Conceptual and Measurement Properties of the Productivity Environmental Preference Survey as a Measure of Learning Style

Abstract

The Productivity Environmental Preference Survey (PEPS) is one of a large number of learning style instruments used by researchers and practitioners to identify differences in the way adult students learn and study. The findings of this study using the PEPS suggest that the Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles Model is not conceptually well-defined. Factor analysis failed to produce the four hypothesized factors identified in the model as (a) Environmental, (b) Emotional, (c) Sociological, and (d) Physical. In the short term (8 weeks), the PEPS has fair test-retest reliability. However, over a longer interval of a year, the test-retest reliability of the PEPS is poor. For an instrument claimed to be measuring stable, inherent characteristics of an individual, this outcome is unsatisfactory. In terms of its utility, the PEPS is easy to administer and interpret. The PEPS variables are easily understood by both students and practitioners and, because an individualized profile is produced, it is less likely that students will be stereotyped on the basis of style using the PEPS than they will using the more simplistic bipolar conceptualizations of students' learning styles.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Clark-Thayer, S. (1987). The relationship of the knowledge of student perceived learning style preferences, and study habits and attitudes to achievement of college freshmen in a small urban university (doctoral dissertation, Boston University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 48, 827A.

Cook, L. (1989). Relationships among learning style awareness, academic achievement, and locus of control of community college students. Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida.

Corcoran, K. , & Fischer, J. (1987). Measures for clinical practice: A sourcebook. New York: Free Press.

Curry, L. (1990). Learning styles in secondary schools: A review of instruments and implications for their use. Paper prepared for the National Center on Effective Secondary Schools, University of Wisconsin.

Dunn, R. (1991, July 7-13). How learning style changes over time. Paper presented at the 14th annual Leadership Institute: Teaching Students Through Their Individual Learning Styles, New York.

Dunn, R. , Dunn, K. , & Price, G. (1979). Identifying learning styles. ln J. W. Keefe (Ed.), Student learning styles: Diagnosing and prescribing programs (Chap. 4). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.

Freeley, M. E. (1984). An investigation of the relationships among teachers' individual time preferences, in-service workshop schedules, and instructional techniques and the subsequent implementation of learning style strategies in participants' classrooms (doctoral dissertation, St. John's University, New York). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46, 403A.

Ingham, J. (1989). An experimental investigation of the relationships among learning style perceptual preference, instructional strategies, training achievement, and attitudes of corporate employees. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St. John's University, New York.

Keefe, J. W. , & Monk, J. S. (1986). Learning style profile examiners' manual. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.

10.

Keefe, J. W. , & Monk, J. S. (1988). Learning style profile technical manual. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.

11.

Mills, C. N. (1990). Review of the Productivity Environmental Preference Survey. In J. J. Kramer & J. C. Conoley (Eds.), The supplement to the tenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 193-195). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurement.

12.

Price, G. E. , Dunn, R. , & Dunn, K. (1991). Productivity Environmental Preference Survey (PEPS manual). Lawrence, KS: Price Systems.

13.

Rule, D. L. (1988, February 25). A critical comparison of learning style instruments frequently used with adult learners. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Eastern Research Association. Miami Beach, FL.

14.

Sippola, B. C. (1990). Review of the Productivity Environmental Preference Survey. In J. J. Kramer & J. C. Conoley (Eds.), The supplement to the tenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 195-196). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurement.