Classroom Instruction Adapted To Perceptual Learning Styles: Does It Count In Vocabulary Learning?

This study adopts a combination of quantitative and qualitative approach to explore the pedagogical effects of learning styles. Specifically, it measures the effects of match, mismatch and nonmatch instruction (traditional instruction) on vocabulary learning outcomes of students with different perceptual learning styles. To achieve this goal, the study examined:(1) The distribution of perceptual learning style preferences among the participants;(2) The effects of different instructional methods on vocabulary learning outcomes of participants with different perceptual learning style preferences;(3) Participants' attitudes towards different instructional methods and whether their attitudes correspond to their vocabulary learning outcomes under different instructional methods.Participants from six classes majoring in English and English Education took a revised version of Reid's (1984) Perceptual Learning-Style Preference Questionnaire to make their perceptual preferences known. They also took a Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (Paribakht & Wesche, 2001, p. 180) to show their familiarity with the words, through which the researcher can ensure words to be taught are unknown to them. Subsequently they were divided into three groups according to their perceptual preferences (auditory, visual and tactile/ kinesthetic), and learned three sets of words taught through three instructional methods, namely match, mismatch and nonmatch. After the instruction, students took an immediate posttest and delayed posttest to examine their vocabulary learning results. Six students, two from each style group, were also chosen to take the in-depth interview.Findings of the study indicate that the majority of participants in this study have more than one major style; learning-style-based instruction (match and mismatch) has a significant dominance over traditional (nonmatch) instruction. However, the study does not support the widely held view that when instruction is catered to students' preferred learning style, students' learning can be improved. Instead, it shows that when students are taught through mismatched instruction, especially students of auditory and tactile/ kinesthetic styles, they have better performance and such differences are statistically significant, which is probably caused by the dominance of visual instruction. However, results from the in-depth interview show that visual instruction is least favored by the participants compared to tactile/ kinesthetic instruction and auditory instruction. In addition, only two of the participants prefer instruction mismatched to their major perceptual learning styles which contradicts their performance in vocabulary learning. The study concludes with the suggestion that in the process of teaching, teachers should take students' learning style preferences into account, but the adoption of match or mismatch instruction should be considered carefully.