The Relationship Between Learning and Thinking Styles and the Performance of Female Pharmacy Students in an Anatomy Course.

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Advances in Medical Education and Practice Pub Date : 2025-10-11 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/AMEP.S545204
Munirah Batarfi, Abdulrahman Alraddadi
{"title":"The Relationship Between Learning and Thinking Styles and the Performance of Female Pharmacy Students in an Anatomy Course.","authors":"Munirah Batarfi, Abdulrahman Alraddadi","doi":"10.2147/AMEP.S545204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In professional health education, it is common to align teaching strategies with students' preferred learning and thinking styles. However, the evidence supporting this \"meshing\" approach is weak. To address this gap, this study aimed to investigate the learning and thinking styles of first-year female pharmacy students and compare them to their performance in an anatomy course.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study evaluated first-year female Doctor of Pharmacy students enrolled in an anatomy course over two consecutive academic years. Two validated inventory tools were used to assess students' learning and thinking styles: the Visual, Aural, Read/Write, and Kinesthetic Learning Styles Inventory (VARK) and the Thinking Style Indicator (TSI). The students' final course grades were compared with their thinking and learning styles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>259 students (98% of both cohorts) provided complete data on both instruments. The kinesthetic (58%) and concrete-sequential learners (32%) had the highest grades among the studied population. Neither learning style (P = 0.959) nor thinking style (P = 0.918) predicted the performance of students in the anatomy course. On the other hand, students with multimodal learning and thinking styles tended to have better scores than those who were unimodal.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of the study demonstrate that learning and thinking styles do not have a significant role in the performance of pharmacy students in an anatomy course, which led us to reject the null hypothesis. Thus, anatomy educators should make full use of multiple active blended learning modalities available to accommodate the full range of individualized learning preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":47404,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","volume":"16 ","pages":"1869-1877"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12526390/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S545204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In professional health education, it is common to align teaching strategies with students' preferred learning and thinking styles. However, the evidence supporting this "meshing" approach is weak. To address this gap, this study aimed to investigate the learning and thinking styles of first-year female pharmacy students and compare them to their performance in an anatomy course.

Material and methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated first-year female Doctor of Pharmacy students enrolled in an anatomy course over two consecutive academic years. Two validated inventory tools were used to assess students' learning and thinking styles: the Visual, Aural, Read/Write, and Kinesthetic Learning Styles Inventory (VARK) and the Thinking Style Indicator (TSI). The students' final course grades were compared with their thinking and learning styles.

Results: 259 students (98% of both cohorts) provided complete data on both instruments. The kinesthetic (58%) and concrete-sequential learners (32%) had the highest grades among the studied population. Neither learning style (P = 0.959) nor thinking style (P = 0.918) predicted the performance of students in the anatomy course. On the other hand, students with multimodal learning and thinking styles tended to have better scores than those who were unimodal.

Conclusion: The results of the study demonstrate that learning and thinking styles do not have a significant role in the performance of pharmacy students in an anatomy course, which led us to reject the null hypothesis. Thus, anatomy educators should make full use of multiple active blended learning modalities available to accommodate the full range of individualized learning preferences.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

药学女学生解剖课学习思维方式与学习成绩的关系
背景:在专业健康教育中,将教学策略与学生偏好的学习和思维方式相结合是很常见的。然而,支持这种“啮合”方法的证据是薄弱的。为了解决这一差距,本研究旨在调查药学一年级女学生的学习和思维方式,并将其与解剖学课程的表现进行比较。材料和方法:本横断面研究评估了连续两学年注册解剖学课程的药学博士一年级女学生。两种经过验证的量表工具被用来评估学生的学习和思维风格:视觉、听觉、读写和动觉学习风格量表(VARK)和思维风格指标(TSI)。学生的期末课程成绩与他们的思维和学习方式进行了比较。结果:259名学生(占两个队列的98%)提供了两种仪器的完整数据。动觉型学习者(58%)和具体顺序学习者(32%)在研究人群中成绩最高。学习风格(P = 0.959)和思维风格(P = 0.918)均不能预测学生在解剖学课程中的表现。另一方面,具有多模态学习和思维方式的学生往往比单模态学习和思维方式的学生得分更高。结论:研究结果表明,学习方式和思维方式对药学学生在解剖学课程中的表现没有显著影响,因此我们拒绝原假设。因此,解剖学教育者应充分利用多种主动混合学习模式,以适应全方位的个性化学习偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Advances in Medical Education and Practice
Advances in Medical Education and Practice EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
189
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信