The Learning Styles Inventory and the Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale for Children were administered to 300 fourth, fifth, and sixth grade gifted/talented students in New York and Connecticut and to 283 students from the general population. Other test score information was obtained from student records. It was found that (a) gifted students and students of the general population differ overall with respect to learning style; (b) the learning style variables contributing most to the difference between the two groups were lecture, independent study, discussion, and projects; and (c) grade level, sex, locus of control, and favorite subject significantly affect learning style preferences. It was concluded that there seems to be a preference among gifted/talented students for those instructional methods emphasizing independence, while students of the general population seem to prefer instructional methods with somewhat more structure.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarronF.The needs for order and for disorder as motivation in creative activity. In TaylorC. W. & BarronF. (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development.New York: Wiley, 1963.
DempseyR. D.Cognitive style differences between gifted and average students (Doctoral dissertation, United States International University, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1975, vol. 2298–B. (University Microfilms No. 75–29, 198).
4.
DominoG.Interactive effects of achievement orientation and teaching style on academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971, 62, 427–431.
5.
DowalibyF. J., & SchumerH.Teacher-centered versus student-centered mode of college classroom instruction as related to manifest anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973, 63, 125–132.
6.
GallagherJ. J.AschnerM. J., & JenneW.Productive thinking of gifted children in classroom interaction (CEC Research Monograph Series B, No. B–5). Washington DC: The Council for Exceptional Children, National Education Association, 1967.
7.
HuntD. E.Matching models in education: The coordination of teaching methods with student characteristics.Ontario: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 1971.
8.
JamesN. E.Personal preference for method as a factor in learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1962, 53, 43–47.
9.
LundyR. A.Dimensions of learning for the highly gifted student.Palo Alto CA: Palo Alto Unified School District, 1978.
10.
MacKinnonD. W.In search of human effectiveness: Identifying and developing creativity.Buffalo NY: Creative Education Foundation, 1978.
11.
MacKinnonD. W.Selecting students with creative potential. In HeistP. (Ed.), The creative college student: An unmet challenge.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968, 101–116.
12.
NowickiS., & StricklandB. R.A locus of control scale for children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1973, 40(101), 148–154.
13.
PascalC. E.Instructional options, option preferences, and course outcomes. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 1971, 17, 1–11.
14.
PlattJ., & EisenmanR.Internal-external control of reinforcement, time-perspective, adjustment, and anxiety. Journal of General Psychology, 1968, 79, 121–128.
15.
PriceG. E.The preferred learning style(s) of gifted elementary and junior high school students as compared to the preferred learning style(s) of nongifted elementary and junior high school students. Unpublished manuscript, University of Kansas, 1978.
16.
RenzulliJ. S., & SmithL. H.Learning styles inventory: A measure of student preference for instructional techniques.Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press, 1978.
17.
SatterlyD. J., & BrimerM. A.Cognitive styles and school learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971, 41, 294–303.
18.
SmithL.Learning styles: Measurement and educational significance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, 1976.
19.
TallmadgeG. K., & ShearerJ. W.Relationships among learning styles, instructional methods and nature of learning experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1969, 60(3), 222–230.
20.
ThelenH. A.Classroom grouping for teachability.New York: Wiley, 1967.
21.
VintonJ.The relationship among life style, task and structure in university classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, 1972.
22.
WitkinH. A.Some implications of research on cognitive style for problems of education. Archivio di Psicologia Neurologia e Psichiatria, 1965, 26, 27–54.
23.
WhittrockM. C.Developmental processes in learning from instruction. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1978, 132, 37–54.
24.
YandoR. M., & KaganJ.The effect of teacher tempo on the child. Child Development, 1968, 39, 27–34.
25.
ZelnikerT., & JeffreyW. E.Reflective and impulsive children: Strategies of information processing underlying differences in problem solving. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1976, 41(5), Serial Number 168.
