Learning styles and learning strategies of left-handed EFL students

Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 WCLTA 2011 Learning styles and learning strategies of left-handed EFL students Ali Gholami Mehrdad a *, Manouchehr Ahghar b a b Islamic Azad university, Hamedan Branch, Hamedan, Iran Islamic Azad university, Hamedan Branch, Hamedan, Iran Abstract As some studies on brain lateralization (e.g. Knecht et al., 2000) have lent support to the hypothesis that left handed people may reflect a right-brain dominance, and as differences in dominance could have implications about cognitive functioning, the present study aims at investigating whether this difference is reflected in the learning-style and, therefore, learning-strategy differences between left-handed and right-handed EFL students. To do this, three questionnaires, Torrance’s (1987) Right/Left Brain Dominance Test; Oxford’s(1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning, and VAK Learning Styles Indicator, were adopted and administered among a sample of 100 EFL students (50 left-handers and 50 right-handers). The data collected were then analyzed by SPSS Package to find the patterns of difference and the significance of the differences between left and right-handers on the areas of concern by the computation of cross-tab frequencies with Chi-Square and Independent Samples T-test respectively. Although the results of the data analysis showed no significant difference in brain dominance between right-handers and left-handers, the differences between the groups on certain aspects of learning styles as well as learning strategies were found to be statistically significant suggesting a rather different cognitive processing in left-handed learners than right-handed counterparts and bringing to light the need for the educators, teachers, and syllabus designers to give the issue due attention. ©©2011 byElsevier ElsevierLtd. Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Prof. Hüseyin Uzunboylu. 2011 Published Published by Keywords: Handedness, brain dominance, learning styles, learning strategies, EFL students; 1. Introduction The assumption that individuals might differ in their cognitive style according to the dominant hemisphere has given rise to tendencies to apply the theory to teaching methods. Studies on occupational choice suggest that more "left brain thinking" might be involved in students' preferences for language and literature and more "right brain thinking" in preferences for graphic arts, artistic skills and architecture. Hemisphericity has raised much interest among educators and the question how to accommodate instruction techniques to students' cognitive styles has been often addressed at meetings of educational associations (see Dunn & Dunn, 1986; Dunn & Reddix, 1990; Lynes et al., 1987; Miller, 1988). It has also raised much opposition from the traditional segments of the teaching profession, and from neuro-specialists, who have called for more caution with this approach (see Harris, 1985). The existing research on cognitive styles has also addressed handedness. Paul Broca who identified a region of the brain specialized for language also suggested that a person's handedness was opposite from the specialized hemisphere (so a right-handed person probably has a left-hemispheric language specialization). * Ali Gholami Mehrdad. Tel.: +98-811-4494000 E-mail address: ali.gholami.mehrdad@gmail.com 1877-0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Prof. Hüseyin Uzunboylu. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.100 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 537 The association between hand and brain captured the imaginations of researchers because it would be so useful (so easy, so non-invasive, so cheap) to study patterns of brain asymmetries by using a person's handedness as a marker for brain lateralization. In general, the theory of learning styles states that people have different approaches to learning and studying (Dunn & Dunn, 1978; Dunn & Dunn, 1987; Felder & Brent, 2005; Felder & Henriques, 1995; Hall, 2005; Heiman, 2006; Manochehri & Jon, 2006; Mupinga, Nora, & Yaw, 2006; Price, 2005; Sheridan & Steele-Dadzie, 2005; Silverman, 2006; Ware, & O'Donoughue, 2005). Given a specific instruction method or environment, some people will learn more effectively than others due to their individual learning style. The term learning style is used to encompass four aspects of the person: cognitive style, i.e. preferred or habitual patterns of mental functioning: patterns of attitudes and interests that affect what an individual will pay most attention to in a learning situation; a tendency to seek situations compatible with one’s own learning patterns; and the tendency to use certain learning strategies and avoid others (Lawrence, 1984). Learning style is inherent and pervasive (Willing, 1988) and is a blend of cognitive, affective and behavioral elements (Oxford & Ehrman, 1988). Although learning styles have been heavily researched (Coffield et al., 2004; Reynold & Vince, 2007; Welsh et al., 2007; Hornyak et al., 2007; Herbert & Stenfors, 2007; Sievers, 2007; Hyde, 2007; Kayes A.B., 2007; Kayes D. C., 2007; Garcia et al., 2007; Demirbas & Demirkan, 2007; Armstrong & Mahmud, 2008; Li et al., 2008), little is known about left-handed students’ learning styles, and strategies. One group of learners who make up around 7% of the whole population of learners are left-handed students who may have different learning styles and therefore may use different learning strategies due to an alleged link between handedness, brain lateralization and brain functioning. The aim of study is to present and explore the learning styles of left-handed EFL students enrolled in at universities in the province of Hamedan, Iran to better understand and to offer a better insight into the different learning styles among such students and to see whether there are significant differences between these students and their right-handed counterparts. Needless to say such investigation could have pedagogical implications for teachers to develop appropriate teaching and pedagogical strategies. The present work addresses the following questions: 1. Do left-handed EFL students reflect a different brain functioning than their right-handed counterparts? 2. Do left-handed EFL students use different learning styles than the right-handed ones? Do they show a dominant learning style? 3. Is there a significant difference between left-handed and right-handed EFL learners in learning styles? 4. Do left-handed EFL students use different learning strategies than the right-handed ones? Do they show a dominant learning strategy? 5. Is there a significant difference between left-handed and right-handed EFL learners in strategy use? 2. Methodology 2.1. Subjects and sampling A total of 100 EFL students, consisting of 50 left-handed subjects and a reference group of 50 right-handed subjects, 63 females and 27 males, between 18 to 29 years old were selected from a total of 1760 EFL students in three major universities in Hamedan. Purposive sampling was used to select the left-handed subjects as their selection was highly limited by the low frequency of the occurrence of such attribute among the population Handedness in this study was determined by the individual's self report. 2.2. Instruments 538 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 Three questionnaires were adopted and used to carry out the present study: 1. Right/Left Brain Dominance Test by E. Paul Torrance, Your style of learning and thinking, 1987 which includes 20 items of the type below, each of which has two contrasting statements. Between the two statements is a scale of 5 points on which the subjects are to indicate their own perception of which statement best describes them. 2. Vak visual, auditory, kinesthetic Learning Style Indicators (free self-test questionnaire) which provides a very easy and quick reference inventory by which to assess people's preferred learning styles. The version adopted here includes 30 items. Every item on the questionnaire describes a situation and offers three ways for tackling with the situation. These three reflect the three learning styles of desire the first being visual, the second being auditory, and the third kinesthetic/physical. 3. Oxford’s (1990) Strategy for Language Learning (SILL): Version for Speakers of Other Languages Learning English which contains 50 statements about learning English which students have to read and decide how true the statement is of them, marking their choices on a separate worksheet on a scale of 5, where 1 indicates that the statement is never true of them and 5 indicates that the statement always or almost always holds true of them. 2.3. Data collection In the present study, handedness was determined by asking each participant whether or not they considered themselves right handed or left handed. All demographic information and test data were compiled. Data were then entered into a data base format and analyzed with the aid of the. To collect the data for the present study the three questionnaires were given to each participant in the study after they had been familiarized with how to answer the items on each questionnaire. The participants were required to return these after they had completed them about themselves at home. 2.4. Data analysis Collecting up the questionnaires during a period of two weeks, all the data were analyzed by the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SSPS) Version 17 to find the distribution of answers and to examine possible differences between left and right-handers on the three main concerns of the study: Brain functioning, dominant learning style(s) and the preferred learning strategies by applying chi square tests and independent samples t-tests to the collected data. The results of the data analysis are presented below: 2.4.1. Brain functioning in right-handed and left-handed learners Table 1 shows the brain functioning statistics for the groups. As it seen from the table, the mean score for the brain functioning in right-handed learners (57.6) is higher than that of left- handed learners (55.4) which indicates a greater right brain tendency in the former. Table 1 Brain functioning statistics 3 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 index Frequency Minimum Maximum Mean Variance Std. Deviation Right Handers 50 35 78 57/6 103/3 10/2 Left Handers 50 35 67 55/4 82/2 9/1 Total 100 35 78 56/5 93/1 9/6 Groups 539 2.4.1.1. Distribution of scores on brain functioning in right-handed and left-handed learners As table 2 shows, three right-handed learners (6%) have scored above 70 which is indicative of a total right-brain functioning while no left-handed individual has obtained such a score. Also, thirteen right-handed learners (26%) and ten left-handed ones (20%) have obtained a score of 64-70 which is indicative of an average right-brain tendency; meanwhile, eleven left-handed learners (22%) and only three right-handed individuals (6%) have scored below 50 which is indicative of a total left-brain tendency. Table 2. Brain functioning * Handedness cross-tabulation Right handers Frequency Left handers percent df=4 Frequency percent sig=0/019 Below 50 3 6% 11 22% 50-56 11 22% 14 28% 57-63 12 24% 23 46% 64-70 13 26% 10 20% Above 70 Total 3 50 6% 100% 0 50 0% 100% X2=11/78 Furthermore, a study of the statistics given in the table reveals that in the range of scores between 50-56, which implies an average left-brain tendency again left-handers outnumber right-handers with fourteen and eleven individuals (28% and 22%) each. This also holds true about the range of scores between 57-63 which signifies no certain brain tendency. Here, twenty-three left handed (46%) and twelve right-handed (24%) individuals fall. 2.4.1.2. Inferential statistics To analyze the significance of the differences observed between the groups, a chi square test and an independent-samples t-test were carried out, the results of which appeared contradicting. As the results of the two tests in tables 2 above and 3 below show, for the Chi Square test carried out at p< 0.05 and a degree of freedom of 4, the observed value of 11.78 was found to be statistically more significant than the critical value of 9.49. This can imply a different brain tendency in right-handed and left-handed learners. However, the results obtained for the t-test summarized in table 3 below at p< 0.05 and sig= 98 do not show such a difference. Here, the observed t-value 540 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 standing at 1.13 is found to be smaller than the critical value of 1.98. This will imply a lack of difference between the two groups as far as the brain functioning is concerned. Table 3. Independent samples t-test index Groups Frequency Mean Std. Deviation 50 57/6 10/2 Right handers Left handers 50 55/4 Mean Difference t df sig 2/2 1/13 98 0/26 9/1 2.4.2. Learning styles of right-handed and left-handed learners The next step in the analysis of the data was to compute crosstab frequencies between handedness and learning styles to decide about the meaningfulness of the responses. These are summarized below: Table 4. Learning style * Hand preference cross-tabulation Visual Auditory Kinaesthetic/ Physical Total Frequency percent Frequency percent Frequency percent Frequency percent 20 40% 16 32% 14 28% 50 100% Left handers 39 78% 0 0 11 22% 50 100% Total 59 59% 16 16% 25 25% 100 100% Right handers X2 =22/47 df=2 sig=0/000 As the data shows, 78% of the left-handed learners have shown a visual learning style while only 40% of the right-handed ones have shown a preference for such a style; that is while, on both auditory and kinaesthetic styles the percentage of right-handed learners is higher than that of left-handed individuals (28% vs. 22% and 32% vs. 0% respectively). The interesting observation here is that none of the left-handed learners has shown a tendency for auditory style. Thus, to check the significance of the differences, a chi-square test was applied, the results of which summarized in table 4 above, point to a significant difference between the two groups in the dominant learning style. As it is seen from the table, the observed chi-square value of 22.47 at p<0.05 and with a sig=2 is higher than the critical value of 5.99. 2.4.3. Learning strategies of right-handed and left-handed learners 5 541 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 Now to check if there is any difference in strategy use between the left-handed and right-handed learners crosstab frequencies through chi square test and independent samples t-test were carried out on the data, the summary of which are presented in tables 5, 6 and 7 below. Table 5 Group statistics on strategy Use Groups Right hands Left hands Freq Min Max Mean SD Freq Min Max Mean SD 50 2/1 3/6 2/6 0/4 50 1/6 4/2 2/8 0/6 50 2/3 3/7 3/1 0/4 50 2/5 4/3 3/2 0/5 50 2/1 4/6 3/3 0/7 50 2 3/8 3/1 0/6 50 2/3 4/4 3/4 0/5 50 2/5 4/4 3/6 0/5 E: Managing your emotions 50 1/3 3/8 2/6 0/6 50 2 4 3/1 0/5 F: Learning with others 50 1/6 4/3 2/7 0/6 50 2/3 4/8 3/4 0/8 A: Remembering more effectively B: Using all your mental processes C: Compensating for missing knowledge ِD: Organizing and evaluating your learning As it is seen from table 5, the average scores obtained by left-handers on all strategies (A, B, D, E and F) except the group of strategies signified as C are higher than those obtained by right-handers. 2.4.3.1. Analyzing the significance of the differences observed between the two groups on strategy use In this study, strategy use was measured under 6 categories including: A: Remembering more effectively B: Using all your mental processes C: Compensating for missing knowledge D: Organizing and evaluating your learningِ ِِ E: Managing your emotions F: Learning with others To carry out such an analysis, an independent-samples t- test and a chi square test were performed on any group of strategies. Table 6. Independent samples t-test on strategy use Right hands Left hands t df sig 542 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 A: Remembering more effectively B: Using all your mental processes C: Compensating for missing knowledge ِD: Organizing and evaluating your learning E: Managing your emotions F: Learning with others Freq Mean SD Freq Mean SD 50 2/6 0/4 50 2/9 0/6 2/13 98 0/035 50 3/1 0/4 50 3/2 0/5 1/71 98 0/09 50 3/3 0/7 50 3/1 0/6 2/38 98 0/02 50 3/4 0/5 50 3/6 0/5 1/37 98 0/17 50 2/6 0/6 50 3/1 0/5 3/7 98 0/000 50 2/7 0/6 50 3/4 0/8 5/1 98 0/000 As the table 6 shows, the differences observed between the two groups are statistically significant at p< 0.05 except on B (using all mental processes) and D (organizing and evaluating learning) sets where the results obtained point to a lack of difference between the two groups. This makes the present writer to conclude that left-handed learners DO use different sets of strategies compared with their right-handed counterparts as far as strategies A (remembering more effectively), C (compensating for missing knowledge), E (managing emotions), and F (learning with others) are concerned. Table 7. Learning strategy * Hand preference cross-tabulation Right hands A: Remembering more effectively B: Using all your mental processes C: Compensating for missing knowledge ِD: Organizing and evaluating your learning E: Managing your emotions F: Learning with others Total Left hands Frequency percent Frequency percent 0 0% 0 0% 6 12% 7 14% 20 40% 6 12% 14 28% 13 26% 7 14 % 6 12% 3 50 6% 100% 18 50 36% 100% X2=18/44 df=4 sig=0/001 As reflected in the table, the dominant strategy for right-handed learners is strategy C where 40% of these people fall; whereas, the dominant strategy for left-handed students is strategy F where 36% of such people fall. To see whether these observed differences were meaningful, a chi square test was used. As the results of the test at p<0.05 and with a sig. =4 show (see table 7), the observed value of (18.44) is higher that the critical value of 7 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 543 (9.49). This points to a significant difference between the two groups in dominant strategy use where the dominant one for left-handed learners is F and the dominant one for right-handed ones is C. 2.5. Findings Having done the data analysis, we turn to the major finding of the present work: 1. Left-handed people do not show a statistically significant brain tendency from their right-handed counterparts, but the general trend of the responses may suggest more left-brain tendency in such learners. 2. As far as the learning style is concerned, it seems that most left handed individuals (78% in the present study) are visually oriented, a finding previously noted in some other studies as well such as the one by Ferrari (2007).An interesting observation about the present sample is that none of them has shown a preference for auditory style which is a point in need of further research. 3. When it comes to strategy use, it seems that left-handed learners use remembering strategies, compensation strategies and cooperation strategies more than right-handed learners do. All these strategies fall under the general heading of meta-cognitive strategies. Therefore, it can be concluded that these people use their metacognition more than right-handed people do. This may account for left-handers’ higher achievements and their creativity and resourcefulness as emphasized in studies such as Borade (2009). 3. Limitations It is important to address some limitations of this study. An initial one concerns the nature of the design of the study and use of a convenience sample. Non-random samples such as these have limited generalizability to larger populations. A second limitation concerns the manner in which hand preference was assessed. While the participants used in this study reported little variability of their dominant hand preference, it can be a matter of degree (Bishop, 1990); a continuum shaped by experience rather than just a sharp categorical variable. There can also be a difference between hand preference and hand skill (McManus, 2002). A third limitation relates to the way brain dominance was established in this research. It seems that using more evidence-based approaches to determining brain dominance such as fMRI provides a better footing for the research although this could present its own practical problems A fourth limitation also involves external validity. Despite the overall sample size and consistency with earlier work, there were still only 50 left-handed individuals in the research. Thus, caution must be taken in generalizing the findings to other groups of persons who are left-handed. 4. Conclusion Addressing learning styles is a dual responsibility. Teachers need to determine student's learning style preferences and present instruction, supply materials and provide assessment options that address students' learning style needs. Students must be taught about their learning style strengths so they can be empowered to study in ways that will help them concentrate process and retain new and difficult information. Students and teachers alike need to be respectful of learning style differences. An important factor in understanding learning styles is understanding brain functioning. Both sides of the brain can reason, but by different strategies and one side may be dominant. The left brain is considered analytic in approach while the right is described as holistic or global. The assumption that individuals might differ in their cognitive style according to the dominant hemisphere has given rise to tendencies to apply the theory to teaching methods. 544 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 This was the very impetuous that motivated the present study aiming at investigating the relationship between handedness and learning styles and strategies of EFL students in an Iranian context. The results of the study do show minor differences in brain orientation in left-handed EFL learners compared to their right-handed counterparts, and based on the results of the data analysis, the present author believes that such differences can result in adopting pretty different cognitive orientations to processing the data and this can reflect itself in their adopting different learning strategies. This points to a need for syllabus designers and teachers to consider the left-handed students’ specific needs and preferences in designing the syllabi and in conducting the classes so that they can more benefit from the instruction and enjoy their learning experiences. References Armstrong, S. & Mahmud, A. (2008). Experiential learning and the acquisition of managerial tacit knowledge. Academy of Management Journal, 7(2), 189-208. Borade, G. (2009). Myths and facts about left handed people. Available at:http://www.buzzle.com/web/articles.css Dunn, K. & Dunn, R. (1978). Teaching students through their individual learning styles: A practical approach. Reston, VA: Reston Publishing Dunn, K., & Dunn, R. (1987). Dispelling outmoded beliefs about student learning. Educational Leadership, 44(6), 55-63. Felder, R. & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding student differences. International Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 57-72. Felder, R., & Henriques, E. R. (1995). Learning and teaching styles in foreign and second language education. Foreign Language Annals, 28(1), 21-31. Ferrari, M. (2007). Cognitive performance and left-handedness: Comparative analyses in adults with seizures, physical, psychological and learning disorders in a rehabilitation setting. Journal of Rehabilitation Garcia, P., Amandi, A., Schiaffino, S. & Campo, M. (2007). Evaluating Bayesian Networks’ precision for detecting students’ learning styles. Computers & Education, 49, 794-808. Hall, E. (2005). Learning styles: Is there an evidence base for this popular idea? Education Review, 19(1), 49-56. Heiman, T. (2006). Assessing learning styles among students with and without learning disabilities at a distance-learning university. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29(1), 55-63. Herbert, A., Stenfors, S. (2007). Choosing experiential methods for management education: The fit of action learning and problem-based learning. In Reynolds M & Vince R. (Ed.), the Handbook of Experiential Learning & Management Education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Horwitz, E.K. (1988). The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. The Modern Language Journal, 72 (3), 283-294. Hyde, P. (2007). Integrating experiential learning through live projects. In Reynolds M & Vince R. (Ed.), the Handbook of experiential learning & Management Education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development. Kayes, A. B. (2007). Power and experience: Emancipation through Guided Leadership Narratives. In Reynolds M & Vince R. (Ed.), The handbook of experiential learning & management education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kayes, D. C. (2007). Institutional barriers to experiential learning revisited. In Reynolds M & Vince R. (Ed.), The handbook of experiential learning & management education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Keefe, J.W. (1979). Learning style: An overview. In NASSP's Student learning styles: Diagnosing and proscribing programs (pp. 1-17). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principles. Kencht, S., Drager, B., Deppe, M., Bobe, L., Lohmann, H., Floel, A., Ringelstein, E. B., & Henningsen, H. (2000). Handedness and hemispheric language dominance in healthy humans. Brain 123(12), 2512-2518 Lawrence ,G. (1984). A synthesis of learning style research involving the MBTI. Journal of Psychological Type, 2-15. Li, Y. S, Chen, P. S. & Tsai, S. J. (2008). A Comparison of the learning styles among different nursing programs in Taiwan: Implications for nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 28, 70-76. Manochehri, N., & Jon, Y. (2006). The impact of student learning styles with web-based learning or instructorbased learning on student knowledge and satisfaction. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(3), 313-316. 9 Ali Gholami Mehrdad and Manouchehr Ahghar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012) 536 – 545 Mupinga, D., Nora, R., & Yaw, D. (2006). The learning styles, expectations, and needs of online students. College Teaching, 54(1), 185-189. Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies, what every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House Publishers. Oxford, R. L. & Cohen, A. D. (1992). Language learning strategies: Crucial issues of concept and classification. Applied Language Learning, 3(1), 1-35. Oxford, R.L., & Ehrman, E. (1993). Second language research on individual differences. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 188-205. Price, L. (2005). Individual differences in learning: Cognitive control, cognitive style, and learning style. Educational Psychology, 24(5), 681-698. Sheridan, M., & Steele-Dadzie, T. (2005). Structures of intellect and learning style of incarcerate youth assessment: A means to providing a continuum of educational service in juvenile justice. Journal of Correctional Education, 56(4), 347-371. Tripp, L. O., & Moore, S. D. (2007). Examination of pre-service teachers’ learning styles and temperament styles within an elementary science methods course. Institute for Learning Styles Journal, 1, 23-33. Willing, K. (1987). Learning styles in adult migrant education. Sydney: NSW Adul Migrant Education Service. Welsh, M.A., Dehler, G. E. & Murray, D. L. (2007). Learning about and through aesthetic experience: Understanding the Power of Experience-Based Education. 545