson (interactive vs. non-interactive) did not interact with participants’ learning style. For a test that targeted the content for which the interactive exercises were designed, learning performance was better when the lesson format mismatched the preferred learning style. The results importantly enrich the experimental evidence countering the matching hypothesis. The current finding is particularly strong because it does not rely on a null effect. Further, the current findings significantly extend the experimental literature from a focus on the modality-specific matching hypothesis to a broader consideration of learning-styles that includes an activity-based (active/reflective) learning style model.
