RELC Journal - University of Hong Kong · Additional services and information for RELC Journal can...

http://rel.sagepub.com

RELC Journal

DOI: 10.1177/003368829302400204 1993; 24; 69 RELC Journal

Ken Hyland Japanese Students

Culture and Learning: A Study of the learning style preferences of

http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/24/2/69 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:RELC Journal Additional services and information for

http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://rel.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/24/2/69SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms):

(this article cites 9 articles hosted on the Citations

© 1993 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Ken Hyland on August 19, 2008 http://rel.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://rel.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://rel.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/24/2/69


69

Culture and Learning: A Study of the learning stylepreferences of Japanese Students

Ken HylandInternational Pacific CollegeNew Zealand

Abstract

Following a brief review of recent research on learning styles and thelearning experiences of Japanese students, this article describes a

replication of a study by Reid (1987) of learning style preferences ofESL learners in the US. A questionnaire asking students to identifytheir perceptual learning preferences was administered in either

Japanese or English to 440 students at 8 Universities in Japan and toJapanese students at a tertiary college in New Zealand. Statistical

analysis shows that variables such as sex, college level, years of

English study, number of semesters with a foreign teacher and studyoverseas are all related to learning style differences. Japanese studentsappear to exhibit no major learning style but have multiple minorlearning styles. The study concludes by discussing the implicationsof the results for TESOL teachers working with Japanese students.

Introduction

Culture is an important, but often neglected variable in second lan-guage learning. ESL teachers have long suspected that the meaningsstudents assign to classroom activities and the success they achieve inthem may be at least partially due to their previous learning experiences,but this has been difficult to determine with certainty. The significance ofculture in learning is becoming increasingly apparent however and animportant area where culture and education overlap is that of learningstyles. Interest in learning styles is closely related to the idea of &dquo;learner-centred&dquo; instruction as it implies a need to consider information about thelearner when designing methods and content.

Learning style refers to a person’s natural, habitual and preferredways of learning. Keefe defines it as &dquo;characteristic cognitive, affectiveand physiological behaviours that serve as relatively stable indicators ofhow learners perceive, interact with and respond to the learning environ-ment&dquo; (Keefe, 1987:5). Every person has &dquo; a consistent way of responding



70

to and using stimuli in the context of learning&dquo; (Claxton & Ralston, 197 8:1 )which is created by the individual’s psychological make-up and socio-cultural background. Style is said to be &dquo;the most important concept todemand attention in education in many years [and] is at the core of what itmeans to be a person&dquo; (Guild & Garger, 1985:viii).

Learning style research therefore suggests that people make sense ofthe world in different ways, more importantly however, these ways arepartly created by cultural experiences. As Oxford et al (1992:441) pointout:

Although culture is not the single determinant, and although manyother influences intervene, culture often does play a significant rolein the learning styles unconsciously adopted by many participants inthe culture.

The importance of these personal characteristics to EFL teachers isthat the same teaching technique may be effective for some learners anduseless for others. Learning style is therefore central to the growing inter-est in individualised instruction as it can help provide a basis for a morepersonalised approach to student counselling, teaching and assessment.By selecting appropriate teaching styles, methodologies and courseorganisation, improvements in learner satisfaction and performance can beachieved (e.g. Dunn et al, 1989). Despite the growing interest in learningstyles however, little is known about the learning styles of specific culturalgroups.

This article briefly reviews the recent literature on learning stylesand on Japanese learning experiences. It goes on to discuss a study intothe perceptual learning style preferences of Japanese students. Finally theimplications of the data for EFL instruction are reviewed.

Learning Styles Research

Learning style has generated considerable attention and research inrecent years as a means of identifying the significance of various individu-al characteristics on learner achievement. Essentially the concept express-es the simple idea that each learner has a clear and coherent set of learninglikes and dislikes, but studies have addressed an enormously wide range offactors. Keefe (1988) lists some 40 ingredients of style including cogni-tive processing habits, personality traits, perceptual responses and studyand instructional preferences. Until recently research focused on the cog-



71

nitive dimension of style, emphasising the individual psychological strate-gies of information processing. These studies tended to describe bi-polarcharacteristics of a single dimension such as serialist/holist, extrovert/introvert, reflective/impulsive, holistic/analytical, studial/experiential, andso on.

These are all incorporated into Witkin’s influential construct of FieldDependence/Field Independence, or global versus analytic approaches toexperience (Witkin et al, 1977). In the context of L2 acquisition, thisresearch suggests that Field Independent learners out-perform Field De-pendent learners in both form focused and communicative tests (e.g. Day,1984; Chappelle & Roberts, 1986; Hansen & Stansfield, 1981). The theo-retical significance of these concepts as components of second languageaptitude is uncertain however (Skehan, 1989; Chappelle & Green, 1992).

The research has been criticised for ignoring learning contexts anddescribing invisible mental phenomena (e.g. Riley, 1988) while the centralconstructs of Field Dependence/Independence have come under increasingattack as unreliable, unscientific, culturally biased and irrelevant to anexplanation of second language learning (Ellis, 1985; Willing, 1988:44;Griffiths & Sheen, 1992).

A rather different approach to the study of learning style has soughtto incorporate physical and effective - aspects of learning as well as thepsychological functioning dimension. This concept of learning style is

more general and socially based than the cognitive orientation, focusingon the more external and concrete aspects of style. There are numerous

models which examine different aspects of learning styles. Some considerthe effect of environmental elements such as lighting, temperature or seat-ing arrangements. Some focus on perceptual preferences for visual orauditory input. Others examine instructional factors such as groupingmethods or time of day preferences. Comprehensive studies include theNASSP task force which profiled 24 independent subscales (Keefe, 1987,1988) and Dunn and Dunn (1979) who identified 21 learning styles.

This paper focuses on two elements of learning style which I believeare of the most practical concern to teachers because they directly influ-ence methodological decisions. These are grouping preference and per-ceptual modalities.

Perceptual learning styles refer to &dquo;the variations among learners in

using one or more senses to understand, organise and retain experience&dquo;



72

(Reid, 1987:89). It is possible that some 90% of traditional classroominstruction is accomplished through talk (Hodges, 1982) and some re-

searchers have argued that audio-based methodologies are most effectivefor EFL instruction (Takeuchi et al, 1990). However, people tend to havean innate preference for the way they receive information in a learningsituation, and research shows that they use four basic perceptual modali-ties (Dunn, 1983 & 1984; Hodges, 1982; Guild & Garger, 1985):

1. Visual: reading texts or notes, attending to diagrams;2. Auditory: listening to lectures or tapes, discussing;3. Kinesthetic: experiential learning, role-play, physical involvement in

learning;

4. Tactile: &dquo;hands-on&dquo; creativity, model building, note-taking,experimentation.

Perceptual learning style research has typically relied on self-report-ing questionnaires. Various studies have shown that students can accu-

rately identify their own learning style preferences (e.g. Dunn, 1984).This approach may be open to criticism, but we should respect students’self-definitions while expecting expressed preferences to influence at leastsome learning decisions (Willing, 1988). The literature on accommodat-

ing learning styles is less clear, but evidence suggests that matching stu-dents to their preferred style increases both learner satisfaction and achieve-ment. Reid (1987), Willing (1988) and Dunn et al (1989) provide exten-sive reviews of this literature.

Learning style and cultural background

Learning styles appear to vary according to culture, although re-

search into the cultural antecedents of styles is a major priority. Learningstyle research, with few exceptions, has been done from a &dquo;Western, white,middle class perspective and value system&dquo; (Claxton & Murrell, 1987:71 ).While Witkin (1976) and Kaplan (1966) have hypothesised that differentmodes of thinking are characteristic of different cultures, little is knownabout cross-cultural differences in learning styles.

Willing’s (1988) survey of adult migrants suggests that the variouslearning preferences and styles are represented in similar proportions in allethnic groups. Guild and Garger however claim that &dquo;socialisation plays arole in the development of style differences of people of various cultures



73

and in both sexes&dquo; (1985:78). Similarly, Young argues that &dquo;children fromidentifiably different cultural groups overwhelmingly exhibit certain learn-ing styles&dquo; (1987:18). The only published research in this area has beencarried out by Reid (1987) who examined the perceptual learning stylepreferences of 1,234 NNSs of English studying in US language programmes,and a follow-up study by Melton (1990) of 331 university students in

China. These studies confirm that learning style preferences of ESL stu-dents often differ significantly from those of native speakers and thatstudents from different language and cultural backgrounds sometimes dif-fer from one another in their preferences.

Japanese learning experiences

There is no published research which specifically examines the learn-ing style preferences of Japanese speakers although a recent study foundthat a multi-media lesson plan using visual, auditory and kinesthetic meth-ods was more effective than single modalities in a vocabulary learningactivity (Hinkelman and Pysock, 1992). Reid found that the Japanesediffered significantly from all the language groups in her study by not, as agroup, identifying a single major perceptual learning style (Reid, 1987).Reid speculates that culture may play a role in this variance, and it is clearthat the language learning experiences of Japanese students differ consid-erably from those found in Western classrooms.

While English is one of the most widely studied subjects in Japan,its study is regarded as an academic pursuit, and students apparently havelittle motivation to learn the language or use it outside the classroom (Day& Iida, 1988; Benson, 1991). The Japanese education system does notseem to value independence nor assign creative or imaginative tasks. At

both secondary and tertiary levels traditional methods and materials tendto predominate, classes are teacher-centred and students are expected to bepassive. Written examinations alone determine grades and future success(e.g. White, 1987; Ritsuko, 1991).

English classes often involve the use of a reading text in Englishwhich students translate into Japanese (Widdows and Voller, 1991).Memorisation and rote learning play important roles in classrooms (Tinkham,1989), and there is generally no expectation that students will use librariesor research papers from source materials (Hendricks, 1991). English ex-ams are primarily tests of grammatical knowledge and vocabulary (Mor-row, 1987). Instruction is therefore likely to be focused on imparting



74

declarative facts about the language and is often carried out in Japanese(Ellis, 1991; Kobayashi et al, 1992). This is not to suggest that Japaneselearners prefer such approaches. Students seem to doubt the effectivenessof their instruction (Kobayashi et al, 1992) and may favour interactive andstudent-centered learning methods over the traditional teacher-focused ap-proaches they are familiar with -(Widdows and Voller, 1991). This studywas undertaken to help resolve such issues and provide information toenhance students’ awareness of their learning style preferences.

Questionnaire modifications and procedures

Reid’s (1987) original study involved the use of a self-reportingquestionnaire based on existing learning style instruments. The purpose ofthe study was to determine respondents’ visual, auditory, kinesthetic, tac-tile, group and individual learning preferences. The questionnaire consistsof randomly arranged sets of 5 statements on each of the preferences.Validation for second language speakers was done using the split-halfmethod. Reid’s sample consisted of only 130 Japanese respondents.

The present study used the same questionnaire in order to determinewhether Japanese learners have perceptual learning style preferences andwhether these change as a result of overseas study. The backgroundinformation required by the questionnaire was slightly amended to make itmore relevant for Japanese learners (Appendix A). TOEFL data were

removed and added to the survey were questions concerning the length oftime respondents had studied English, the number of semesters they hadbeen taught by native speakers and whether they had studied abroad. The

questionnaire was reduced to one page and translated into Japanese (Ap-pendix B) in order to facilitate learner response. An explanation of thepreferences was distributed with the forms, and teachers decided whetherto distribute the English or Japanese language versions to their students.

Eight Japanese universities participated in the survey with 265 un-dergraduate students responding. The questionnaire was also administeredto 140 Japanese students at various English proficiency levels at a tertiarycollege in New Zealand to determine whether overseas study influencedmodality and group preferences. Most of the respondents were Englishmajors, and therefore field of study was not considered a variable. A totalof 405 questionnaires were returned. Table 1 summarises the informationon respondents according to six background variables.



75

The student responses and background data were extrapolated andpreference means calculated for each variable. These means were scaled

and classified into three ranges accordingly to Reid’s original study: ma-jor, minor and negative learning style preferences. An analysis of vari-ance and multiple comparison of means were run on the preference meansusing the Minitab version 8.1 statistical package. Following Melton (1990),the Tukey test was used at a significance of 0.1 to determine significancein the comparison of means as the Scheffe test which Reid originally usedwas not available.

Table l:Learning Style Variables

Language of Questionnaire No. Sex No.

English 116 Male 182

Japanese 289 Female 223

Level of Study Overseas Study

Non-University 140 Never 176

Year 1 69 Three months or less 55

Year 2 94 Four to eleven months 60

1 Year 3 102 Twelve or more 114

Years with a NS teacher Years of English StudyLess than one 147 Two to seven years 60

One to two 141 1 Eight to nine years 279

More than two 117 Ten or more years 66

Results and discussion

The overall means of this study indicated that Japanese learnersprefer auditory, tactile, kinesthetic and individual learning as minor styles,F (5,2424) = 34.1, p = 0.000. It concurs with Reid’s findings that Japa-nese speakers are distinctive as learners in not identifying a single strong(major) learning style. Visual and group learning were considered nega-tive learning styles.



76

Reid’s means for Japanese students are all higher than those ob-tained in the present study although they are not markedly different intheir preference order (Table 2). Both studies identify tactile, kinestheticand auditory modalities as the three strongest preferences and distinguishgroup learning as the weakest mode of learning. The greatest differenceoccurs in the means for visual modality, although Reid found that Japa-nese were the least visual of her eight NNS language groups. The differ-ences in means could be attributed to the fact that all Reid’s respondentswere above upper intermediate ability in English and had lived and studiedin the USA for between three months and three years. The students in the

present survey included a much wider proficiency range and a high pro-portion of students who had never been overseas.

. Table 2: Summary of Learning Style Preference Means

Note: Means 13.5 and above = Major Learning Style Preference

Means 11.5 - 13.49 = Minor Learning Style Preference

Means 11.49 or less = Negative Learning Style Preference

The fact that both studies suggest that Japanese speakers do not havea major learning style preference may be a factor in the difficulties oftenexperienced by Japanese when studying abroad. Without a strong learningpreference many students may be unable to develop the strategies neces-sary for educational success and high academic achievement. Neverthe-

less, the fact Japanese speakers have multiple minor preferences couldallow them to compensate for the lack of a clearly articulated learningchannel. In addition to the overall preferences of Japanese learners, thestudy investigated a number of variables with a possible relationship todifferences in learning styles, and these will be discussed in detail below.

Language of the Questionnaire

Statistical analysis showed no significant variation in students’ an-swers as a result of the language of the questionnaire (Table 3). It appearstherefore that despite the possibility of students differently interpreting theconcepts underlying such terms as ’model’ (q. 11), or ’project’ (q. 14 & 25)as a result of different cultural connotations, respondents understood the



77

questions in the same ways. The data from the two languages was there-fore combined for analysis.

Table 3: Learning Style Preference Means according to Languageof Questionnaire




Gender

Female students demonstrated stronger preferences than males in

each modality and were significantly more tactile than males, F (1,403)=8.74, p=.003. Neither group identified a major learning style but bothmales and females chose auditory, kinesthetic, tactile and individual learn-ing as minor styles. Both sexes identified group and visual learning asnegative styles (Table 4). Males and females only differed in the order oftheir choices by favouring tactile and auditory learning respectively. It is

possible that these differences in preferences may be a result of the consid-erable differences in socialisation practices experienced by children ofdifferent sexes in Japan (Condon, 1985).

Table 4: Learning Style Preference Means according to gender

~ - - ~ ~~~Note: Means 13.5 and above = Major Learning Style Preference



Level of Study

Statistical analysis of this variable revealed a number of significantdifferences but fewer trends than expected (Table 5). Seniors were signifi-



78

cantly more kinesthetic and tactile than sophomores, F( 1,194) = 13.63, p =.000, and F ( 1,194) = 22.56, p = .00 respectively, and more visual thannon-university students, F( 1,240) = 16.91, p = .000. They also indicated astronger tendency towards group learning, although this was a negativelearning style for all groups. All levels chose auditory learning as a minorlearning style, and all groups except sophomores selected tactile and ki-nesthetic as minor styles. Sophomores favoured individual learning andfreshmen a kinesthetic style. All levels but seniors indicated a negligibleliking for visual learning. Once again, no group expressed a major prefer-ence.

Table 5: Learning Style Preference Means according to level ofstudy




Years of English Study

Statistical analysis of this variable demonstrated a number of inter-esting trends but only one significant difference (Table 6). Students whohad studied English for ten to thirteen years were significantly more tactilethan those who had studied for two to seven years, F (1,124) = 11.38, p =.001. Students who had studied English for more than seven years chosetactile, auditory, kinesthetic and individual learning as minor preferences.The group who had studied for the shortest time selected only auditory andkinesthetic as minor styles.

Although the differences in the means are not marked, there are anumber of interesting trends with students appearing to expand their rangeof modalities and strengthen their preferences the longer they studiedEnglish. Preferences for individual, kinesthetic and group learning in-

creased but, as with previous variables, tactile learning showed the stron-gest trend, perhaps because writing notes, actively working with materialsand physical involvement in class related tasks becomes increasingly nec-



79

essary to successful language learning and academic study. It is also

possible however that students are not self-reporting their own preferencesbut simply reporting on modalities they have adapted to during years ofstudy. Although the statistical differences are minor, the failure of the

auditory and visual means to increase, and particularly the stronger prefer-ence for visual learning by students in the eight to nine group is puzzling,given the emphasis on the written word in Japanese schools and universityenvironments.

Table 6: Learning Style Preference Means according to years ofstudy




Years of Native Speaker Instruction -

Many Japanese students experience English native speaker instruc-tion, and statistical analysis of this variable suggests this factor may influ-ence style preferences (Table 7). Students who had attended classes taughtby native speakers for more than two years were significantly more kines-thetic and auditory than those who had attended for less than one year,F(1,262) = 21.78, p = .000, and F(1,262) = 10.57, p = .001 respectively.In addition, these students also favoured group learning significantly more,F (1,262)=8.4, p = .004. The group with the shortest period of nativespeaker teaching chose auditory and individual learning as minor styleswhile students with 12 months or more with a native speaker chose audito-ry, tactile and kinesthetic styles. Once more, the means indicate thatvisual and group learning are of negligible importance to Japanese stu-dents.

Auditory, kinesthetic and group learning showed interesting trendswith preference means increasing over time with native speaker instruc-tion. This may reflect the teachers’ training in or preferences for commu-



80

nicative methodologies which emphasise the use of spoken English, risk-taking, interactive tasks, role-play and active participation in group work.The means for the visual modality, on the other hand, suggest that prefer-ences for traditional text-based learning approaches decline the longerstudents attend classes with a native speaker teacher.

These hypotheses cannot be substantiated conclusively on this evi-dence, but it appears that foreign teachers may have an important influ-ence on learning style preferences. Clearly teachers have a variety ofinstructional styles which may reflect their own learning styles (Witkin,1976; Dunn & Dunn, 1979), result from their reading or training, or in-volve more personal factors (Willing, 1988). Tentatively, however, it

seems likely that the activity-focused and learner-centered teaching stylesfundamental to current EFL methodology will be more characteristic ofnative speaker classrooms than the traditional grammar-translation approach-es which dominate language learning in Japan. Whether foreign teachersrather than non-native teachers are likely to favour these methods is a

question for further research, but this survey suggests that native speakerteachers have more of an impact on student preferences for group, audito-ry and kinesthetic learning than years of study.

Table 7: Learning Style Preference Means according to period ofnative speaker instruction

. I -




Overseas Study

The statistical analysis of this variable did not provide as many

significant differences as expected, but the trends are logically consistentwith the results above and demonstrate close correspondence with theprevious variable (Table 8). All groups indicated auditory and kinestheticas minor learning styles and group and visual learning as negative styles.



81

Students who had never studied overseas or who had gone for less thanthree months favoured individual learning as a minor style while thosestudying abroad for longer reported this as being of negligible importance.Students studying abroad for less than three months were significantlymore individual, for example, than those studying for 4 - 11 months, F( 1,113) = 8.58,p =.004.

Although less marked, the trends here mirror those revealed by anal-ysis of the native speaker teacher variable discussed above, with prefer-ences for auditory, kinesthetic and group learning strengthening the longerstudents had studied abroad. Students who had studied overseas for 12months or longer were significantly firmer in their preference for auditorylearning than students who had studied entirely in Japan, F (1,288)=9.63,p=9.63, p=.002. Reid also found that preference means for auditory learn-ing increased the longer students lived in the United States but hesitated tosuggest whether learners become &dquo;more comfortable with auditory learn-ing ... or ... become more auditory as they adjust to US academic class-rooms&dquo; (Reid, 1987:95).

Table 8: Learning Style Preference Means according to period ofoverseas study

Note: Means 13.5 and above = Major Learning Style PreferenceMeans 11.5 - 13.49 = Minor Learning Style Preference


Another interesting trend indicated that students who had studied

overseas became progressively less visual in their learning style preferenc-es. Students who had no overseas study experience were the only group tochoose visual learning as a minor learning style and were significantlymore visual than those who had studied abroad for 12 months or more,

F(1,288)=13.49, p=.000.



82

Overview of Japanese learning style preferences

This study confirms Reid’s findings that Japanese learners appear tohave no strong learning style preferences, a fact which might help explainthe language learning difficulties experienced by many Japanese students(Benson, 1991; Ellis, 1991; Kobayashi et al, 1992). Moreover, because thevisual modality is a negative style for many Japanese, many students areunable to take full advantage of an education system which emphasises theimportance of reading texts, composition and written grammar exercises.

On the other hand, students with mixed modality strengths are ableto process information in a numbers of ways and &dquo;often have a betterchance of success than do those with a single modality strength&dquo; (Guild &

Garger, 1985:64). This research suggests that while Japanese learnershave no major learning style preference, they appear to favour three mo-dalities and individual learning as minor styles. The expressed preferenc-es for auditory, tactile and kinesthetic learning confirms Widdows &

Voller’s findings that &dquo;students do not like classes in which they sit pas-sively, reading or translating&dquo; ( 1991:134), nor is full advantage taken oflearners’ auditory preference by a teaching methodology which circum-scribes the use of spoken English (Morrow, 1987).

Analysis of the variables further suggests that sex, length of study,level of study, semesters with a foreign teacher and time spent studyingoverseas are related to learning style differences. The extent to which

learning styles are malleable is uncertain, but it appears that Japanesestudents adapt to different learning experiences and that the modificationand extension of learning styles occur to facilitate this. It is important tonote however that these generalisations do not apply to all Japanese learn-ers in a stereotypical way. Learning style preferences are also affected bypersonal as well as cultural factors and many individual exceptions obvi-ously exist. The results do, however, help us to understand somethingabout the way Japanese students learn and prefer to learn.

Implications

The obvious advantage of moving towards ways of identifying andcatering for learner cognitive and instructional differences is that learningmay be thereby improved. Learning style is a consistent way of function-ing which reflects cultural behaviour patterns and, like other behavioursinfluenced by cultural experiences, may be revised as a result of trainingor changes in learning experiences. Learning styles are thus &dquo;moderately



83

strong habits rather than intractable biological attributes&dquo; (Reid, 1987:100).While many of the instructional implications of differing learning styleshave yet to be investigated, this work therefore proceeds under the as-sumption that learning styles are adaptable, that preferences can be modi-fied, and that sub/unconscious learning styles can become conscious learn-ing strategies. The relationship between learning style and successful L2acquisition is uncertain however with the literature divided between theneed to accommodate learners’ preferred styles (Dunn & Dunn, 1979;Young, 1987; Wallace and Oxford, 1992) and training learners to adoptwhat are seen as more effective styles (Rubin, 1975). Overall, the re-search evidence favours matching teaching methods and learning styles toincrease learner satisfaction and achievement. It is clear from recent

studies, moreover, that style conflicts between teachers and students myhave a negative effect on the success of many EFL learners (Bialystok,1985; Ellis, 1989; Wallace & Oxford, 1992). Matching Japanese learningstyles and instruction can be accomplished by careful lesson planning.Clearly the objective must be to make students aware of their own learn-ing style and encourage them to be versatile in their learning activities byassisting them to extend and develop their preferred modalities.

Students must be helped to identify their preferred styles and torecognise their effects on learning. Japanese students are generally veryinterested in this metacognitive level of learning and are keen to discovertheir own and their peers’ styles. Sharing information about differentmodalities can also help explain the purpose of language learning activi-ties. Teachers need to be cautious with group learning however andbalance the advantages of encouraging greater style flexibility against thediscomfort students are likely to experience in using a negative learningstyle.

An effective means of accommodating learning styles in the class-room is to offer a range of activity types to the whole class. This will bothsuit the preferences of different learners and also help to strengthen theskills associated with their negative learning styles (Melton, 1990; Ellis,1989). Teachers need to be aware of their learners’ modality preferencesand to consciously include various styles in their lesson plans. Hinkelmanand Pysock (1992), for example, have demonstrated the effectiveness of amulti-media methodology for vocabulary building with Japanese learners.This approach is effective in tapping a variety of learning modalities. Byconsciously accommodating a range of learning styles in the classroom inthis way, it is possible to encourage most students to become successfullanguage learners.



84

As teachers it is important that we are aware of our students’ differ-ent learning style preferences and are able to prepare a learning environ-ment that responds to those differences. Because Japanese speakers seemto have multiple minor learning styles and are able to process informationin a variety of ways, there is a need for teachers to respond flexibly usinga broader range of teaching approaches which more ideological methodol-ogies tend to constrict. The research presented here provides some infor-mation to teachers working with Japanese students about how their stu-

dents learn. I also hope that it will encourage teachers to consider howbest to accommodate their learners’ style preferences while providing guid-ance in developing and extending them further.

Conclusion ,

In this paper I have discussed the cultural foundations of perceptuallearning style preferences and provided some empirical evidence to sug-gest that Japanese speakers exhibit distinctive learning style characteris-tics. The research indicates that teachers can benefit from a clearer under-

standing of Japanese students’ learning style preferences by developingculture-sensitive pedagogies which take account of learner characteristics.Clearly much more research needs to be conducted, both into Japaneselearning style preferences and the relationship between learning style andtypes of instruction. It is clear however that by helping students to under-stand their learning styles and to exercise active control over their cogni-tive skills, we can assist them in becoming more effective language learn-ers.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Takahiro Kojima for translating the question-naire into Japanese, Joy Reid for her helpful comments and the manypeople, both in Japan and New Zealand, who encouraged this project andhelped conduct the survey.

References

Benson MJ, 1991 "Attitudes and motivation towards English: a survey ofJapanese freshmen" RELC Journal 21 (1)

Bialystok, E 1985 "The compatibility of teaching and learning strategies"Applied Linguistics 6, 255-262



85

Claxton CS & Y Ralston 1978 Learning styles: Their impact on teachingand administration. Washington, DC: American Assn for HigherEducation

Claxton CS & PH Murrell 1987 Learning styles: Implications for improvingeducational practices. Washington, ASHE-ERIC.

Condon, J 1985 A half step behind: Japanese women today Tokyo:Tuttle

Day, RR & Iida, M 1988 "Use, attitude and motivation in foreign languageacquisition" University of Hawaii working papers in ESL, 7 (1): 109-118.

Dunn, R 1984 "Learning styles: State of the scene "Theory into practice,23, 10-19

Dunn, R & KJ Dunn 1979 "Learning styles/teaching styles: Should they..canthey...be matched? "Educational Leadership, 36, 238-244.

Ellis, R 1985 Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford, OUP.

Ellis, R 1989 "Classroom learning styles and their effect on second languageacquisition: A study of two learners". System, 17 (2), 249-262

Ellis, R 1991 "Communicative competence and the Japanese learner" JALTJournal 13 (2)

Griffiths, R.T & Sheen, R. (1992) Disembodied figures in the landscape:A reappraisal of L2 research on field dependence. Applied Linguistics,13, 133-48.

Guild, PB & S Garger, 1985 Marching to different drummers Alexandria,VA: Assn for supervision & curriculum development

Hansen J & C Stanfield 1981 "Relationship of field dependent-independentcognitive styles to foreign language achievement" Language Learning,31, 349-367

Hendricks Y, 1991 "The Japanese as library patrons" College and researchlibraries news April.

Hinkelman, DW & Pysock, JM 1992 "The need for multi-media ESL

teaching methods: A psychological investigation into learning styles"Cross Currents, 19(1):25-35.

Hodges H 1982 "Madison Prep-alternatives through learning styles" in JWKeefe (ed) Student learning styles: Diagnosing and prescribingprograms. Reston, VA: NASSP



86

Kaplan, RB 1966 "Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education

"Language Learning 16, 1-20.

Keefe JW 1987 Learning style theory and practice Reston, Virginia: NASSP

Keefe JW 1988 "Development of the NASSP learning style profile" in JWKeefe (ed) Profiling and utilising learning style Reston, Virginia:NASSP

Kobayashi S, B Redekop & R Porter 1992 "Motivation of college Englishstudents" The Language Teacher 16 (1)

Kolb, D 1984 Experiential learning Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.

Melton CD, 1990 "Bridging the cultural gap: a study of Chinese students’learning style preferences" RELC Journal 21 (1):29-58

Morrow PR 1987 "The users and uses of English in Japan" World Englishes(6)49-62

Oxford RL, 1990 Language learning strategies: what every teacher shouldknow New York: Newbury House

Oxford RL, ME Hollaway & D Horton-Murillo 1992 "Language learningstyles: Research and practical considerations for teaching in the

multicultural tertiary ESL/EFL classroom" System 4, 439-456.

Reid JM, 1987 "The learning style preferences of ESL students" TESOLQuarterly 21 (1):87-109

Riley P, 1988 "The ethnography of autonomy" In A Brookes and P

Grundy Individualisation and autonomy in language learning. ELT

Docs 131. MEP/BC.

Ritsuko Y, 1991 "Harvest of the standard score greenhouse" Japan QuarterlyApril-June

Rubin, J 1975 "What ’the good language learner’ can teach us" TESOLQuarterly 5

Tinkham T, 1989 "Rote learning, attitudes and abilities: a comparison ofJapanese and American students" TESOL Quarterly 23(4): 695-8

White, M 1987 The Japanese educational challenge Tokyo: Kodansha.

Widdows, S & Voller, P 1991 "PANSI: A survey of the ELT needs of

Japanese University students" Cross Currents 18 (2) 127-141.

Willing K 1988 Learning styles in adult migrant education. Sydney:NCELTR



87

Witkin et al, 1976 "Cognitive style in academic performance and in teacher-student relations" in S Messick & Associates (eds) Individuality inlearning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Witkin HA, CA Moore, P Oltman, DR Goodenough, F Freedman, DROwen & E Raskin 1977 "Field dependent and field cognitive stylesand their educational implications" Review of Educational Psychology,69, 179-211

Young R, 1987 "The cultural context of TESOL - a review of researchinto Chinese classrooms" RELC Journal 18 (2): 15-30



RELC Journal - University of Hong Kong · Additional services and information for RELC Journal can...

Documents

Transcript of RELC Journal - University of Hong Kong · Additional services and information for RELC Journal can...