Abstract
Learning Support Environments need to support the learner not only for a variety of tasks (both learning and information retrieval), but also by providing flexibility so they can determine their own navigational or learning strategy with which to accomplish these tasks. Following a review of the background to our understanding of individual learner differences and individual learning strategies and styles, an investigation of user behaviour and its relationship to individual learning style is reported. Entwistle's Approaches to Study Inventory was employed to select test subjects as this questionnaire attempts to incorporate various dimensions of a student's approach to study, deep/surface processing, the serial/holist dimension (as proposed by Pask), and various strategic and motivation elements. Those subjects selected for their high reproducing approach to study, showed a preference for a more linear and structured presentation of the information and navigated the screens at a slower rate. The high meaning group demonstrated more active use, especially for their initial period of system use, showed greater use of the self-determined hypertext linkages as a navigational strategy, and appeared to be more actively searching the material.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
L. J Allinson, N. V. Hammond. A learning support environment: the Hitch-Hiker's Guide. In (R. McAleese, ed.) Hypertext: theory into practice. Intellect Books, 1989, pp. 62–74.
L. J. Allinson. Designing and evaluating the navigational toolkit. In Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Educational Workshop “Cognitive Modelling and Interactive Environments”, Mierlo. 1990.
J. B. Biggs. Dimensions of study behaviour: another look at A.T.I. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 1976, Vol. 48, pp. 68–80.
J. B. Biggs. Individual and group differences in study process. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 1978, Vol. 48, pp. 266–279.
J. B. Biggs. Student Approaches to Learning. Australian Council for Educational Research, 1987.
L. Coventry. Some effects of cognitive style on learning UNIX. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. 1989, Vol. 31, pp. 349–365.
D. Diaz. The identification of approaches to learning adopted by Venezuelan university students. University of Wales Institute of Science and Technology, 1984.
N. Entwistle. Motivational factors in students' approaches to learning. In (R. R. Schmeck, ed.) Learning Strategies and Learning Styles. Plenum, 1988, pp. 21–51.
N. J. Entwistle and P. Ramsden. Understanding Student Learning. Croom Helm, 1983.
N. V. Hammond and L. J. Allinson. The travel metaphor as design principle and training aid for navigating around complex sytems. In (D Diaper and R Winder, eds.) People and Computers III. Cambridge University Press, 1987, pp. 75–90.
N. V. Hammond and L. J. Allinson. Development and evaluation of a CAL system for non-formal domains: the Hitch-hiker's Guide to cognition. Computers and Education, 1988, Vol. 12, pp. 215–220.
N. V. Hammond and L. J. Allinson. Travelling around a learning support environment: rambling, orienteering or touring. CHT88: Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, 1988, pp. 269–273.
N. V. Hammond and L. J. Allinson. Extending hypertext for learning: an investigation of access and guidance tools. In (A. Sutcliffe and L. Macaulay, eds) People and Computers V. Cambridge University Press, 1989, pp. 293–304.
F. Marton and R. Säljö. On qualitative differences in learning: 1. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 1976, Vol. 46, pp. 4–11.
F. Marton and R. Säljö. Approaches to learning. In (F Marton, D Hounsell and N Entwistle, eds.) The Experience of Learning. Scottish Academic Press, 1984, pp. 36–55.
S. Messick et al. Individuality in Learning. Jossey Bass, 1976.
C. M. Miller and M. R. Parlett. Up to the mark: a study of the examination game. SRHE, 1974.
A. Morgan, G. Gibbs and E. Taylor. Students' approaches to studying the social sciences and technology foundation courses: preliminary studies. Institute of Technology, The Open University, 1980.
G. Pask and B. C. E. Scott. Learning strategies and individual competence. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. 1972, Vol. 4, pp. 217–253.
P. Ramsden. Student learning and perceptions of the academic environment. Higher Education. 1979, Vol. 8, pp. 411–428.
R. Säljö. Learning about learning. Higher Education. 1979, Vol. 8, pp. 443–451.
D. Watkins. Identifying the study process dimensions of Australian university students. Australian Journal of Education. 1982, Vol. 26, pp. 76–85.
D. Watkins. Assessing tertiary study processes. Human Learning. 1983, Vol. 2, pp. 29–37.
W. G. Webiter and A. D. Walker. Problem solving strategies and manifest brain assymetry. Cortex. 1981, Vol. 14, pp. 474–479.
C. E. Weinstein and V. L. Underwood. Learning strategies: the ‘how’ of learning. In (J. W. Segal, S. F. Chipman and R. Glaser, eds.) Thinking and Learning Skills. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1985.
H. A. Witkin. Cognitive style in academic performance and in teacher-student relations. In (S Messick et al., eds) Individuality in Learning. Jossey-Bass, 1976
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1992 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Allinson, L. (1992). Learning styles and computer-based learning environments. In: Tomek, I. (eds) Computer Assisted Learning. ICCAL 1992. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 602. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-55578-1_58
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-55578-1_58
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-55578-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47221-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive