The Process of Creating a Learning-Teaching Style Assessment: A Checklist for Documenting Observations and Teaching Strategies 1

Abstract

Summary.—This paper describes the process of creating an observational assessment designed to identify learning styles of individual children, help teachers, therapists, and parents select optimal strategies for teaching new skills in schools, clinics, and home environments, and evaluate results of the selected intervention strategies to either maintain or modify them. The checklist is organized into sections of learner styles (Visual, Auditory, and Tactile/Kinesthetic), each with two subsections (Behavior Characteristics Observed in School, Clinic, and/or Home Contexts, and Teaching Strategies Recommended). The final section, Interpretation and Recommendations, includes the analyses of results, based on calculation of percentages to indicate strongest learning styles, or to detect Multi-Sensory learners. Planning of a field-test study is described.

The assessment and teaching of 21st century skills is an international project organized in the United Kingdom by the Centre for Research and Practice. Its goal is to provide teachers with information that will guide them to teach the skills required for students and workers to function effectively in a world where human performance requires increasingly sophisticated and complex problem-solving and coordinating skills, such as creativity innovation and collaboration. To identify the nature of those skills, the design and development of assessment tasks require research efforts at the classroom level (Care, 2014). Leaders of the project recommend that administrators create time and space for staff to engage with research, apply it to their own contexts, test specific interventions, and then refine and improve their practice (Hendrick, 2014).

Many professional health organizations, e.g., physical, occupational, and speech therapy have also stated strongly that more research needs to be done by those working in the field, rather than by university students and professors only. A good practice is an ongoing informal research program. Most clinicians, however, believe they do not have the time. They need to see an actual model of how it can be done, how the process can be to interwoven into their professional activities, and how their practices can be enriched by the process and its products.

This paper describes the process of creating a new observational assessment that identifies learning styles of individual children and recommends appropriate teaching methods. This instrument differs from others as it is designed for a wider group of test administrators, not only to select optimal strategies for teaching new skills, but also to do so in the different contexts of schools, clinics, and home environments. Teachers, therapists, and parents who want to teach academic, motor, and self-help skills to children effectively need an individualized assessment methodology that (a) identifies preferred learning styles, (b) contains correlated teaching strategies, and (c) provides ways to evaluate results of the selected intervention strategies in order to adapt or modify them. Thus, tests must be both qualitative (to individualize learning modes), and quantitative (to measure progress).

Definitions of Learning Styles

People learn, process, and retain information in different ways. Common types of learning styles have been briefly described as (a) visual: learning through seeing, (b) auditory: learning through hearing, and (c) tactile/kinesthetic: learning through touching, doing, and moving (AbilityPath, 2014; Child Central, 2014). Some sources describe multi-sensory learners who do well when several or all of those methods are employed to learn a particular concept or skill (Learning Styles Identifier, 2014).

Barseghian and Kelmon (2014) reported that visual learners operate best by observing (either in print or pictures); auditory learners absorb information best by hearing it through verbal instructions; physical learners (tactile/kinesthetic) like to use their hands and whole body movements to make discoveries. Robledon (2014a, 2014b, & 2014c) writes for parents in more detail about learning modes:

Visual learners like to sit and leaf through a book; play with puzzles or shapes and letters; have keen powers of observation; may watch people's lips move as they speak; pay close attention to someone demonstrating something; rely primarily on the sense of sight to take in information, understand it, and remember it, or else do not fully comprehend it. The two types of visual learners are (a) picture learners, who think in images, previously seen in a photograph or in person, and (b) print learners, who think in words, quickly learning to read and easily memorizing the correct spelling of words, and enjoy practicing writing and forming letters (Robledon, 2014c).

Auditory learners understand new ideas and concepts best when information is heard; learn a tune just from hearing someone sing it; follow directions perfectly after being told only once or twice what to do; concentrate better at a task with music or white noise in the background; retain new information best by talking about it (Robledon, 2014a).

Physical learners, also known as tactual-kinesthetic learners (tactual for touch, kinesthetic for movement), rely on their sense of touch to grasp new ideas and concepts, as most babies do. By the time children reach preschool or kindergarten, many have begun to adopt other learning styles, but some maintain a strong affinity for physical learning. The two types of physical learners are (a) tactual, who prefer hands-on activities, such as scissors and crafts, and (b) kinesthetic, who learn best by immersing in physical activities; like to move and get the whole body involved; are very expressive, like to act out stories with the whole body, wiggling, dancing, and waving arms (Robledon, 2014b).

According to Raghavan and McDonald (2013), a collaborating triad of teachers, therapists, and parents, to achieve consistency in responding to students' learning styles, can be a powerful approach to assessment methodologies and teaching strategies. Of course, the adults who are instructing the children need to be aware of their own learning styles, especially if a mismatch may be apparent (Hayes & Allinson, 1993). A number of studies have found that students' achievement increases when teaching methods match their own learning styles (Dunn, Beaudry, & Klavas, 2002).

Assessment of Learning Styles

Standardized assessments, required by many educational facilities and health systems are important for documenting change and determining placement, but do not yield much useful information leading to differentiated instruction. Some, including those available online, refer to other types of learning categories, rather than sensory channels; that research has expanded greatly in the last several decades (Dunn, et al., 2002).

For example, Kolb's original printed 1971 version of the Learning Style Inventory (LSI), listed four prevalent learning styles: (a) diverging, (b) assimilating, (c) converging, and (d) accommodating (Kolb, Rubin, & McIntyre, 1971). Later versions of the LSI, based on the Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles Model, included a short section on perceptual learning styles (Neely & Alm, 1992). Kolb then revised his online version to designate nine learning patterns: (a) experiencing, (b) imagining, (c) reflecting, (d) analyzing, (e) thinking, (f) deciding, (g) acting, and (h) balancing (Kolb, 2014). Interestingly, that online version also measures the extent to which people change their learning styles in different contexts, and which learning style types individuals use in addition to their dominant learning style type (Dunn, 2014).

Current qualitative observational or self-report instruments, such as questionnaires and checklists, may or may not provide appropriate test items for assessing children's learning styles, and rarely link teaching strategies to the assessment data. A plethora of instructional methods reported in the literature similarly lack direct linkage to individuals' learning styles. Many checklists measure academic achievement (Wilkinson & Robertson, 2006), motor skills (Rosa, Ridgers, & Barnett, 2013), personality (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985), social skills (Matson, Rotatori, & Helsel, 1983), and even children's preferences for teaching strategies (Heal, Hanley, & Layer, 2009). The existing checklists that do measure sensory attributes of learning in children are primarily focused on classroom skills, which are not as useful for therapists and parents who may want to individualize their teaching of motor or self-help skills. In order to provide the best learning experience possible for their children, some practitioners consider constructing their own instruments (Erhardt, 2007). Table 1 describes the stages of one such project that encompassed the needs of a wide range of children in the contexts of their natural environments, and was designed for parents as well as professionals.

TABLE 1

An Example of Assessment Development: A Hand Preference Assessment

Process	Examples of Incorporating the Process into a Professional Career
Motivation	As an occupational therapist, needing more information to be able to answer teachers' and parents' many questions about hand dominance and implications for function in school and home environments
Ongoing comprehensive literature review using key words: Dominance, preference, handedness	Reading everything possible during clinical pediatric practice, because of fascination with the topic, the need to know more in order to respond accurately to questions, and to provide appropriate programs for children with and without disabilities
Presentations at conferences and workshops	Sharing more knowledge, asking challenging questions, and exploring more solutions with participants about the topic
Publications of journal articles	Disseminating more information to occupational therapists and teachers, who shared with parents
Videotaped research	Normative study of typical children, ages 5–11 yr., to determine unilateral hand preference, as well as bilateral and bimanual hand movements
Production of video programs	Edited from a series of video tapings and distributed for educational use
Research versions of the assessment	Five versions revised over a period of 10 yr. during clinical use and ongoing literature reviews
Formal field testing of the assessment	Volunteer occupational therapists from the United States, Canada, and Europe providing valuable feedback that contributed to revisions
Production of more videos about normal and atypical hand preferences	Part 1. Descriptions of emerging and mature hand preferences and congruenciesPart 2. Factors influencing hand preferences in persons with disabilities
Teaching online course about hand preference	Hand preference issues and applications to practice©
Publication of 1st version of test booklet	Distribution of the assessment
Publication in a journal for occupational therapy, schools, & early intervention	A pilot study of scissor skills and hand preference, revealing that therapists teaching children to use scissors consider not only handedness, but also environmental factors, hand/eye congruence, and scissors use as a bimanual task
Publication of a book about hand preference	Including the current version of the assessment inside the book and as a separate test booklet
YouTube postings: Use of the assessment	Occupational therapy students demonstrating selected administration and scoring procedures for the hand preference assessment

Theoretical Approaches

A comprehensive literature search included information about current practical approaches to assessment and intervention, based on theoretical principles of Differentiated Assessment (DA), which support the learning process by helping teachers identify and address student strengths and needs, are ongoing and responsive, and change over time in response to student growth and development (Learning Resources Centre, 2010; Penn State Extension, 2014); Response to Intervention (RtI) foundational principles provide educators with guidance on how to match the needs of children with appropriate levels of support to ensure that instructional opportunities are effective and foster continued progress (Jackson, Pretti-Frontczak, Harjusola-Webb, Grisham-Brown, & Romani, 2009); and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) guidelines incorporated into the language of the test items to provide multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement for children with and without disabilities (Rose & Gravel, 2011). The principles of UDL overlap with and complement the approach of differentiated education, and may rely on the use of technology to make learning resources and environments more flexible (Learning Resources Centre, 2010).

Many educational systems are now recognizing that in order to support the sensory intelligences of all children, the focus must be on inclusive teaching through the facilitation of differentiated instruction and the design of sensory responsive classroom environments (Alberta Education, 2010; Hildreth, 2013). For example, teachers of high school students in Zimbabwe defined innovative teaching as (a) the introduction of new things in a creative, organized, and unique way to get students excited about learning, and (b) new ways of utilizing human and material resources by breaking away from the norm and doing something, i.e., fun while learning (Gudyanga, Gudyanga, & Mutemeri, 2013).

Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 was created to improve the academic achievement of the disadvantaged by “meeting the educational needs of low-achieving children in our Nation's highest-poverty schools, limited English proficient children, migratory children, children with disabilities, Indian children, neglected or delinquent children, and young children in need of reading assistance.” (U.S. Department of Education, 2014, p. 1). In order to meet those educational needs, teachers may need to identify their students' learning styles, adjust their own teaching methods to accommodate the diverse learning styles of their students, and redesign their classroom environments with flexibility and ongoing responsiveness (Park, 2002).

Incidence and Characteristics of Learning Styles

A review of studies about preferred learning styles revealed that the typical K-12 classroom contains 30 percent visual learners, 25 percent auditory learners, and 15 percent kinesthetic learners, with the remaining 30 percent consisting of students with mixed learning styles (Hope, 2014). A study of five ethnic groups of high school Secondary English Learners showed that high achievers were the most visual and low achievers were the least visual; middle achievers showed statistically significant higher preferences for auditory learning than low achievers, and these students generally preferred to learn through tactile and kinesthetic modes (Park, 2002). Brown (1999) gave self-reporting questionnaires to vocational education students, and found that kinesthetic learners retained best, but they made up only 5 percent of the population, whereas visual learners made up 65 percent, and auditory learners, 30 percent.

Many researchers and educators who have studied learning styles believe that the purpose of these instruments is to identify the preferred learning style of each individual, which in turn should result in modified instructional methods to optimize each individual's learning. A plan for designing such assessments must consider (a) purposes of the assessment, (b) types of performances to be evaluated, (c) activities that will allow that performance to be observed, and (d) systematic rating procedures (Stiggins, 1987). A Canadian study of self-reported learning styles, however, challenges the hypothesis that individuals learn best with material presented in a particular sensory modality. Instead, it concludes that most people are probably multimodal and multi-situational learners, changing learning strategies depending on the context of the to-be-learned material (Krätzig & Arbuthnott, 2006). Most experienced teachers, especially those aware of the need to adapt their teaching styles to students' learning styles, are comfortable using their own observation, intuition, and judgment to select theories and implement strategies for specific children in specific situations.

Stages of Creating a New Learning-Teaching Style Assessment

The first three (motivation, literature review, and draft version) of the seven stages in the process to develop a learning-teaching style assessment described in this paper have been completed. These stages include:

1. Motivation

2. Literature review

3. Draft version of new checklist

4. ------------------------------

5. Plan for formal field-testing

6. Results of formal field-testing and final draft

7. Clinical and educational use

8. Publication of the assessment (primarily for teachers, therapists, and families)

The next stages include drafting an assessment, planning for field testing, revising the ELSA and clinical use. The work and information necessary in these stages is described below.

Stage 3: Draft Assessment

The third stage involved collecting, comparing, modifying, and organizing test items into a draft version of The Erhardt Learning-Teaching Style Assessment (ELSA). As suggested by Abdel-Khalek (2013), the item pool was constructed from several sources: (a) search of the literature, (b) items from existing scales, and (c) personal clinical experiences of the author. The statements were written as concisely as possible, and were consistent with the language of Differentiated Assessment (DA), Response to Intervention (RtI), and Universal Design for Learning (UDL). This draft version was organized into three sections of types of learners: Visual, Auditory, and Tactile/Kinesthetic, each with two subsections: Behavior Characteristics Observed in School, Clinic, and/or Home Contexts and Teaching Strategies Recommended. The fourth section is titled Interpretation and Recommendations. Scoring symbols included:

(Behavior characteristic observed)

(Teaching strategy recommended and scored: + Effective results, – Ineffective results)

Scores from each section and sub-section will be calculated as percentages by a formula including the total possible score. Analyses of results, documented in the Interpretation Section, are based on additional calculation of percentages to indicate strongest learning styles or detect Multi-Sensory Learners. Interpretation and Recommendations should be written with consideration of possible relationships to specific tasks, topics, and/or environmental contexts. The fourth stage will involve formal field-testing of the instrument with elementary-age children.

Stage 4: Formal Field Testing

For this fourth stage, a convenience sample of children who are struggling with academic performance in reading (25%–50% quartile) will be recruited from a total of approximately 40 children in two Title 1 pull out classrooms (kindergarten through 3rd grade), in an urban elementary school. The demographics of this population, which crosses all levels of income, includes students with a variety of learning problems who, depending on their progress, will either (a) return to their regular classrooms without assistance, (b) be recommended for continued services in the Title I program, or (c) qualify for special education services. About one-third of the children in these classrooms are considered English Second Language (ESL) or English Language Learners (ELL). Others are underachievers who have difficulty with focus and attention, lack motivation, or are emotionally affected by their negative life experiences. Total staff includes two teachers and three teaching assistants, who work with the children in groups of two or three, and sometimes 1:1, if needed. Descriptions of two children identified as potential candidates for the study typify the challenges the learning styles assessment was designed to address (M. Cavanagh, personal communication, July 9, 2014).

Participant 1 is a six-year-old first grader with English Language Learner (ELL) support. She was referred to the Title I reading intervention team for assessment and additional reading assistance. Her social language skills are fair, but her vocabulary and academic language are limited, and sight words are difficult. She appears to be a happy girl, living with her parents and three siblings, who often participate in special family activities together. Her mother reads with her and does extra word work every night. Becoming a good reader is important to her, and within the small group she likes to share her ideas about the stories they are reading together. However, limited vocabulary makes it difficult for her to fully comprehend the stories that most first graders can understand. She came to kindergarten with limited English language experience, which has resulted in a slower pace in improving reading skills. The Title I reading intervention team has collaborated with the ELL teacher to make sure she is placed appropriately in a small reading group.

Participant 2 is a six-year-old first grader who is having reading difficulties. Because the Response to Intervention (RtI) Tier One interventions used in his classroom have not been enough to help him keep up with first grade reading goals, he was referred to the Title I reading intervention team for assessment and additional reading assistance. Although learning first grade sight words is easy for him, and he is able to read and spell words with common phonetic patterns, he has difficulty with comprehension issues. He lacks confidence when asked to share ideas about stories the class is reading. His expressive language is grammatically correct, but he appears to be unfamiliar with many words and concepts that most first graders know, e.g., “flower.” He lives with his mother and two older brothers who are responsible for him while their mother is at work. His evenings and weekends are spent playing video games and watching television. He spends very little time with friends, playing outside, or having conversations with his family members. It appears that his limited social and conversational experiences have prevented him from gaining the prior knowledge and vocabulary needed to comprehend what he reads at a first grade level.

Planned Procedure for the Formal Field Test

Since the first 2 wk. at this school are spent observing all the Title I children, the draft Erhardt Learning-Teaching Style Assessment will be one of the checklists informally used to flag significant behaviors that need attention. The designated Title I lead teacher, with the assistance of her staff, will then select appropriate children for the study, i.e., those children who are struggling with academic performance in reading (25%–50% quartile).

During the school year, Title I staff (teachers and teacher assistants) will use the Erhardt Learning-Teaching Style Assessment draft version (Appendix A) to score each child's learning styles during everyday observations in school, until the checklist is completed. Each Behavior Characteristics page will be scored, calculated, and interpreted (Step 1). Next, Initial Teaching Strategies will be selected and implemented for a trial period, to be determined by the teaching staff (Step 2). Strategy Effectiveness will then be scored, to determine and record final recommendations, including methods of ongoing individualization and adaptations (Step 3).

Following this period of implementing the final recommended strategies, reading performance will be measured by independent common assessments (post-tests) used in the school district and compared with previous assessments (pre-tests) (Step 4).

Stage 5. Results of Formal Field-Testing and Revisions

At the conclusion of the study, participating staff will be requested to provide their reactions and suggestions for improvements to the Erhardt Learning-Teaching Style Assessment on a Feedback Form (Appendix B). Table 2 provides guidelines for creating the final draft of the new assessment, similar to those in Table 1.

TABLE 2

Proposed Process for Developing The Erhardt Learning-Teaching Style Assessment (ELSA)

Process	Description of Stages for Creating a New Checklist
* Motivation	The need for an instrument that could determine optimal learning styles of individual children, and recommend instructional strategies for teachers (academics), therapists (motor skills), and parents (self-help skills)
* Literature review using key words: Children, learning styles, checklists, test items	Ongoing searching and reading materials related to learning styles, to compile test items for a new checklist for children who are underachievers or have difficulty learning new skills in home, school, and community environments
* Draft version of new checklist: The Erhardt Learning-Teaching Style Assessment (ELSA)	Modifying and organizing test items, devising scoring system, recommending strategies, and describing methods of interpretation and recommendations
† Formal field-testing of ELSA	Selected school staff observing and scoring a sample of children in Title I classes for reading performance, implementing and scoring the effectiveness of the recommended strategies, and completing the feedback form to analyze for revision.
† Revision of ELSA based on feedback form	Results of formal field-testing, revision, and submission for journal publication
† Informal field-testing	Educational and clinical use, recording suggestions for improvement
† Publication of ELSA	Final version and publication for distribution

Note * Stages completed; † Stages to be implemented

Stage 6: Educational and Clinical Use

With ongoing use of the ELSA in the classroom, teachers can accommodate the needs of individual students with different learning styles, and provide increased interactivity and functionality to foster effective learning environments. For example, instructors could supplement online discussion forums (for visual learners) with classroom exchanges that encourage verbal sharing among students (for auditory learners) and physical activities related to the lesson topic (for tactile/kinesthetic learners) (Teo, 2011). While technology has empowered many learners, especially those with learning and physical disabilities, some concrete thinkers may find that technology-differentiated learning is more difficult for them than it is for abstract thinkers. Therefore, recommended strategies in the ELSA have focused on providing children with as many opportunities as possible for experiential, concrete, and 3-dimensional learning, rather than a preponderance of digital technology and electronic devices.

Once published, the ELSA will be available to teachers, therapists, and parents, for continual, structured observation of children's interactions with their environment, their individual interests, and current abilities. In both the educational and clinical contexts, information from the ELSA can contribute to the development of programs that support individual learning of academic and motor skills. In the home context, with this knowledge, caregivers can decide which specific strategies to use for teaching new skills, especially in the area of self-help activities.

Conclusion

This paper has described the process of creating a new observational assessment, The Erhardt Learning-Teaching Style Assessment (ELSA), designed to provide a useful tool for therapists and parents, as well as teachers, in the different contexts of schools, clinics, and home environments. The assessment checklist differs from others by helping a variety of test administrators (a) identify learning styles of individual children, (b) select optimal strategies for teaching skills in other categories in addition to academics (e.g., motor, self-help), and (c) evaluate results of the selected strategies in order to modify them if needed.

The structure of the ELSA has been explained as containing three categories of learner styles (Visual, Auditory, and Tactile/Kinesthetic), each with two subsections (Behavior Characteristics Observed) and (Teaching Strategies Recommended). The final section (Interpretation and Recommendations) will include the analyses of results, which are based on calculation of percentages to indicate strongest learning styles, or to detect Multi-Sensory Learners, with consideration of possible relationships to specific tasks, topics, and/or environmental contexts. The stages, participants, and procedures for formal field-testing have been described. Revision will be done according to feedback received, and informal field-testing with more revisions will continue through practical use before final publication of the ELSA.

It is hoped that this description will motivate professionals who are interested in developing new assessments to integrate the necessary research into their clinical practice, using the described process as a blueprint (Erhardt, 2007).

Potential users of the ELSA: The author is seeking volunteer field-testers for The Erhardt Learning-Teaching Style Assessment (ELSA). To apply, e-mail [e-mail] with “ELSA Field Test” in the subject line, and your name and preferred e-mail address in the message. You will then receive a return e-mail with two attachments: the ELSA, in booklet format, to print as many times as you wish, and the Field-Test Feedback Form, which should be returned after you have used the assessment with one or more children. Your feedback will be used to refine and revise the instrument during 2015, for publication in 2016. At that time, you will receive the final version for your own use, and acknowledgment in a future journal article reporting the results.