Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1. Background of The Study

Students like to take in and process information in different ways: by seeing and hearing,
reflecting and acting, reasoning logically and intuitively, analyzing and visualizing,
steadily and in fits and starts. Teaching methods also differ. Some instructors talk, others
demonstrate or lead students to self-discovery; some focus on principles and others on
applications; some emphasize memory and others understanding.

Learning style is the way in which each learner begins to concentrate on, process,
absorb, and retain new and difficult information (Dunn and Dunn, 1992; 1993; 1999).
The communication of these basics occurs in a different way in everyone. Therefore, it is
necessary to determine what is most likely to generate each student's concentration, how
to maintain it, and how to respond to his or her natural processing style to produce long
term memory and preservation.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Malaysian school environment is based on teacher centered whereby, the teachers play
major part during the lesson (Chitravelu, Sithamparam & Choon, 1999). In that particular
situation, teachers are important agent in bringing about success in the lesson. They
should know the suitable activities and materials that are relevant and interesting to the
students. The teaching styles of a teacher can influence or diminish students’ interest in
the lesson and suit with students’ learning styles.

Rosniah,M. (2006), stated higher education in Malaysia places emphasis on auditory and
visual modes of learning. Since most of the teaching instruction at the tertiary level in
Malaysia is given in auditory manner mostly through lectures and in class discussions,
students who have auditory as their strongest learning modality would be the ones who
benefits most from such instruction. This is because the teaching and learning style are
matched.

The process of differentiation, offering students multiple ways of taking in and

expressing information, begins with educators examining four areas content; process,
product and environment (Tomlison, 1999). The idea is to find out where students are in
the learning process and offer opportunities for advance movement. This is not
individualized instruction, nor does it offer an easy way out for the indifferent that are
based on solid curriculum and high expectations. It does allow students to lead with their
strengths and their interests in order to understand essential questions and feel successful
in the understanding of concepts and skills.

Felder & Silverman (1988) said serious mismatches may occur between the learning
styles of students in a class and the teaching styles of the instructor. The students tend to
be bored and inattentive in class, do poorly in tests, and get discouraged about the
learning process and may conclude that they are no good at the subject and give up.

Pask (1976) found that if the teaching strategy is matched to the students’ learning style,
the students will learn more quickly and retain the information for longer. Matching
teaching and learning styles is one way of overcoming what Oxford & Lavine (1992) call
“style wars in the language classroom”.

Oxford & Anderson (1995) in their overview article on “cross cultural views” of learning
styles present ample evidence that learning styles have a strong cultural component in
that cognitive development is determined by the demands of the environment in which
we grew up.
1.3. The Study

The learning styles can determine how successful students towards their learning. The
purpose of this study is to learn about learning styles. Each of the students has their own
learning styles.

Besides, there are three common types of learning styles among the students which are
visual, auditory and kinesthetic. So, this study is carried out to explore the differences
between these three learning styles among the students. Learning styles play a significant
role in students’ life. This study can help the students identify their own learning styles.

1.4. Research Questions

This study is undertaken to ensure the following research questions:

1. What are the types of learning style that UKM students employ in their learning?

2. What are the socio cultural factors that influence UKM students to have different
learning styles?

1.5. Significance Of The Study

The significance of the study is to examine the students learning styles. This will help the
students to identify and improve their learning styles in order to become successful.
Therefore the students will become more understanding about their learning styles. The
results of this study can be a basis for further understanding of learning styles among the
students.
1.6. Summary

This chapter has described the background of the study, statement of the problem,
purpose of the study, research questions, and significance of the study. The next chapter
will discuss the literature review that is relevant to this study.
 Chapter 2

Literature Review

2.0. Definition

The term learning style refers to the general approach preferred by the student
when learning a subject, acquiring a language, or dealing with difficult problem (Oxford,
2001). Learning style is an overall pattern that provides broad direction to learning and
makes the same instructional method beloved by some students and hated by others.

A learning style is a student's consistent way of responding to and using stimuli in

the context of learning. Keefe (1979) defines learning styles as the "composite of
characteristic cognitive, affective, and physiological factors that serve as relatively stable
indicators of how a learner perceives, interacts with, and responds to the learning
environment." Stewart and Felicetti (1992) define learning styles as those "educational
conditions under which a student is most likely to learn." Thus, learning styles are not
really concerned with "what" learners learn, but rather "how" they prefer to learn.

2.1. Literature Review

Kolb (1984) conceives learning as continuous process grounded in experience and he

describes learning styles as follows;

“Learning styles are conceived not as fixes personality traits but as possibility
processing structures resulting from unique individual programming of the basic but
flexible structure of human learning. These possibility processing structures are best
thought of as adaptive states or orientations that achieve stability through consistent
patterns of transaction with the world.”

Through socialization experiences in the family, school and work, learners tend to
emphasize some learning abilities over others. Each of us has a unique way of developing
a learning style that has some weak and strong points (Kolb & Fry, 1975). The
differences among learning styles are more striking as our learning in higher education
have become more diverse. Traditionally, the education system has favored certain types
of learners; they succeeded and went on to higher education, while other types or learners
generally did not. But as higher education becomes more accessible, our students are
more representative of the general population, which means a greater diversity in learning
styles.

Triandis (1976) in his research found that culture influences whether learners are
primarily aural, visual or verbal learners. For example Native Americans tend to be visual
learners. “Native Indian learners frequently and effectively use coding with imagery to
remember and understand words and concepts. They use mental images to remember or
understand, rather than using word association.” In contrast, “many students, including
African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Haitian Americans and Hmong auditory ability
as evidenced by the oral traditions and rote learning methods.” Because the Hmong do
not have a written language, they have highly developed aural skills. When the
classroom contains aural, visual and verbal learners, a multisensory approach to teaching
is often effective.

Judith Kleinfeld (2006) stated that children from different cultural background as a group
seem to have distinctive patterns of intellectual abilities. Native American children, for
example, appear to have especially high levels of visual and spatial skills and do less well
on tests of verbal ability in English. This does not mean that every Native American child
will have this ability pattern, just that this pattern is more common among this cultural
group than among certain other cultural groups, such as Caucasian or African-American
children.
2.2 VAK (Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic) Learning Model

For years, studies on how people prefer to get new information have been conducted in
the field of neurolinguistic programming (NLP). Learners differentiate between external
experience (information received from the environment through the five senses) and
internal experience (what happens inside). These studies have found that learner
preferences fall into three categories, often referred to as the VAK model:

• Visual: Intake by seeing. Visual learners prefer pictures, diagrams, and other visuals.
They probably need to see something to know it. They may have an artistic ability and a
strong sense of color. They may have difficulty following directions or learning from
lectures or might overreact to noise or misinterpret words.

• Auditory: Intake by hearing. Auditory learners prefer to get information by listening.

They need to hear something to know it. They may have difficulty following written
directions or completing any activity that includes reading.

• Kinesthetic: Intake by doing and touching. Kinesthetic learners prefer hands-on

learning. They need to do something to know it. They assemble things without reading
directions and usually have good spatial perception. They learn best when they are
actively involved.

Learner varies in their orientation toward these three styles. Some learn primarily through
one style, and others use a combination of all three styles. Intake styles are not the same
as intelligence. Whether learner prefers to learn by seeing, hearing, or doing has no
bearing on how intelligent they are. It’s just their preference for receiving new
information. Preferred learning styles determine how learners assimilate, sort, retain,
retrieve, and reproduce new information.

Learners use all three modalities to receive and learn new information and experiences.
However, according to the VAK or modality theory, one or two of these receiving styles
is normally dominant. This dominant style defines the best way for a person to learn new
information by filtering what is to be learned. This style may not always to be the same
for some tasks. The learner may prefer one style of learning for one task, and a
combination of others for a different task.

According to the VAK theorists, we need to present information using all three styles.
This allows all learners the opportunity to become involved, no matter what their
preferred style may be.

While there is some evidence for modality specific strengths and weaknesses (Rourke, et
al. 2002), what has not been established is matching the instructional style to individual
learning strength improves their learning abilities. For example, one study
(Constantinidou and Baker, 2002), found that visual presentation through the use of
pictures was advantageous for all adults, irrespective of a high or low learning-style
preference for visual images. Indeed, it was especially advantageous for those with a
strong preference for verbal processing.
 Chapter 3

Research Methodology
3.1 Introduction

This chapter explains why students have the tendency in having different
learning styles in terms of different ethnicities. Apart from that, we will also reveal the
socio cultural factors that affect the respondents to have different learning styles. The
research tool that we used in this research is questionnaire. It will be used in order to find
out the types of learning styles that the respondents employ in their learning as well as the
factors that affect them in having various different styles. This chapter will also discuss
the procedures and processes we went through while conducting this research.

3.2 Research Method

There are two types of approaches to design a research which are quantitative and
qualitative. The approach that a researcher chooses must be suitable to the topic.
Quantitative approach was chosen to design this research study through conducting an
interview. According to Smith,1988( as quoted in Matveev.V.A,2002), “Quantitative
research involves counting and measuring of events and performing the statistical
analysis of a body of numerical data”. “ The main concerns of the quantitative paradigm
are that measurement is reliable, valid, and generalizable in its clear prediction of cause
and effect” (Cassell & Symon, 1994 as quoted in Matveev.V.A 2002)

Weinreich.K.N (2006) explains that, “Quantitative research uses methods adopted

from the physical sciences that are designed to ensure objectivity, generalizability and
reliability. These techniques cover the ways research participants are selected randomly
from the study population in an unbiased manner, the standardized questionnaire or
intervention they receive and the statistical methods used to test predetermined
hypotheses regarding the relationships between specific variables.”. According to this
particular writer, “The strengths of the quantitative paradigm are that its methods produce
quantifiable, reliable data that are usually generalizable to some larger population.
Quantitative measures are often most appropriate for conducting needs assessments or for
evaluations comparing outcomes with baseline data.”

According to Matveev.V.A(2002) , “Employing the quantitative method allowed

the researcher to state the research problem in very specific, definable, and set terms;
specify clearly and precisely the independent and the dependent variables; follow the
original set of research goals; achieve high levels of reliability of gathered data due to
mass surveying; test the research hypotheses; arrive at more objective conclusions by
minimizing subjectivity of judgment.”

3.3 Types of Analysis

The type of analysis that we use in order to analyze the data that we obtained in
our research are statistical analysis and a cause and effect analysis. We will be using
calculations and bar graphs to analyze and to indicate our findings. Hopkins (2000) said
that in quantitative research our aim is to determine the relationship between one thing
(an independent variable) and another (a dependent or outcome variable) in a population.
Therefore, we believed that both statistical and cause- effect analysis would be the
appropriate type of analysis to interpret our numerical data.

3.4 Sample of Population

The respondents of this study are 35 bachelor degree students which consists of 6
Malays, 6 Chinese, 6 Indians, 6 Bumiputera Sarawak and 6 Bumiputera Sabah from
University Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM). All the respondents are third year students and
from different faculties such as Faculty of Social Science and Humanities(FSSK), Faculty
of Science and Technology(FST), Faculty of Business(FEP) and Faculty of Law (FUU).
3.5 Research Tool

3.5.1 Questionnaire

Since this is a quantitative research study, the tool that has been used is a
questionnaire with 35 questions. According to Eachus (2008), “Questionnaires are
instruments used to gather information, often as part of a survey, using a structured
format. Questionnaires tend to be designed for one purpose or specific research project.
Questionnaires can of course also be used as part of an experimental study where they
may provide additional information useful to the researcher, or indeed may be the
primary means of measuring the dependent variable. Regardless of their use, it is still
important that the researcher should have confidence in the reliability and validity of the
questionnaires used.”

According to Black & Champion (1976), “Probably no other data collection tool
is used more frequently in social research than the questionnaire. Many means of data
collection are employed to elicit information from the targets of social inquiry namely,
social groups”. Thus, most of the researchers feel that it is easy to conduct questionnaires
compared to other methods. Black & Champion (1976) explained that “there are two
functions of conducting questionnaires. The first function is to acquire information which
provide descriptions of individual and or group characteristics such as sex, age years of
education, occupation, income, political affiliation, religious preference and or
membership in civic groups. Another primary function is questionnaires is the
measurement of individual or group variables, particularly attitudes.”

3.5.1.1 The Structure of Questionnaire

The questionnaire is divided into two parts namely Part A and Part B. The
questions for Part A is basically related to the respondents background such as age,
gender, ethnicity as well as their education background such as the name of the course
and the name of their faculty. Part B consists of 35 questions related with auditory
learner, visual learner and kinesthetic learner. We will find out the factors which cause
these respondents to have different learning styles.
 3.5.1.2 Type of Response Required
There are certain types of response which are required in a particular such
as fixed or closed, open-end or a combination of types of both. The type of response that
we use in our research study is fixed or closed response. Fixed response questionnaire
consist of items (statements or questions) with a fixed number of choices. All the
respondents are asked to choose the response that best fits them.

3.6 Research Procedures

We follow few research procedures in order to conduct this study. First of
all, we design the questionnaire with 35 questions which based on visual, auditory and
kinesthetic learner. Then, we find suitable respondents for our research study and
distribute the questionnaire to them. After we receive the responses, we will begin to
analyze the data from the questionnaire. Chart 1 briefly explains the research procedures
that taken by the researcher before, during and after the interview session.

STAGE 1

The preparation of the questionnaire

STAGE 2

We find the suitable respondents and distribute the questionnaire

STAGE 3

We obtained the responses and start to analyze it

STAGE 4

The findings of the analysis

Chart 1 : Research Procedures

3.7 Conclusion

This chapter deals with the methods and procedures that the researcher used in
order to conduct this study. The main research tool that we use is a questionnaire. We
use questionnaire in order to analyze the socio cultural factors which consist of cultural
and education background on why the respondents used various learning styles in their
learning.
 Chapter 4

Presentations Of Findings

4.1 Introduction

The aim of this study is to find out what are the preferable learning styles by different
students from different ethnicity (Malays, Chinese, Indians, Sabahan, and Sarawakian)
and what are the socio-cultural construct that caused the respondents to have different
learning styles The findings would be discussed based on the following themes as
reflected in the research questions below:

1. Background of the respondents.

2. What are the preferable learning styles by students who came from different
ethnicity.

3. The socio-cultural construct that caused the respondents to have different learning
styles.

The analysis of data will be in the form of charts and the conclusion of the findings
will also be presented in this chapter.

4.2 Presentations of Findings

At the end of the research, the researchers managed to collect all the data needed
to answer all the research questions of the study. The researchers managed to follow all
the research procedures planned with the co-operations of the respondents. The
researchers will proceed with data analysis based on the data collected in the
questionnaires.
4.3 Analysis of Findings

4.3.1 Profile of the respondents

Before analyzing the data, the researchers felt that the background of the respondents, as
show in the charts below, have to be scrutinized in order to gain a clearer understanding
of the whole study.

4.3.1.1 Gender

Percentages,
100
83.33
80

60
Percentages,
40 16.67

20

0 Male
Male Female
Female

Chart 1: Gender of the Respondents

As shown in the chart above, the majority of the respondents are female with
83.33% or a number of 25 people. On the other hand, there are only 5 male respondents
in this study with the percentages of 16.67%.
4.3.1.2 Ethnicity

We have an equal number of respondents from the same ethnicity as shown in chart 2
below. There are all together 30 respondents with 6 Malays, 6 Chinese, 6 Indians, 6
Sabahan, and 6 Sarawakian.

Percentages

20.00
18.00
16.00
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Ethnicity
Malay Chinese Indian Sabahan Sarawakian

Chart 2: Ethnicity of the Respondents

4.3.1.3 Age

Chart 3 below shows the age of the respondents. 15 of the respondents are 23 years old
with the highest percentages of 50% and the second largest number is 13 respondents
with 43.33% age 22 years old. There is only 1 respondent age 24 and another 1
respondent age 27 years old.
 24years old,
3.33%
22years old, 23years old,
Age
43.33% 50%
22
27years old, 23
3.33% 24
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 27

Chart 3: Age of the Respondent

4.3.1.4 Faculty

33.33%
35.00%
30.00%
25.00%
16.67% 20%
20.00%
13.33%
15.00% 10% 6.67%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
FEP FUU FST FSSK FPI FPEN

Chart 4: Faculty of Respondents

Chart 4 above shows the faculty of the respondents. The majority of the respondents are
from FEP or known as Fakulti Ekonomi Perniagaan with a number of 10 respondents or
33.33%. The second largest number is from FSSK, Fakulti Sains Sosial Kemanusiaan
with a number of 6 respondents or 20%. It is followed by 16.67% or 5 respondents who
are from FST, Fakulti Sains dan Teknologi. 4 of the respondents are from FPEN, which is
also known as Fakulti Pendidikan with a percentage of 13.33%. There are 3 respondents,
10% from FUU, Fakulti Undang-Undang and 2 respondents from FPI, Fakulti Pendidikan
Islam with the percentages of 6.67%.

4.3.1.5 Field of Study

Bussiness Management

Law

Mathematics

10% Oleochemistry
17%
Physics
7%
Literature in English
3%
10% Chemical Technology

10% English Language

Studies
3% Accountancy

7% 3% Geography

7%
3% Al Quran & Al Sunnah

7% 3% 3% 7% Financial Economy

Sejarah

Pengajian Melayu

Tesl

Chart 5: Respondents’ Field of Study

The pai chart above shows the field of study of the respondents. The percentages are
stated as below:
Field of Study Number Percentages
1. Business Management 5 17%
2. Law 3 10%
3. Mathematics 1 3%
4. Oleo Chemistry 1 3%
5. Physics 2 7%
6. Literature in English 2 7%
7. Chemical Technology 1 3%
8. English Language Studies 1 3%
9. Accounting 2 7%
10. Geography 1 3%
11. Al-Quran & Al-Sunnah 2 7%
12. Financial Economic 3 10%
13. History 1 3%
14. Pengajian Melayu 2 7%
15. TESL (Teaching English as Second Language) 3 10%

Table 1: Respondents’ Field of Studies

4.3.2 Research Question 1 and 2

What are the preferable learning styles by students who came from different
ethnicity?

4.3.2.1 Malay Respondents

60.00%
50%
50.00%

40.00%
33.33%
30.00%

20.00% 16.67%

10.00%

0.00%
Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Chart 6: Malay Respondents’ Learning Styles

As chart 6 above shows, the learning style of the Malay Respondents are majority
Kinesthetic, with a number of 3 respondents and the percentage of 50%. 2 of them
(33.33%) prefer learn by visual aids and only 1 of them (16.67%) is auditory learner.
Shareena, M. H. (1995) in her studies of Learning Style Preferences of Malay ESP
Learners in University Malaya found that majority of Malay learners were favoured
in group discussion to complete the assignment and tasks. They learn best by
experience, by being involved physically in classroom experiences and remember
information well when they actively participate in activities, field trips and role
playing in the classroom. A combination of stimuli, for example an audio tape
combined with an activity will help them understand new material.
 4.3.2.2 Chinese Respondents

50%
50%
40%

30%
33.33%
20%
16.67%
10%

0%
Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Chart 7: Chinese Respondents’ Learning Styles

The Chinese respondents are majority visual learner. It consists of 50% or 3 of the
Chinese respondents. This is strongly because of the Chinese student’s learning culture
where it is influenced by the way the Chinese students recognize their handwriting
system. The Chinese, Korean and Japanese are influence with specific symbols in their
writing system to build the language (Samovar, Porter and Stefani, 1998). In learning to
write Mandarin, ones need to be look at the visual appearance of the word and thus it
caused the most of the Chinese students to prefer in learning by visual.
4.3.2.3 Indians Respondents

50.00%

40.00%

30.00%

20.00%

10.00%
50%
16.67% 33.33%
0.00%
Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Chart 8: Indians Respondents’ Learning Styles

Table 8 above shows the preferable learning styles by the Indian respondents. Majority of
the Indian respondents, with a percentage of 50%, or 3 respondents are auditory learner.
The second preferable learning style of the Indians respondents is kinesthetic leaner with
a percentage of 33.33% or 2 respondents. There are minority of them, where 1 of the
respondent is visual learner.
4.3.2.4 Sabahan Respondents

70.00%

60.00%

50.00%

40.00%
66.67%
30.00%

20.00%
33.33%
10.00%

0.00%
Types of Learning Styles
Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Chart 9: Sabahan Respondents’ Learning Styles

As shown in chart 9, the Sabahan respondents prefer to learn by visual. There are
4 respondents out of 6 respondents (66.67%) who prefer visual learning style. 2
respondents prefer kinesthetic learning style with a percentage of 33.33%. None of them
is auditory learner. A research made by Khalid, Johari (2000) about Sabah Students’
Style of Learning in Higher Level in University Malaysia Sabah found that the Sabahan
learners are prefer their tutorial session to be filled with visual support and creative
PowerPoint presentation by the lecturer to make the discussion significant with their
lesson. In this research also stated that the Sabahan learners were influenced by their
previous learning styles introduces by the teachers during their pre-school and primary
school. Whereby the learners are from rural area and the approach applied by the teacher
was more on visual by showing pictures or actual object to introduce new words in
English Language and standard Bahasa Melayu.
4.3.2.5 Sarawakian Respondents

100%
80%

60%
40%
100%
20% 0% 0%

0%
1st Qtr

Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Chart 10: Sarawakian Respondents’ Learning Styles

All of the Sarawakian respondents are visual learner with a full percentage of
100% or 6 respondents. None of them are auditory and kinesthetic learner. As for this
result conclude that the Sarawakian respondents’ learning style is near equivalent with
the Sabahans’ learners finding. Initially Sarawakian is influence with creative art and
unique figure in their local communities. Heyward, M. (1999) in his research ‘Teaching
and Learning for Intercultural Literacy’ focussed in Iban Community in Sarawak stated
that the Iban communities’ activities and attitude are influence by their surrounding and
their environment. Their cultural and tradition are correspond with artistic art and figure
to represent their status and identity in the society in Sarawak. The tattoo at the male skin
for instance, painted with different motif to differ their status. All Dayaks communities in
Sarawak have different style of curvature to represent the community background.
Through educational approach, the rural learners are engage with visual teaching
technique introduce by the teachers. Atan, L. (1980) explained that the rural learners
could ‘experience’ the words by showing the pictures and using the correct approaches in
teaching.
4.3.2.6 Overall Preferable Learning Styles

50%
50.00%
45.00%
37.50% 37.50%
40.00%
33.33%
35.00%
30.00% 25% 25% 25%
25.00%
18.75%
20.00% 16.67%
15.00% 12.50%
10.00%
12.50%
5.00% 6.25% 0% 0% 0%
0.00%
Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Malays Chinese Indians Sabahan Sarawakian

Chart 11: Overall Preferable Learning Styles

As shown in chart 11 above, there are all together 16 respondents out of 30

respondents who are visual learner. Among the 5 ethnicities groups, the Sarawakian
respondents are the majority ethnic group who prefer to learn by visual. It consists of
37.5% or 6 respondents. The second ethnic group who prefer the visual type of learning
style is the Sabahan respondents with a number of 4 or 25%. It is then followed by 3
Chinese respondents, or 18.75%. The Malays and Indians respondents are less visual
learners, with the percentages of 12.5% (2 Malay respondents) and 6.25% (1 Indian
Respondent).

As for the auditory learning style, there are all together 6 respondents who are
auditory leaner. None of the Sarawakian and Sabahan is auditory learner. The majority
ethnic groups with a preferable visual learning style are the Indians, Chinese and Malay.
The Indians respondents are the majority ethnic group with a number of 3 respondents or
a percentage of 50%. It is followed by the Chinese respondents with 33.33% (2
respondents), and 1 Malay respondent with a percentage of 16.67%.

There are all together 8 respondents out of 30 respondents who are kinesthetic
learners. The majority ethnic group is the Malays with a number of 3 respondents
(37.5%). The Indians and Sabahan are equal in number where there are a number of 2
respondents (25%) and 12.5% of the Chinese respondents are kinesthetic learner. None of
the Sarawakian is kinesthetic learner.

4.3.2.7 Respondents’ Overall Preferable Learning Styles

60.00%

50.00%

40.00%
53.33%
30.00%

20.00%
26.67%
10.00% 20%

0.00%
Types of Learning Styles

Visual Kinesthetic Auditory

Chart 12: the overall Preferable Learning Styles by the Respondents

As shown in chart 12, In general, majority of the respondents are visual learner. It
consists of 16 respondents out of 30 respondents, with a percentage of 53.33%. Only a
number of 6 respondents are auditory learner with a percentage of 20%. It is believed that
students in Malaysia applied mostly kinesthetic and tactile styles in their learning
process. However, in this research, we found that the majority are visual learner.
 According to Rosniah, M. (2006), Malaysian students are kinesthetic and tactile
learner, whereas the American students are considered as more auditory. This is because
of their learning culture where they are brought up to be independent learner and the
American culture encourages their children to express their thoughts and opinions in
class. In her research, she found that Malaysian students face difficulties in their higher
education level that emphasize more on visual and auditory modes of learning. Thus,
students are required to listen to the lectures, and read from slides. As proven in this
study, there is only a number of 6 respondents or 20% are auditory learner.

Chapter 5
 Conclusion

5.1 Conclusion and recommendation

From the data obtained through our study, we determined that the overall
Preferable Learning Styles by the respondents is Visual Style it represents 53.33% of
respondents. This means most of the students learn best through pictures, diagrams, and
other visuals. Visual learners usually enjoy reading books, surfing internet, watch movies
or documentaries and may appear to day-dream during a session with a lot of verbal
activities (Robinson, 2001). Preferred learning styles can also be included in an
individual or learner action plan. The action plans can help learners work using their
strengths and help with their challenges. Learners learning styles involve teaching
process. Teachers should develop their knowledge or skills in teaching for nowadays as
creative generations are needed for the development country. The suit and appropriate
teaching approach using accurate form of teaching style could make the learning process
meaningful and lifelong (Mok, S.S., 2002).

Below we list some suggestions to enhance learning and teaching styles approach.

a. Provisioning

Provisioning means to tailor the lessons to the needs of the overall preferable learning
styles of the learners. For example, if most of the learners in a class are Visual learners,
more Visual-based activities like posters and charts should be conducted during lessons.
This way the majority of the learners (the Visuals ones) in the class would be able to
benefit optimally from the lessons.

b. Flexing
Flexing means to train the learners to use their weaker or non-preferred Learning Style to
enable them to use that style effectively in their studies. This is done by conducting 3
activities for a Learning Style that is other than the preferred Learning Style of the
majority of students in a class. This kind of exposure would help them to use Learning
styles other than their preferred one effectively in learning.

c. Matching

Matching means to match the teaching method or lesson activities to the preferable
learning styles of the learners. For example, when dealing with a visual learner, instead of
using words to explain something, diagrams can be used instead. This method is most
suitable to be used when explaining on a one-on-one basis.

It should be noted that all three recommendations above should be incorporated into the
lessons simultaneously to achieve the best results.

References
Atan Long. 1980. Pedagogi Kaedah Am Mengajar. Petaling Jaya: Penerbit Fajar Bakti.

Black, A. J. & Champion J.D.1976. Methods and Issues in Social Research. New York:
John Wiley & Sons,Inc..

Chitravelu, N., Sithamparam, S. & S.C. Teh. 2000. ELT Methodology: Principle and
Practice. Penerbit Fajar Bakti: Kuala Lumpur.

Constantinidou, F. and Baker, S. 2002. Stimulus modality and verbal learning

performance in normal aging. B r a i n a n d L a n g u a g e . 82(3)

Felder, R. M. and Silverman, L. K. 1988. Engineering Education. Learning and Teaching

Styles in Engineering Education.78 (7):674-681.

H. C. Triandis, “Approaches Toward Minimizing Translation,” in Translation

Applications and Research, Richard W. Brislin, Ed. (New York: Garder, 1976)

Heyward, M. 1999. Borneo 2000: Ethnicity, Culture & Society. Teaching and Learning
for Intercultural Literacy. 835-854.

Jones, S. 1998. Forum for Modern Language Studies. Learning Styles and Learning
Strategies: Towards Learner Independence. Vol.XXXV (2): 114-129.

Keefe, J. W. 1979. Learning style: An overview. In NASSP's Student learning styles:

Diagnosing and proscribing programs Reston, VA. National Association of Secondary
School Principles.1-17.

Khalid Johari. 2000. Borneo 2000: Ethnicity, Culture & Society. Sabahan in High
Learning Level: Relationship between Preferable of Learning Style and Social Culture
Context. 737-756.

Kolb, D. 1984. Experiential learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and

Development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Mok Soon Sang. 2002. Pedagogi Untuk Kursus Diploma Perguruan Semester 3. Subang
Jaya: Kumpulan Budiman Sdn. Bhd.

Oxford, Rebecca L. 2003. ProQuest Education Journals. Language Learning Styles and
Strategies: Concepts and Relationships.41(4):271.

Oxford, R.L. & Anderson, N.J. 1995. Language Teaching. A Crosscultural View of
Learning Styles: State of the Art Article. 28: 201-215

Pask, G. 1976 B.J.Educ.Psych. Styles and Strategies of Learning.vol.46:128-148.

Robinson, Ken. 2001. Out of our Minds: Learning to be Creative. Oxford: Capstone.

Rourke, B., Ahmad S., Collins, D., Hayman-Abello, B., Hayman-Abello, S., and
Warriner, E. (2002). Child clinical/pediatric neuropsychology: some recent advances.
A n n u a l R e v i e w o f P s y c h o l o g y , 53, 309339.

Samovar, L.A., Porter, R. E. & Stefani, L.A. 1998. Communication Between

Cultures.USA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Shareena Mohamed Hashim. 1995. Topics in the Learning style preferences of Malay
ESP learners: A Case Study of Learners’ Variables and Exposure Among University of
Malaya Students. Master Thesis, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Sprenger, M. 2003. Differentiation Through Learning Styles and Memory. California:

Corwin Press.

Stewart, K. L., & Felicetti, L. A. (1992). Learning styles of marketing majors.

E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h Q u a r t e r l y , 15(2), 15-23.

On-line resources:

Dickman N..2005. What is Quantitative Research.

http://www.marketresearchworld.net/index.php?
option=com_content&task=view&id=11& Itemid=64. [3rd April 2008]

Hopkins,G.W.2000. Quantitative Research Design.

http://sportsci.org/jour/0001/wghdesign.html. [9th April 2008]

Matveev,V.A(2002). The Advantages of employing quantitative and Qualitative methods

in intercultural research: Practical Implications of the study of the perceptions of
intercultural communication competence by American and Russianmanagers.
http://www.russcomm.ru/eng/rca_biblio/m/matveev01_eng.shtml.Russian
Association Communication.[ 3rd April 2008]

Judith Kleinfeld (2006) Learning Styles and Culture

http://www.judithkleinfeld.com/ar_learningstyles.html [18 April 2008]

Weinreich.K.N.2006. Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Social

Marketing Research.Weinreich Communication. [3rd April 2008]