基于分类方法的学习风格比较

Jacqueline Solís-Céspedes, Julia Espinoza-Guzmán
{"title":"基于分类方法的学习风格比较","authors":"Jacqueline Solís-Céspedes, Julia Espinoza-Guzmán","doi":"10.1109/LACLO.2017.8120894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Learning styles have been used to explain students' differences in approaching their learning, but there are still deficiencies in interpreting the results of their application, and there are authors that indicate that there are no elements that support their credibility in achievement-based education. For this reason, we proposed a methodology to analyze the results obtained after the application of the test of learning styles. Our methodology is designed in four steps: identify the population and its characteristics, establish the time for the samples, determine the existing conglomerates in the population and to extract the characteristics of the constructed conglomerates. To evaluate the this aproach, the methodology was applied and validated by the Felder and Silverman's dichotomous test vs its diffuse version in an adult population in continuous formation and we found evidence that there are external aspects to those evaluated by the traditional learning styles instruments that could influence the changes of preferences over time.","PeriodicalId":278097,"journal":{"name":"2017 Twelfth Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Learning styles comparison based on a classification methodology\",\"authors\":\"Jacqueline Solís-Céspedes, Julia Espinoza-Guzmán\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/LACLO.2017.8120894\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Learning styles have been used to explain students' differences in approaching their learning, but there are still deficiencies in interpreting the results of their application, and there are authors that indicate that there are no elements that support their credibility in achievement-based education. For this reason, we proposed a methodology to analyze the results obtained after the application of the test of learning styles. Our methodology is designed in four steps: identify the population and its characteristics, establish the time for the samples, determine the existing conglomerates in the population and to extract the characteristics of the constructed conglomerates. To evaluate the this aproach, the methodology was applied and validated by the Felder and Silverman's dichotomous test vs its diffuse version in an adult population in continuous formation and we found evidence that there are external aspects to those evaluated by the traditional learning styles instruments that could influence the changes of preferences over time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":278097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 Twelfth Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO)\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 Twelfth Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/LACLO.2017.8120894\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 Twelfth Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/LACLO.2017.8120894","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

学习风格已经被用来解释学生在学习方式上的差异,但在解释其应用结果方面仍然存在不足,并且有作者指出,在基于成就的教育中没有支持其可信度的因素。为此,我们提出了一种方法来分析学习风格测试应用后获得的结果。我们的方法设计分为四个步骤:识别种群及其特征,确定样本时间,确定种群中现有的群集以及提取已构建群集的特征。为了评估这一方法,我们将该方法应用于费尔德和西尔弗曼的二分类测试,并在连续形成的成年人群中对其扩散版本进行了验证,我们发现有证据表明,传统学习风格工具评估的那些外部方面可能会影响偏好随时间的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Learning styles comparison based on a classification methodology
Learning styles have been used to explain students' differences in approaching their learning, but there are still deficiencies in interpreting the results of their application, and there are authors that indicate that there are no elements that support their credibility in achievement-based education. For this reason, we proposed a methodology to analyze the results obtained after the application of the test of learning styles. Our methodology is designed in four steps: identify the population and its characteristics, establish the time for the samples, determine the existing conglomerates in the population and to extract the characteristics of the constructed conglomerates. To evaluate the this aproach, the methodology was applied and validated by the Felder and Silverman's dichotomous test vs its diffuse version in an adult population in continuous formation and we found evidence that there are external aspects to those evaluated by the traditional learning styles instruments that could influence the changes of preferences over time.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信