Ford N. and Chen S.Y. (2001)
Matching/mismatching revisited:
an empirical study of learning
and teaching styles.
British Journal of Educational Technology,32 (1),5-22.
指導教授:陳明溥
學生:張庭禎
摘要
• The research project that explored the
relationship between matching and mismatching
instructional presentation style (breadth-first and
depth-first) with students’ cognitive style (fielddependence/-independence) in a computerbased learning environment
• Performance in matched conditions was significantly
superior to that in mismatched conditions.
摘要
• Significant effects were found for gender,
matching mainly affecting male students.
• The findings provide support for the notion that
matching and mismatching can have significant
effects on learning outcomes
文獻探討
• There is empirical research evidence (eg, Entwistle,
1981; Ford, 1985, 1995; Pask, 1976, 1979; Schmeck,
1988; Witkin, Moore, Goodenough and Cox, 1977) which
suggests that: (Matching cognitive and learning styles
with instructional presentation strategies)
– different individuals seek and process information
using very different strategies
– that learning in matched conditions, in which
instructional strategy is matched with students’
learning styles, may in certain contexts be
significantly more effective than learning in
mismatched conditions.
文獻探討
• Witkin’s cognitive styles
– The dimensions of cognitive style identified by
Witkin are most generally termed Fielddependence and Field-independence.
– Field-independent individuals are more adept at
structuring and analytic activity relative to
relatively Field-dependent individuals
– Relatively Field-dependent individuals thrive
more in situations where learning is structured
and analysed for them
文獻探討
• Pask’s learning styles and strategies
– Pask and his colleagues monitored the routes taken by
learners who used one of two basic approaches.
– “Holists” tended to adopt a global approach to learning,
examining interrelationships between several topics
early in the learning process, and concentrating first on
building a broad conceptual overview into which detail
could subsequently be fitted.
– “Serialists” tended to use a predominantly local learning
approach, examining one thing at a time, and
concentrating on separate topics and the logical
sequences linking them.
Method
• Aim
– This study aimed to determine whether
matching and mismatching Breadth-first and
Depth-first information presentation styles
with students’ levels of Field-dependence/independence had any effects on learning
outcomes.
Breadth-first and Depth-first
Research instruments
• Riding’s Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA) was used to
measure Field-dependence/-independence.
• Learning materials
– Two versions were designed of a learning package to
teach basic HTML.
• Personal Survey
– Data was also collected on each person’s gender,
age, department and course.
– Students indicated their existing levels of knowledge,
using a 5-point Likert scale, of authoring World Wide
Web (Web) pages.
• Pre- and Post-tests
Analysis of results
• Learning Outcomes:
– Gain Score => (Post-test - Pre-test) in order to
ascertain how much knowledge had been
gained as a result of the experiment.
• Task Performance:
– by summing scores for items successfully
completed, the relevant variable being named:
Task score.
– Task Gain—consisting of Task Score minus Prior
experience of creating Web pages
Analysis of results
• Table 1. shows significant links between Gain
Score and Matching, and between Gain Score
and an interaction of Matching with Gender.
Analysis of results
• Table 2 indicates that the mean Gain Scores for
students working in matched conditions was
significantly higher than those for students
working in mismatched conditions.
Analysis of results
• The effects of matching/mismatching were
significant only in relation to the male sample.
Analysis of results
• Table 5 shows T-test results for male and female
students in matched conditions , and the corresponding
analysis for mismatched conditions. Gender differences
were significant only in relation to the matched sample.
Analysis of results
• Gain Score by matched and mismatched students when
working with Breadth-first , Depth-first learning materials.
• No significant differences were found in the case of Task
Gain
Analysis of results
• the results showed that males outperformed females significantly in
Task Gain when learning in Breadth-first conditions.
• Gender differences thus had effects only in Breadth-first conditions
(Table 10).
Discussion and conclusions
• When students learned in matched conditions (ie,
Field-dependent individuals using Breadth-first
teaching materials, and Field-independent students
using Depth-first materials) they scored significantly
higher on Gain Score
• Males out-performed females in matched conditions
but this significant difference disappeared in
mismatched conditions.
• There was an overall significant difference in Gain
Score for males and females, males scoring more
highly than females.
Discussion and conclusions
• Differences in Task Gain—the measure of
performance on the practical task—did not differ
significantly according to matched or mismatched
conditions.
• However, scores did differ according to gender—
but only in the case of individuals who learned
using the Breadth-first learning materials, males
outperforming females.
Discussion and conclusions
• the study raises a number of questions.
– the role of gender in the interactions between
matching/mismatching and conceptual
knowledge acquisition , and between
instructional presentation style and
performance on the practical task, is far from
clear and requires further investigation.