A comparative study of the teaching practice preferences of teachers with different learning styles

The present study aimed to identify the classroom teaching practices of physics teachers who have different learning styles, and to understand how the practices were affected by the identified learning styles.

The analysis of the data gathered in the study led to the conclusion that physics teachers who have different learning styles made limited use of teaching practices which focus on concrete experience and abstract conceptualization, while teaching practices which focus on active experimentation and reflective observation learning skills have been virtually disregarded. Against this background, one can forcefully argue that the participating teachers did not make sufficient use of teaching practices focusing on students who have different learning styles.

The study produced findings which arguably support the claim that teachers with different learning styles carry out their teaching activities in a similar manner, making use of a uniform and monotonous teaching framework. This is possibly an indicator of the lack of influence of their own learning styles, in terms of determining the teaching practices used by the teachers. The similarities in the practices employed by the teachers, despite the differences in their learning styles, suggest some kind of linkage with their own education life under the shadow of educational and teaching activities in line with the conventional approach based on the principle of "uniformity of students". A more detailed insight would refer to the preference on the part of teachers whose own education had been shaped by conventional teaching practices, for implementing the teaching practices they were used to. On the other hand, this very finding also shows that the teachers ignore the principle of the "uniqueness of every student" requiring an eye for individual differences in learning, as part of the physics curriculum that is based on modern teaching perspectives along with a changing identity. Ignoring that principle leads to a state of affairs in teaching activities, whereby the teachers believe that all students have the same characteristics. One can forcefully argue that a student who is subjected to teaching activities which are not oriented towards his/her individual characteristics cannot assume an active role in learning activities, and even if s/he did so, such activities would be restricted to the classroom, falling short of application in solving the problems faced in daily life.

The teachers' inclination towards a frequent use of presentation for teaching, and the utilization of examples, suggest that the students have remained in a rather receptive position in terms of education and teaching activities, and have failed to assume a more active stance. This is clearly shown in Figure 1, developed with reference to the work of Svinicki & Dixon (1987). In addition, one can also argue that the "active learner" trait should not solely be associated with the "learning by doing-experience", with reference to the existence of different learning styles. Even though the literature seems to be in consensus with the idea that students can learn by doing/experience, it is possible to argue that this view would apply only for a specific group of students, taking into account the fact that individual differences would certainly affect learning styles. Felder (1986) described such a perspective, noting that some individuals were better at focusing on phenomena, data, and algorithms, while some others were more comfortable with theories and mathematical models; some preferred visual forms such as schemes, figures and graphs, whereas others reacted more strongly to written and verbal statements; some had an inclination towards active and interactive learning, while others choose internal reflection and individual work.

On the other hand, teaching by doing/experience, as highlighted by the contemporary curricula, has been put into effect at schools as if using a magic wand. This could be considered as a contradiction in and of itself, with the principle of the "uniqueness of each student", if it is taken as a perspective claiming that all students could learn in the same way – i.e. by doing/experience – in a surprising parallel to conventional approaches which have been criticized for many years. The principle of "learning by doing-experience", serving as the basic pillar of the new physics curriculum, should be revisited against the background of learning styles, a major component of individual differences, asking the community of scholars the questions 'can every student learn by doing-experience?' and can every teacher 'provide teaching through doing-experience?'.