Session S1D A RESOURCE FOR TEACHING A LEARNING STYLES/TEAMWORK MODULE WITH THE SOLOMAN-FELDER INDEX OF LEARNING STYLES Julie E. Sharp 1
Index Terms - learning styles, Soloman-Felder Index to Learning Styles (ILS), teaching methods, instructor's guide, teamwork skills.
Briggs® personality theory and successfully used in the previous Myers-Briggs® module for ES 130. Instructors may want to consider designing additional activities to address the judging/perceiving dimension. The Soloman-Felder test works well for teaching teamwork for these reasons: • It is a well-known and respected test in engineering education. • The Web-based, free test is more easily administered, scored, explained, and understood than some other tests, for example, the Myers-Briggs® test. • Professor Felder offers helpful, easily accessed resources on his Web page. [2] • The test can be easily related to team interaction and team differences. • It can help students understand and improve their college learning experience.
INTRODUCTION
SUMMARY OF THE ILS LEARNING STYLES
Methods for teaching teamwork skills, particularly to freshmen, have recently been explored by engineering educators. This paper describes activities for an instruction module for teaching teamwork skills using the SolomanFelder Index of Learning Styles. It can serve as a resource for instructors to select activities and design their own module to fit their course objectives and timeframe. For several years, Vanderbilt University Engineering School has used an instruction module I designed based on the Myers -Briggs® Type Inventory (MBTI®) instrument to teach students teamwork and communication strategies for academic and workforce success. Recently, the course instructors preferred to switch from using the MBTI test to the Soloman-Felder Index of Learning Styles (ILS). They decided that the Web-based ILS would be easier for students to use and understand than the MBTI® test. The new module I designed based on the Soloman-Felder ILS was enthusiastically endorsed by Professor Richard Felder. The exercises described in this paper are adapted from this model. Felder indicated that the Soloman-Felder ILS learning style descriptions do not describe personality traits, which can affect many interpersonal conflicts on teams. He recommended including activities using some MyersBriggs® dimensions that particularly affect team conflicts. [1] Consequently, I have included a problem-solving exercise based on the thinking/feeling dimension of Myers-
The Soloman-Felder ILS indicates that learners are one of two opposites in four learning modalities: • Perception: sensors vs. intuitors • Input: visual vs. verbal • Processing: active vs. reflective • Understanding: sequential vs. global [3]
Abstract - This paper can serve as a resource for instructors interested in a course module for teaching teamwork skills using the Soloman-Felder Index of Learning Styles (ILS). After presenting a rationale for the module, I suggest inclass activities and homework assignments from which instructors can construct their own module of up to three one-hour segments. This resource is adapted from a module I created for the Vanderbilt Engineering School ES 130 freshman introductory course and has been endorsed by Professor Richard Felder. At his suggestion, I have included a problem-solving exercise with the thinking/feeling dimension of the Myers-Briggs® personality theory, a dimension affecting interpersonal conflicts.
1
Sensory learners perceive information through their five senses. They are practical, observant, methodical, and detailed. They learn from repetition and deal in concrete facts. Their main complaints are that they have difficulty finishing tests on time and that information presented in class is not "real world." [4] Intuitive learners perceive information subconsciously with the inner mind. They use their imagination, look for meaning, enjoy theory, and thrive on variety. They prefer dealing with concepts rather than details. Their biggest drawbacks are that they are careless on tests and dislike "plug and chug" assignments. [5] Visual learners learn best by sight, not sound. Being shown any type of illustration or visual cue, such as a visual organizer, schematic, figure, or picture, works better for them than hearing or reading words. [6] Verbal learners learn best by sound and written words, not visualizing. Hearing someone talk or even reading the written words works better for them than illustrations. [7]
Julie E. Sharp, Vanderbilt University, Box 1604 Station B, Nashville, TN 37235,
[email protected]
0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S1D-19
Session S1D Active learners process information by doing and participating. They are hands-on learners who think by talking and, therefore, do not mind discussion or working in groups. Sometimes they may act too quickly. [8] Reflective learners process information through introspection and taking time to think about what they are learning. Unlike active learners, they need quiet to learn best and prefer individual work or working with one other person. [9] Sequential learners learn in an orderly step-by-step manner and make connections as they go along. They can consistently progress, making sense of details before they fully realize the big picture. In addition, they have no trouble explaining the material after it is presented to them. [10] Global learners are insight learners, needing almost an epiphany moment when the light bulb turns on and they finally understand. They may become confused by details and do not make connections until the "bright idea" strikes, connecting all the dots. They tend to learn at a slower rate at first than sequential learners and must see the big picture before they can progress. They also may have difficulty explaining the lesson after it is presented. [11] They make swift progress, however, when they experience the moment of insight.
RECOMMENDED SOURCES Almost all essential sources needed for this module are easily accessible online and include the following: • Richard Felder's Web site [12], containing the free Soloman-Felder ILS and helpful resource materials. The site gives detailed information at these links: (1) "Learning Styles" and (2) "Index to Learning Styles." The "Learning Styles" link contains informative, concise articles. Particularly noteworthy are the following articles: "Learning Styles and Strategies" [13], "Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and Teaching Styles in College Science Education" [14], "Meet Your Students: 1. Stan and Nathan" (illustrating sensors versus intuitors) [15], and "Meet Your Students: 2. Susan and Glenda" (illustrating sequential versus global). [16] The "Index to Learning Styles" page contains the test itself, which is easy to take and selfscoring. [17] • Gordon Lawrence's People Types and Tiger Stripes, particularly the section describing the Zig-Zag Process, a problem solving method. [18] Instructors can also order the Zig-Zag Process exercise from the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT) at http://www.capt.org. • The CAPT Web site containing two short, excellent overviews of the four Myers -Briggs® dimensions, including thinking/perceiving and judging/perceiving. These overviews can be found through these links: (1) the link "Overview" contains an excerpt, "Jung's Theory
of Psychological Types and the MBTI® Instrument," taken from the 1985 MBTI® Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator [19]; (2) the link "Type Dynamics" contains a concise and clear article entitled "The Dynamic Basis for Type." [20]
GOALS , OBJECTIVES , AND CAUTIONS The overall goals of this module are the following: • For students to become aware of differences in learning styles • For students to apply learning style theory to their classroom experiences (interaction with professors and other students; learning difficulties and successes) • For students to become aware of ways differences in learning styles and personality traits may affect personal interaction and teamwork After completing this module, students will have met the following objectives: • Taken the Soloman-Felder Index of Learning Styles • Interpreted and evaluated their ILS profiles • Applied the descriptions of the learning styles by analyzing representative statements • Discussed interpretations of scenarios using the descriptions • Used the Zig-Zig method (including the thinking/feeling dimension from Myers-Briggs® theory) in group problem solving • Reflected on ways learning styles and some personality traits affect problem solving and teamwork Before selecting activities to design their own teaching module, instructors should note the following cautions: • This test is merely a tool to get students thinking about ways learning style differences may affect them in the classroom and in teamwork. • The Soloman-Felder ILS is still being developed; thus, validation and reliability tests have not been completed. • The test should not be used to tell a student that he or she should choose a particular major. Felder cautions that it is not suited for that purpose. • Each set of opposites on the ILS should be considered as opposite ends of a continuum. Because each question is set up to allow for two extremes, students' scores may sometimes be more extreme than their learning styles actually are. Learning style preferences may be strong, moderate, or mild. [21] In addition, everyone can operate in each mode sometimes, depending on the situation. [22] These concepts make a good basis for discussion. • Before using the Zig-Zag exercise, the instructor should first describe the thinking/feeling dimensions, using the CAPT Web site as a resource.
0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S1D-20
Session S1D THE THREE-HOUR M ODULE This learning styles module is intended for three one-hour class periods. Instructors can select activities to create their own module suited to their schedule. For example, the module will easily adapt into a one-hour class plus a onehour lab as chosen by Vanderbilt's freshman course, ES 130, Introduction to Engineering. Part 1 of the module (two hours) deals with the Soloman-Felder ILS. Part 2 (one hour) includes the Myers-Briggs® thinking/feeling dimension with the Zig-Zag problem solving method. As noted below, however, some activities, such as item 6, are based on others and should not be completed out of sequence. Part 1: First Hour/Day 1. Test taking: In the computer lab or in class with their laptops, students take the Web-based, automatically scored Soloman-Felder ILS online at Felder's Web page. [23] The test is free. Taking the 44-item test and receiving the profile should take about 20 minutes. Students print out their profiles and eventually turn these in to show they have completed the activity. If the instructor desires, the test can be previously assigned homework brought to class the first day. 2. Hand counting results: After the students download the test results, the instructor asks for a hand count of students in each dimension and writes the results on the board. Students are usually interested to see the breakdown. The class can compare this with Felder's description of professors' usual teaching styles as abstract (intuitive), verbal, sequential, and passive. Most students are visual and many are active learners while global thinkers are in the minority. [24] 3. Explanation of learning styles: To explain the ILS theory to students, the instructor may choose one of two options. First, the instructor can give a brief (10-minute) lecture describing the eight learning styles. Lecture resources are two articles at Felder's Web site: 1) "Learning Styles and Strategies" and 2) "Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and Teaching Styles in College Science Education." Second, as an alternative, students can download and print out "Learning Styles and Strategies" by clicking on the "Learning Style Descriptions" link at the bottom of their online "Learning Style Results" page. This link can also be found from Felder's Web page by clicking on "Index of Learning Styles" and then "Descriptions of Learning Styles." 4. Group discussion of learning style descriptions: In groups of three, students devise their own description of each of the eight learning styles. After allowing five minutes for small group discussion, the instructor selects various people to describe the eight different learning styles. 5. First Day's Homework: Students read Felder's online short articles "Meet Your Students: 1. Stan and Nathan" (examples of sensing and intuitive learners) [25] and "Meet Your Students: 2. Susan and Glenda" (examples
of sequential and global learners). [26] They write a paragraph describing these learners and relating the ILS descriptions to their test results and to people they know. They may describe situations at work and school where learning style differences affect behavior. Part 1 Continued: Second Hour/Day 6. Analyzing statements: The instructor hands out copies of the exercise "Who's Talking?" [27] (This exercise must follow exercises 3 and 5.) Students analyze the list of statements and write answers in the blanks, naming the dimensions represented (Table I). They compare and discuss their answers in groups of two for five minutes. The instructor then ends the discussion and calls on different groups in various parts of the room to report on each question. As long as the students can support their answers with clues from the sentence matching the theory, several different answers may be acceptable. TABLE I FELDER-BRENT EXERCISE: WHO'S TALKING? Reproduced from R.M. Felder, J. Stice, and R. Brent, National Effective Teaching Institute Notebook, 2001. Used by Permission of R.M Felder. [28] Identify the learning style dimension indicated by each student comment. Dimensions may be used more than once. Some statements may have more than one possible answer. Choose answers from the following list: sensor, intuitor, visual, verbal, active, reflective, sequential, global. 1. I don't see what this math garbage has to do with the real world. 2. I go crazy when I have to sit still through a class -- I need to do stuff and talk about it to learn it. 3. I can't do the homework unless I see how it all fits together. 4. I hate all this plug and chug -- it's boring! 5. Lectures don't do a thing for me. You want me to understand something, show me a picture. 6. Even when I know how to do the problems, I always run out of time on tests. 7. Everyone around me can do the problems and I can't and I fail. Then I get it, but by then the teacher is on to something else. I can never win. 8. Don't just lay stuff on me -- tell me why I should care about it.
Possible answers might be the following: 1) Sensing 2) Active 3) Global 4) Intuitive 5) Visual 6) Sensing 7) Global 8) Verbal 7. Student skit and discussion: In addition to the "Who's Talking?" exercise, Felder, Stice, and Brent also use
0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S1D-21
Session S1D the following activity in the National Effective Teaching Workshop. [29] The instructor selects three students to act out a skit based on Felder's article, "Meet Your Students: 3. Michelle, Rob, and Art" (downloaded and copied before class from Felder's Web site and given to the three students). [30] The instructor assigns each student a role to play. (Alternatively, the instructor may assign the skit before class.) Next, before the skit begins, the instructor divides the room into three sections. The instructor assigns each section one student (either Michelle, Rob, or Art) to observe closely during the skit and evaluate the student's approach to learning. The audience must determine if their assigned student has a meaning orientation (deep approach), a reproducing orientation (surface approach), or an achieving orientation (strategic approach) to learning. After the instructor's introduction, the students come to the front of the room and expressively read aloud the conversation on the first page and a half, getting into the spirit of acting their assigned roles. (The remainder of the article is the instructor's resource and elaborates on the three approaches to learning.) After the skit, students in the audience pair off and discuss their analysis for five minutes. The instructor then re-convenes the group and calls on various people within each section to interpret the assigned student's actions in the skit. After one section finishes discussing their student, the instructor calls on the next section. 8. Second Day's Homework: Students download "How to Survive Engineering School" from the "Handouts for Students" section of the Felder Web site. [31] They write a paragraph describing their reactions to the information provided and offer their own advice for student group work. Part II: Third Hour/Day 9. The Zig-Zag problem-solving exercise. This exercise is based on Gordon Lawrence's "The Zig-Zag Process for Problem Solving." [32] In addition to the sensing/intuitive dimension, the method includes the Myers-Briggs® dimension of thinking/feeling. The Zig-Zag method follows a Z pattern of analysis, using techniques from each mode and moving from one mode to another, starting with sensing, progressing to intuitive, then to thinking, and finally to feeling (Figure 1). 1 Sensing
2 Intuitive
3 Thinking
3 Feeling
FIGURE 1 ZIG-ZAG PROBLEM SOLVING METHOD. Used by permission of the Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc., Gainesville, FLA.
The Zig-Zag process contains four steps. The instructor describes the process and may assign a time limit for each step. Each step emphasizes a strength of a particular personality type: 1. Sensing: Analyzing the problem by determining the facts 2. Intuitive: Analyzing by dis covering possibilities 3. Thinking: Analyzing by logically determining consequences of each possible action 4. Feeling: Analyzing by determining the human consequences of each possible solution [33] To begin the Zig-Zag exercise, the instructor introduces Myers-Briggs® descriptions of thinking and feeling and elaborates on sensing and intuitive, using the resources from the CAPT Web site. [34]-[35] In the computer lab or with in-class laptops, students download and read from Felder's Web site the short article "Meet Your Students: 6. Tony and Frank" (thinking/feeling dimension). [36] In groups of three, students discuss for five minutes the strengths and weaknesses of these styles and the other styles used in the Zig-Zag method, relating these traits to teamwork skills. A recorder in each group writes the results. Students decide whether they are thinkers or feelers, sensors or intuitors. The instructor calls on various groups until all styles are discussed. In small groups of three or four, students solve a problem, using the four steps, and then analyze their problem-solving process through the Zig-Zag steps from 1 to 4. Afterwards, they discuss or write about their reactions, analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of their group interaction. Each group should be heterogeneous; that is, it should contain students representing several different styles. For example, an ideal group would be four people, each representing one of the four traits: sensing, intuitive, thinking, and feeling. Instructors can assign an engineering problem or school problem, such as a registration issue. For the Vanderbilt ES 130 course, engineering instructors designed three problems according to their area of expertise: 1) an automotive painting issue, 2) a biomedical engineering case study, and 3) a biotechnology case study. This activity shows that each type can contribute to the problem-solving process. Students feel comfortable when using their strengths and uncomfortable when using their weak modes. I included this exercise in my previous MyersBriggs® module for the Vanderbilt ES 130 course. Both instructors and students liked it as a favorite activity in both the former and current modules.
CONCLUSION This proposed three-hour module, while intended to be taught over three different class days, can be adapted as the individual instructor deems necessary. The main
0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S1D-22
Session S1D consideration is that some exercises depend on others. For example, students should take the ILS test first. Additionally, Exercise 6, analyzing "Who's Talking," depends on Exercises 3 and 5, learning the Soloman-Felder learning style descriptions. Vanderbilt ES 130 instructors selected the following exercises for their module and added a student evaluation component: • ILS questionnaire • Hand counting results • Students' downloading and reading "Learning Styles and Strategies" • Small group discussion of above articles • Two exercises as alternatives to the small group discussion, with each instructor choosing one: 1) "Who's Talking Exercise; 2) student skit using Felder's article "Meet Your Students: 3. Michelle, Rob, and Art" • First-day homework, writing responses to Felder's two "Meet Your Students" articles (Stan and Nathan; Susan and Glenda) • Group problem solving with the Zig-Zag method • Analysis/evaluation homework: 1) preparing for discussion about ways to use the ZigZag method in group projects 2) writing a brief paragraph for each of the following: a) most useful parts of the learning styles module; b) parts of the learning styles module needing improvement. MBTI, Myers-Briggs, and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator are trademarks or registered trademarks of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust in the United States and other countries.
[16]
[17] [18] [19]
[20]
[21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30]
REFERENCES
[31]
[1] Felder, R.M., E-mail to J. E. Sharp, online, July 7, 2001. [2] R. M. Felder's Home Page, http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public. Accessed March 29, 2003. [3] Felder, R.M., "Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and Teaching Styles in College Science Education," J.College Science Teaching, Vol. 23, No. 5, March/April 1993, pp. 286-290. Online at http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/Secondtier.html. Accessed March 30, 2003. [4] Felder, R.M., J. Stice, and R. Brent, National Effective Teaching Institute Notebook, Section A, p. 4, ASEE 2001 Conference, Albuquerque, NM, June 21-23, 2001. [5] Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 4. [6] Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 4. [7] Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 4. [8] Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 4. [9] Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 4. [10] Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 5. [11] Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 5. [12] R. M. Felder's Home Page. [13] Felder, R.M., and B.A. Soloman, "Learning Styles and Strategies." Online at http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSdir/styes.htm. Accessed March 21, 2003. [14] Felder, "Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and Teaching Styles in College Science Education." [15] Felder, R.M., "Meet Your Students: 1. Stan and Nathan," Chem. Engr. Education, Vol. 23, No. 2, Spring 1989, pp. 68-69. Online at
[32] [33] [34] [35] [36]
http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Stannathan.html. Accessed March 30, 2003. Felder, R.M., "Meet Your Students: 1. Susan and Glenda," Chem. Engr. Education, Vol. 24, No.1, Winter 1990, pp. 7-8. Online at http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Susanglenda.html. Accessed March 30, 2003. Soloman, B.A., and R.M. Felder, Index of Learning Styles, online at http://www.ncsu.edu/felder_public/ILSpage.html. Accessed March 30, 2003. Lawrence, G., People Types and Tig er Stripes: A Practical Guide to Learning Styles, 3rd ed., Gainesville Fla: Center for Applications for Psychological Type, 1993, pp. 161-163. McCaulley, M.H., "Jung's Theory of Psychological Types and The MBTI Instrument," excerpt from Chapter 1 of I. Myers and M.N. McCaulley, MBTI Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1985. Online at http://www.capt.org/The_MBTI_Instrument/Overview.cfm. Accessed March 30, 2003. Martin, C., "The Dynamic Basis for Type," excerpt from Looking at Type: The Fundamentals, Gainesville, FLA: Center for Application of Psychological Type, 1997. Online at http://www.capt.org/The_MBTI_Instrument/Type_Dynamics.cfm. Accessed May 29, 2003. Felder, "Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and Teaching Styles in College Science Education." Felder and Soloman, "Learning Styles and Strategies." Soloman, and Felder, Index of Learning Styles. Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, pp. 4-5. Felder, "Meet Your Students: 1. Stan and Nathan." Felder, "Meet Your Students: 1. Susan and Glenda." Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 6. Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p. 6. Felder, Stice, and Brent, Section A, p.6. Felder, R.M., "Meet Your Students: 3. Michelle, Rob, and Art," Chem. Engr. Education, Vol. 24, No. 3, Summer 1990, pp. 130-131. Online at http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Michelle.html. Accessed March 30, 2003. Felder, R.M., "How to Survive Engineering School," Chem. Engineering Education, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2003, pp. 30–31. Online at http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Surviving-School.html. Accessed May 29, 2003. Lawrence. Lawrence. McCaulley. Martin. Felder, "Meet Your Students: 1. Stan and Nathan."
0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S1D-23
