Analysing the relationship of sequential and global learning styles on students historical thinking and understanding : a case study on form four secondary schools students in Malaysia

Ling Weay Ang, Masood Mona,

Abstract

This study ascertained on the relationship between students’ learning styles, which are global and sequential learning styles with their historical understanding and thinking. The specific objectives of the study were to: describe the learning style of the students which are sequential and global; to find out whether students’ historical understanding and thinking differ with their learning styles; and determine the difference between the learning style and their historical understanding and thinking. The participants of the study consist of 40 Form Four Secondary School students from a National School in Kedah State, Malaysia. The Index of Learning Styles (ILS) questionnaire was utilized to carry out the rationale of the study. The results demonstrated that generally the students are fairly well balanced in global and sequential learning styles presented in the ILS questionnaire. An assessment test of history essay writing was used to determine their historical thinking from four categories, which are a) chronological understanding, b) make interpretation, c) express opinions with a sense of empathy, and d) make rationalizations. The results show that there is a significance difference between the sequential learner and the global learner in chronological understanding. Overall, there is no significant difference between students’ learning styles with the ability in making interpretation make rationalization and express an opinion with a sense of empathy. The results of this study can be used to gain insight into the construct of historical understanding and into how historical reasoning competencies can be measured. Besides, the results present some ideas about information organization of history contents to suit the preferences of students’ different learning styles.

References

1. Akdemir, O., & Koszalka, T. A. (2008). Investigating the relationships among instructional strategies and learning styles in online environments. Computers and Education, 50(4), 1451-1461. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.01.004. 2. Andreou, C, Papastavrou, E, & Merkouris, A. (2014). Learning styles and critical thinking relationship in baccalaureate nursing education: a systematic review. Nurse Educ Today. 2014 Mar; 34(3):362-71. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2013.06.004. Epub 2013 Jul 3. 3. Barton, K., & Smith, L. (2000). Themes or motifs? Aiming for coherence through interdisciplinary outlines. The Reading Teacher, 54(1), 54-63. 4. Beck, C. R. (2001). Matching teaching strategies to learning style preferences. Teacher Educator, 37(10), 1–15. Contessa, K. A., Ciardiello, S. Perlman (2005). Surgery resident learning styles and academic achievement. Current Surgery, 62(3) (2005), pp. 344–347. 5. Felder, R. M., & Soloman, B. A. (1997). Index of learning styles questionnaire. Retrieved April 30, 2006 from http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.html. 6. Felder, R.M., and J. Spurlin. (2005). Reliability and Validity of the Index of Learning Styles: A Meta-analysis. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 103–112. 7. Godat, Meredith (2012) Collaborative learning and critical thinking in technology-enhanced environments: An instructional design framework. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology. 8. Jabar, Baharuddin. (2006). Pelaksanaan kemahiran pemikiran sejarah dalam pengajaran guru-guru sejarah: Satu kajian kes di daerah Hilir Perak. In Menanggapi keberkesanan dan perubahan (pp. 1-24). Penerbit Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris. 9. Johnston, D. S. (2011). “Time” activities. from the mundane to the sophisticated. Retrieved fromhttp://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/ows/seminars/tcentury/TimeActivities pdf. 10. Lee, Peter, and Ashby, R (2000). Progression in Historical Understanding among Students Ages 7-14. In Knowing, Teaching, and Learning History: National and International Perspectives, edited by Peter N. Stearns, Peter Seixas, and Sam Wineburg, 199-222. New York: New York University Press. 11. Lee, P. (2004). Historical literacy: Theory and research. Paper presented at the History Education International Research Network Conference. Ambleside: UK. 12. Lee, P. (2007). From national canon to historical literacy. In M. Grever, & S. Stuurman (Eds.) Beyond the canon. History for the Twenty-first Century (pp. 48–62). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 13. Lee, P., & Howson, J. (2009). Two out of five did not know that Henry VIII had six wives: Historical literacy and historical consciousness. In L. Symcox & A. Wilschut (Eds.), National history standards: The problem of the canon and the future of teaching history (pp. 211–264). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub. 14. Mastermann, E., & Rogers, Y. (2002). A framework for designing interactive multimedia to scaffold young children’s understanding of historical chronology. Instructional Science, 30, 14-43. 15. Maksić, S. (2006). Podsticanje kreativnosti u školi. Beograd: Institut za pedagoška istraživanja. 16. Myers, B. E., & Dyer, J. E. (2006). Effects of investigative instruction on content knowledge and science process skill achievement across learning styles. Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(4), 52–63. 17. Omur Akdemir and Tiffany A. Koszalka. (2008). Investigating the relationships among instructional strategies and learning styles in online environments. Comput. Educ. 50, 4 (May 2008), 1451- 1461.DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.01.004. 18. Puteh, S. N., Maarof, N., & Tak, E. (2010). Students' perception of the teaching of historical thinking skills. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 18(SPEC. ISSUE), 87-95. 19. Rowinah binti Jakiwa (2012). Dissertation (M.M.L.S.). Jabatan Bahasa-bahasa Asia dan Eropah, Fakulti Bahasa dan Linguistik, Universiti Malaya, 2012. Retrieved from http://studentsrepo.um.edu.my/3983/4/BAB_1- 5,_BIBLIOGRAFI,_LAMPIRAN.pdf. 20. Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in illstructured domains. In T. M. Duffy, & D. J. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 121-128). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 21. Silverman, L.K. (2002) Upside-down brilliance: The visual-spatial learner. 302-305. Denver: DeLeon. 22. Siti Hawa Abdullah (2008). Empati sejarah dalam Pengajaran dan pembelajaran sejarah. Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 28(1), pp.131 -146. 23. Shemilt, D. (2000). The caliph’s coin: The currency of narrative frameworks in history teaching. In P. N. Stearns, P. Seixas, & S. Wineburg (Eds.). Knowing, teaching, and learning history: National and international perspectives (pp. 83–101). New York: New York University Press. 24. Terrie, E. (2012). Preparing history teachers to develop young people's historical thinking. Retrieved from http://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/may-2012/possibilities-ofpedagogy/ preparing-history-teachers-to-develop-young-peoples-historical-thinking. 25. Van Drie, J., & Van Boxtel, C. (2008). Historical reasoning: Towards a framework for analyzing students' reasoning about the past. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 87–110. 26. Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 27. Wood, K. C., Smith, H., & Grossniklaus, D. (2001). Piaget's stages of cognitive development. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/. 28. Yang, S. C. (2006). E-Critical/thematic doing history project: Integrating the critical thinking approach with computermediated history learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2095-2112. 29. Zaidah Abd Umar & Zulkifli Senin, (2008). Perkaitan antara gaya pembelajaran pelajar dengan prestasi mata pelajaran Matematik Kejuruteraan. Prosiding Seminar Kebangsaan Matematik and Masyarakat, pp: 485-495. 30. Zubaidah Begam Mohamad Zakaria. (2007). Hubungan gaya pembelajaran dengan pencapaian akademik: Tinjauan di kalangan pelajar-pelajar Sarjana Muda Pendidikan Tahun Pertama, UTM, Skudai, Johor. Tesis Sarjana, Universiti Teknologi Malays.