Learning styles and preferred teaching styles of

LEARNING STYLES AND PREFERRED TEACHING STYLES OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN TECHNOLOGY AND LIVELIHOOD EDUCATION OF NUEVA ECIJA VIVIEN A. GUMANGAN Agricultural Science and Technology School Central Luzon State University Abstract How may the students learn is always a concern for teachers in order to deliver a practical approach to learning a subject. Similarly, how teachers “ become” inside their classroom while teaching is a reflection of students’ performance as students prefer a teacher who has a variety of ways in teaching. With 489 male and 591 female students from the eight selected private and eight public secondary schools of Congressional District II of Nueva Ecija, this research was conducted to determine the students’ learning styles and their preferred teaching styles in Technology and Livelihood Education in both private and public schools. Subsequently this study was conducted to examine the effect of students’ learning styles and their preferred teaching styles in Technology and Livelihood Education in their performance in TLE. Results of the study revealed most of the student respondents favored collaborative and participative learning styles and they prefer teachers who are expert and facilitator. Moreover, it was found out that all the learning styles are significantly correlated with the average grade in TLE of the student respondents. The result of the t-test also revealed a highly significant difference in independent, avoidant, competitive and participative learning styles which were evident among the two types of school. Finally, the test revealed that facilitator and delegator teachings styles had significant difference in private and public high school student respondents. Introduction Former US President Theodore Roosevelt once said that, “ Far away the best prize that life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing”. It seems very clear that Roosevelt’s statement points out to teaching. Being a teacher has always been one of the most rewarding but challenging professions since a teacher has the biggest opportunity to make a difference in the lives of people. To be an effective teacher, one has to combine his best of human relations, intuition, sound judgment, knowledge of subject matter, and knowledge of how people learn- all in one act simultaneously. This translates into an extreme task. Moreover, each teacher must be willing to take part in their students’ lives as the second parent and be committed to mold the students’ intellect and the best of their abilities. They have to know the learning style of their students to help improve their academic performance. Aside from learning styles, students also have preferred teaching style from their teachers. To be able to learn effectively, learning style of students should be in congruence with their teacher’s teaching styles. Teacher should take into consideration that their students have different learning styles and they learn more easily through their strengths than through their weaknesses. Most of the time, better teaching performance can be equated with the suited teaching styles employed by the teacher. Teaching style is defined as the way teachers teach and their distinctive mannerisms complemented by their choices of teaching behaviors and strategies. (Kelloug and Robert, 1991). It is viewed as a broad dimension or personality type that encompasses teacher, pattern of behavior, mode of performance, and attitude towards self and others. It is an expressive aspect of teaching characterizes by the emotional relationship between students and teachers and as an instrumental aspect on how teachers carry out the task of instruction, organize learning and set classroom standards (Ornstein, 1992). It has been observed that high school students have poor academic performance, which is the major problem educational institutions are facing today. The education sector is continuously tracking down the possible solution to remedy this serious problem (Velasquez 2007). This study, therefore, was designed to determine the learning style and preferred teaching styles of the private and public high school senior students in TLE in Congressional District II of Nueva Ecija. It also investigated the relationships between the learning styles and the preferred teaching styles of the students in their TLE subject. Also, it was designed to analyze the difference in the learning styles of students and teaching styles of TLE teachers in public and private high schools. Subsequently, this study was conducted to examine the effect of the student’s learning styles and their preferred teaching styles in Technology and Livelihood Education. Method Participants A total of 1, 080 senior students of S. Y. 2010-2011 consisting of 489 male and 591 female students from the eight selected private and eight public secondary schools of Congressional District II of Nueva Ecija were the participants of the study. Measures Sources of data for this study are from student’s permanent record, student’s responses to Grasha-Reichmann Learning and Teaching Style Inventory, and from teacher’s responses to Grasha-Reichmann Teaching Style Inventory. Data were treated using descriptive statistics, Pearson (r), Pearson Chi Square and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Results Learning Styles of Student-Respondents Students learn in many ways-by seeing or hearing; reflecting or acting; reasoning logically; memorizing and visualizing. This is referred to as students’ learning styles. Table 1 shows the summary of overall mean of the different learning styles of private and public high school student respondents. The study revealed that the dominant learning styles among student respondents was collaborative ([pic]= 3. 83), participative ([pic]= 3. 71) and dependent ([pic]= 68). The rest of the student respondents had either independent ([pic]= 3. 53), competitive ([pic]= 3. 44) and avoidant ([pic]= 2. 9). Data revealed that student respondents had different learning styles. Table1. Summary of overall mean of the different learning styles of student respondents | | Private | Public | Total | | Learning Styles | Mean | SD | Description | Mean | SD | Description | Mean | SD | Description | | Collaborative | 3. 81 | 0. 57 | MA | 3. 84 | 0. 72 | MA | 3. 83 | 0. 66 | MA | | Participant | 3. 66 | 0. 56 | MA | 3. 74 | 0. 70 | MA | 3. 71 | 0. 65 | MA | | Dependent | 3. 66 | 0. 51 | MA | 3. 69 | 0. 68 | MA | 3. 68 | 0. 62 | MA | | Independent | 3. 46 | 0. 56 | MA | 3. 57 | 0. 69 | MA | 3. 53 | 0. 63 | MA | | Competitive | 3. 21 | 0. 56 | MA | 3. 59 | 0. 67 | MA | 3. 44 | 0. 65 | MA | | Avoidant | 2. 78 | 0. 50 | U | 2. 97 | 0. 61 | U | 2. 90 | 0. 58 | U | Legend: 4. 20-5. 00 Strongly Agree SA 3. 40-4. 19 Moderately Agree MA 2. 60-3. 39 Undecided U 1. 80-2. 59 Moderately Disagree MD 1. 00-1. 79 Strongly Disagree SD Teaching Style Preferences of the Students Teaching style is defined as the way teachers teach and their distinctive mannerism complemented by their choices of teaching behaviors and strategies. (Kelloug and Roderts, 1991). Table 2 shows the summary of overall mean of the different teaching styles preferences of private and public high school student respondents. The study revealed that the teaching styles preferred among student respondents was expert ([pic]= 3. 69) and facilitator ([pic]= 3. 69). The rest of the student respondents had either personal model ([pic]= 3. 68), delegator ([pic]= 3. 67) and formal authority ([pic]= 3. 54). The data revealed that student respondents had different teaching style preferences. As per type of school, private high school student respondents preferred expert ([pic]= 3. 69) and personal model ([pic]= 3. 68) as teaching styles of their teachers. The rest of the student respondents preferred facilitator ([pic]= 3. 64), delegator ([pic]= 3. 62) and formal authority ([pic]= 3. 52). On the other hand, public high school students preferred facilitator ([pic]= 3. 73), expert ([pic]= 3. 7) and delegator ([pic]= 3. 7) teaching styles. The rest of the teaching styles were personal model ([pic]= 3. 68) and formal authority ([pic]= 3. 56). Table 2. Summary of overall mean of the preferred teaching styles of student respondents | | Private | Public Total | | Preferred Teaching Styles | Mean | SD | Description | Mean | SD | Description | Mean | SD | Description | | Expert | 3. 69 | 0. 55 | MA | 3. 70 | 0. 68 | MA | 3. 69 | 0. 63 | MA | | Facilitator | 3. 64 | 0. 57 | MA | 3. 73 | 0. 73 | MA | 3. 69 | 0. 67 | MA | | Personal Model | 3. 68 | 0. 58 | MA | 3. 68 | 0. 72 | MA | 3. 68 | 0. 67 | MA | | Delegator | 3. 62 | 0. 61 | MA | 3. 70 | 0. 71 | MA | 3. 67 | 0. 67 | MA | | Formal Authority | 3. 52 | 0. 48 | MA | 3. 56 | 0. 65 | MA | 3. 54 | 0. 59 | MA | Legend: 4. 20-5. 00 Strongly Agree SA 3. 40-4. 19 Moderately Agree MA 2. 60-3. 39 Undecided U 1. 80-2. 59 Moderately Disagree MD 1. 00-1. 79 Strongly Disagree SD Preferred Teaching Styles and Student-Respondents’ Grade in TLE The average grade had high significant correlation to all the teaching style preference of the student-respondents. These are expert (X2= 25. 206) , personal authority (X2= 29. 565), personal model (X2= 21. 613), facilitator (X2= 25. 828) and delegation (X2= 39. 174). | Table 3. Association between preferred teaching style to average grade in TLE of student respondents | | Preferred Teaching Styles | Grade | | Expert | 25. 206** | | Formal Authority | 29. 565** | | Personal Model | 21. 613** | | Facilitator | 25. 828** | | Delegator | 39. 174** | ** Highly significant (p