ORIGINAL ARTICLE

LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES AMONG STUDENTS OF

SHALAMAR MEDICAL AND DENTAL COLLEGE, PAKISTAN
Ambreen Khalid1, Khalid Rahim2, Zahid Bashir3, Asif Hanif4

ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND Psychologists and researchers have discovered variations in learning styles of students across insti-
tutes, cultures and educational environments. Awareness of the predominant learning style will enable the facilita-
tors to modify teaching methods and make the educational experience more effective.
AIM This study determines the VARK inventory based learning styles of students at a private medical college in Paki-
stan and relates them with the teaching methods preferred by the students.
METHODS A cross sectional study was conducted on 194 first and second year MBBS students, enrolled at Shalamar
Medical and Dental College, Lahore. The version 7.1 of VARK questionnaire, was used to classify the learning prefer-
ences as visual (V), auditory (A), read and write (R) and kinaesthetic (K). Data was also collected about the students’
gender and their preferred teaching methods.
RESULTS Only 36% of students preferred one learning style (uni-modal), primarily kinaesthetic, while the remaining
students chose more than one learning style (multi-modal), where 44% were bi-modal, 15% tri-modal and only 5%
were quadri-modal. The most and least chosen teaching methods were practical/dissection (38%) and tutorial (8%)
respectively. Strong correlation was found between kinesthetic learners and those who preferred practical as teach-
ing method.
CONCLUSION Multiple modes of instruction will cater for needs of the majority of the learners. The teachers’ aware-
ness about the preferred learning styles of the learners helps him to match it with modes of instruction to ensure a
conducive learning atmosphere for the learners.
KEY WORDS Learning style, Instructional method, Teaching-learning strategies, Medical students.

This article may be cited as: Khalid A, Rahim K, Bashir Z, Hanif A. Learning style preferences among students
of shalamar medical and dental college, Pakistan. Adv Health Prof Educ. 2015;1(1):13-17

typical pattern of obtaining and pro- of how a learner perceives, inter-

INTRODUCTION
cessing information in different sit- acts and responds to the learning
The ‘learning style’ of an individ- uations. The idea of specific learn- environment”.4 Individual learning
ual is the chosen method of collect- ing styles initiated in the 1970s, and style preference is also advocated
ing, processing, inferring, consoli- gained immense popularity. by educational researchers.5 Tradi-
dating and analyzing information. Genetic traits, past experienc- tionally, medical studies have been
1I
In 1960 Dunn presented the term es, and social environment help divided into pre-clinical years (most-
‘learning style’ for various meth- determining predominant learning ly years one and two), characterized
ods of learning. He defined learn- styles of individuals. 3 According to by learning environment focusing on
ing styles as diverse and exclusive Keefe, “Learning style is the com- acquiring large amounts of informa-
ways used by individuals to learn posite of cognitive, affective and tion though lectures, small group
and recall the information.2 Learn- physiological characteristics that discussions and books. The later part
ing style is an individuals’ natural or serve as relatively stable indicators of medical studies mostly consists
of clinical years where the amount
1
Assistant Professor of Physiology, Shalamar Medical and Dental College, Lahore. of interaction with the patients in-
2
Head of Radiology Department, CMH Kharian. creases gradually, achieving its peak
3
Principal Shalamar Medical and Dental College, Lahore.
4
Assistant Prof. and HOD Biostatistics: Gulab Devi PGMI, Lahore. in the final year. As the educational
Address for correspondence: environment and learning situations
Dr.Ambreen Khalid change with the passage of time,
Assistant Professor of Physiology, Shalamar Medical and Dental College, Lahore. learning styles may also change.
E-mail: [email protected]
Date Received: July 17, 2014 In medical education the trends
Date Revised: September 29, 2014 of pedagogy has been shifted to an-
Date Accepted: November 6, 2014

13
AHPE Vol. 1 No.1 January - March 2015
 LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES AMONG STUDENTS

dragogy in recent years 6, therefore and how the learning styles are re- and the preferred teaching- learning
it is vital for educators to adapt in- lated to the learning situations. It methodologies was done by Pear-
structions that incorporate learning will be helpful in formulating teach- son’s Correlation.
styles of their learners. 7 Identifica- ing-learning strategies that improve
tion and measurement of learning students’ learning experience.  RESULTS
styles has been a subject of great The VARK model suggests that
interest for educational psychol- METHODS the students’ learning styles are
ogists for the past few decades. This descriptive cross-sectional dependent upon their preference
Since 1960s, psychologists crafted study was conducted at Shalamar of sensory modalities to receive in-
different inventories to identify the Medical and Dental College, Lahore formation. Their preference could
learning styles of learners. Some on the first and second year MBBS be a uni-model, bi-model, tri-model
of these inventories include Honey students. All students (n = 210) en- or quadri-model. In our study, 44%
and Mumford, VARK by Fleming and rolled in the first and second year of students had bi-model learning style
Kolb’s learning style inventory. These the medical college were included preferences while 36% had uni-mod-
learning styles inventories are based in the study. A total of 194 students el preferences. Figure 1 provides the
on different learning theories, prin- from both genders voluntarily partic- distribution of students among four
ciples of learning and psychological ipated (response rate = 92.4%). High models.
constructs. response rate was achieved through The students with uni-model style
This study uses VARK model for the distribution of the questionnaire were further explored to identify
the determination of learning styles. in two rounds to all students prior their learning styles. Out of the 36%
VARK is an abbreviation for the Vi- to a class with maximum student students with uni-model approach,
sual, Auditory, Read/Write and the attendance. It took approximately 27% were kinesthetic learners, in-
kinesthetic sensory modalities. 8 It 15 to 20 minutes for students to fill dicating that a vast majority of stu-
provides learners the insight of their the questionnaire. A researcher was dents like to learn by experience and
preferred sensory modalities in per- present during the exercise to an- practice.
ceiving the information. For the best swer any queries. Variations among the learning
information processing the visual The questionnaire consisted of styles of male and female students
learners prefer to see, the auditory two parts, part one contained de- were further explored within the
learners prefer listening, the read- mographic information i.e. name, uni-model group. The comparison
write learners like to read while gender, age and their preferred shows that significantly more males
the kinesthetic learners like to gain teaching-learning methodologies had visual learning style (p=0.03)
information by practice. The multi- like lectures, small group discus- and significantly more females had
modal learners have a strong pref- sions, practicals/dissections, tutori- kinesthetic learning style (p=0.002).
erence for multiple modes whereas als and Self-study. Part two consisted Table 1 provides the comparison of
some learners have preference for of VARK questionnaire, developed by four VARK learning styles between
one modality. 9 Fleming (version 7.1) 7, to determine male and female students.
The learners’ preference for dif- students’ learning style preferences. Uni-model, bi-model and tri-mod-
ferent teaching-learning methods The VARK questionnaire determines el learning styles were compared
are dependent upon certain factors four perception preferences (V, A, between male and female students.
like familiarity with the method and R and K) through sixteen questions. Figure 2 shows the distribution of all
results etc. Although there are many The students could choose multiple models between males and females.
studies done on learning styles of options. The VARK model was cho- As evident from the figure, the three
students globally, 10-12 there is only sen because it is a simple instrument most predominant models among
one study carried out in Pakistan with high reliability.14 males and females included Kines-
in which comparison between the The distribution of the VARK thetic (K), Visual and Kinesthetic
learning styles of postgraduate and preferences was calculated accord- (VK) and Auditory and kinesthet-
undergraduate students revealed ing to the guidelines given on VARK ic (AK), kinesthetic being the most
that the postgraduates were reflec- website (www.vark-learn.com). The common style among all of them.
tors while the undergraduates were preferences of the various VARK Students were also asked about
largely activists and theorists. 13 The components, as well as the teach- their preferred teaching-learning
present study determines the distri- ing-learning methods were analyzed methods. These methods can be
bution of VARK based learning styles by descriptive statistics. To compare divided into four groups: namely
of basic sciences students in a med- the VARK scores for the male and fe- interactive mode of instruction (tu-
ical college of Pakistan. The study male students the Student t-test was torials); direct mode(lectures and
also explored gender-based differ- used. While to analysis of the cor- demonstrations); independent study
ences in learning style preferences relation between the learning styles mode (self-study); and experimental

14
AHPE Vol. 1 No.1 January - March 2015
 LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES AMONG STUDENTS

FIGURE 1: DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENTS WHO PREFERRED ONE OR MORE that majority of learners learn ac-
LEARNING STYLES BASED ON VARK LEARNING STYLES INVENTORY (N= 194) tively when the combination of mul-
Quadmodel 5%
tiple modes of instruction is used,
with predominant role played by
Trimodel 15% Kinesthetic learning style. The use
of multimedia can represent multi-
Unimodel 36%
ple contents (text, animations and
images) to accommodate for the stu-
dents with diverse learning styles.
According to the “meshing hypoth-
esis” 17 learning increases exponen-
tially by incorporating the predom-
inant learning styles in teaching. 18
The Kinesthetic mode was the
top preference in the uni-modal and
Bimodel 44% bi-modal categories. Therefore, the
active learning strategies may be
more beneficial than the tradition-
al lecture formats for kinesthetic
mode (practicals/dissections). Data modes and teaching learning meth- learners. Active learning strategies
shows that among all students, the odologies. encourage critical thinking and im-
preferred teaching-learning methods prove problem solving and the de-
were practicals/dissections (38%), DISCUSSION cision making skills among students.
lectures (28%), self-study (26%) and The aim of most instructional In our study, the percentage of the
tutorials (8%) in descending order of programs for medical graduates is to auditory learners was lesser than the
preference. There were no statisti- construct knowledge and skills that kinesthetic and the visual learners,
cally significant differences among can be applied to the profession. 15 indicating the need for learning situ-
males and females for the choice Therefore instructions must be de- ation that support kinesthetic learn-
of methods. Figure 3 shows the dis- signed to maximize cognitive and ers.
tribution of teaching methods pre- learning processes. If we incorpo- Didactic lecturing is a passive
ferred by male and female students. rate the learning styles of learners learning strategy that works for au-
Data showed that kinesthetic in our instructional techniques we ditory learner. Baykan and Nacar5
mode was the most preferred VARK can manage intrinsic load, decrease reported similar results of their
mode and practical/dissection the extraneous load, and optimize ger- study conducted on first year med-
most preferred teaching–learn- mane load. 16 ical undergraduates in Turkey. Lujan
ing method. A positive correlation Most of the learners (64%) exhib- and DiCarlo reported that, the first
(Pearson’s correlation coefficient, r ited multimodal learning style. Oth- year medical students from Indiana,
= 0.752) was present between VARK er studies have also reported similar USA preferred read/write style. 1
results (59-85%). 1, 5, 17-18 This shows Nuzhat et al. reported that audito-
ry mode was preferred by the med-
ical students of Saudi Arabia. 19 This
TABLE 1: COMPARISON OF FOUR VARK LEARNING STYLES BETWEEN MALE AND
FEMALE STUDENTS differences in the preference of the
medical students around the globe
VARK Gender Mean ± SD p Value may be due the exposure of various
Visual Male 5.83±2.33 0.03* modes of instructions at the pre-
medical studies and the use of the
Female 4.83±2.29
hands-on clinical experiences in the
Auditory Male 5.23±1.61 0.13
medical curriculum.
Female 4.76±1.81 There is no single best teach-
Read-Write Male 3.79±1.90 0.39 ing-learning strategy available that
Female 3.66±2.31 is fit for every student. Certain
Kineasthetic Male 5.98±2.14 0.002* modes of instructions, like problem
based learning, are preferred to
Female 7.45±2.01
lectures.20,21 This study reveals that
Comparison of VARK Scores
practical/dissections were the most
*Significant chosen methodologies for students

15
AHPE Vol. 1 No.1 January - March 2015
 LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES AMONG STUDENTS

FIGURE 2: DISTRIBUTION OF VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF VARK LEARNING STYLES the Germane load. This is likely to
IN MALE & FEMALE STUDENTS ensure an efficient learning and aca-
35% 33% demic success.

30%
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We acknowledge the study participants
25%
who took time out for this study and

Boys
20% 18% shared their views.

14%
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Girls
15%

All the authors contributed significant-

10%
6% ly to the research that resulted in the
5%
5% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% submitted manuscript.
1% 1% 1%
0% CONFLICT OF INTEREST

RK
Authors declare no conflict of interest.

R
R

K
VR

K
VA

AR

AK
VK

KR
A

AK
V

VA
K

VA

VR

VA
R

ETHICS APPROVAL
FIGURE 3: PERCENTAGE OF PREFERENCE OF TEACHING METHODS BETWEEN MALE The Ethical approval was obtained from
AND FEMALE STUDENTS (N=194)
Shalamar Medical and Dental College,
37% Lahore.
40%

35%
29%
.
30%
REFERENCES
24% Girls 1. Lujan H, Di-Carlo S. First-year medi-
25%
cal students prefer multiple learning
20% styles. Adv Physiol Educ. 2006; 30:13-
Boys

15% 6.
10%
2. Dunn R, Giannitti MC, Murray JB.
10%
Grouping students for instruction: ef-
5%
fects of learning style on achievement
0% and attitudes. J Soc Psych. 1990; 130:
P/DI SS L T 485–494.
3. Flavell J, Miller P, Miller S. Cognitive
development: Upper Saddle River. 4th
of both gender and is consistent tors. Studies should be conducted to ed Prentice-Hall press; 2002.
with the kinesthetic as most pre- explore the correlation between the 4. Keefe J. Learning style: theory and
ferred learning style of the student. performances after incorporation practice. Reston: National Association
For females the second preferred of the learning styles of students in of Secondary School Principals; 1987.
teaching methodology was lectures instructional techniques and to find 5. Baykan Z, Naçar M. Learning styles of
on multimedia, which is consistent out the change in learning styles as first-year medical students attending
with their inclination for auditory the students shift from pre-clinical Erciyes University in Kayseri, Turkey.
and visual modes of learning styles. to the clinical phase. Adv Physiol Edu. 2007; 31: 158–60.
If there is no harmony between 6. Collins J. Education techniques
learning styles and teaching meth- CONCLUSION for lifelong learning: principles of
odologies the learning will be min- The knowledge on the learning adult learning. Radiographics. 2004;
imum,22, 23 therefore instructional styles is beneficial for both the edu- 24(5):1483-9.
techniques should be matching with cator and the learners. If the learn- 7. Claxton CS, Murrell PH. Learning
the students’ learning style prefer- ers identify their learning preferenc- Styles: Implications for Improving Ed-
ences. 23 es, it will be helpful in the use of ucational Practices. ASHE-ERIC Higher
The findings of the study are lim- appropriate learning strategies that Education. Report Number: 4, 1987.
ited as the study is conducted in a enable them to become lifelong and 8. Fleming ND, Mills C. Not another inven-
private sector medical college in self-directed learners, thus maxi- tory, rather a catalyst for reflection.
Pakistan. There is a need to conduct mizing their potential. Teachers can To Improve the Academy 1992; [cited
more studies in a variety of medical incorporate learning styles in teach- 2013 03 Jan]; Available from:  http://
colleges in public and private sec- ing-learning strategies to maximize www.varklearn.com/documents/not_

16
AHPE Vol. 1 No.1 January - March 2015
 LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES AMONG STUDENTS

another_inventory.pdf  14. DiCarlo S, Collins H.Colored Letters: A erences of medical students: a sin-
9. Abdallah AR, Al-zalabani A, Alqabshawi tool to increase class participation in gle-institute experience from Saudi
R. Preferred learning styles among pro- a large classroom. Adv Physiol Educ. Arabia. Int J Med Edu 2011; 2:70-3.
spective research methodology course 2001; 25: 143. 20. Antepohl W, Herzig S. Problem-based
students at Taibah University, Saudi 15. Clark R, Harrelson GL. Designing In- learning versus lecture-based learning
Arabia. J Egypt Public Health Assoc. struction That Supports Cognitive in a course of basic pharmacology: a
2013; 88(1):3-7. Learning Processes. J Athl Train. 2002; controlled, randomized study. Med
10. Robinson G. Do general practitioners’ 37(4 Suppl):S152-S159. Educ.1999; 33(2):106-13.
risk-taking propensities and learning 16. Young JQ, Van Merrienboer J, Durning 21. Michel MC, Bischoff A, Jakobs KH. Com-
styles influence their continuing medi- S, Ten Cate O. Cognitive Load Theory: parison of problem-and lecture-based
cal education preferences? Med Teach. Implications for medical education: pharmacology teaching. Trends Phar-
2002; 24: 71–8. AMEE Guide No. 86. Med Teach. 2014; macol Sci. 2002; 23(4):168-70.
11. Smits PB, Verbeek JH, Nauta MC. Fac- 36(5):371-84. 22. Felder RM, Brent R. Understanding
tors predictive of successful learning in 17. Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork student differences. J Engineering
postgraduate medical education. Med R. Learning Styles Concepts and Ev- Educ. 2005; 94(1): 57-72.
Educ. 2004; 38:758–66. idence. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 23. Minotti JL. Effects of learning-style-
12. Erol Gurpinar, Hilal Bati, Cihat Tetik. 2008; 9(3):105-19. based homework prescriptions on the
Learning styles of medical students 18. Sankey MD, Birch D, Gardiner MW. The achievement and attitudes of middle
change in relation to time. Adv Physiol impact of multiple representations of school students. NASSP Bulletin. 2005;
Educ. 2011;35:307-11. content using multimedia on learning 89:67-89.
13. Irfan Shukr, Roop Zainab, Mowadat H outcomes across learning styles and
Rana. Learning styles of postgraduate modal references. Intern J Educ Dev
and undergraduate medical students. ICT. 2011; 7(3):18-35.
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2013;23:25- 19. Nuzhat A, Salem RO, Mohammed SA,
30. Nasir Al-Hamdan. Learning style pref-

17
AHPE Vol. 1 No.1 January - March 2015