Abstract

Introduction

Research Environment

Data Collection

Claims

Conclusion

Biographical sketches

Bibliography

Appendix
 

The purpose of this study was to determine if students would perform better, academically, if they were aware of their strongest learning styles. We were also interested in students taking ownership in their learning by using their learning style(s) when studying. We questioned whether students would use their knowledge of learning styles, on an independent basis, by incorporating study styles that matched their strongest method of learning.

The group studied consisted of approximately one hundred seventh grade students, twelve of whom were taught by both teachers involved in this research.

Students were given surveys to complete which asked them to explain how they thought they learned best. They were also given a learning style preference test to determine if their strongest learning mode matched how they thought they learned. Interviews were conducted to gather data about the use of learning styles after instruction on learning was given and our observations from class discussions documented what students said in these discussions.

This research question developed from the desire of both teachers involved to search for new ways to help students find success and fulfillment in their educational experience. We found the data were inconclusive in determining if students consciously chose their best learning style in their study habits. There was limited data to show an increase in the use of personal learning styles in study habits after limited instruction, not enough to give a conclusive answer to our questions. Ultimately, the research concludes by asking a third question; if students were introduced to the knowledge of their best learning styles as they enter school, would they be better equipped to learn more than those who were ignorant of learning styles.

As adolescents, middle school students naturally experience physical and mental changes that can impact their learning. In observing middle school students, we noticed those who seemed to understand what helped them learn often found success in their classes. For example, very creative, artistic students were often enthusiastic about working on projects, just as students who enjoyed reading were happy to write their own historical fictions. Social, outgoing students said they studied with friends or had family members quiz them from their notes. In hopes of helping students who struggle academically in school, we looked for specific aspects of thought that were evident with students who were successful in school, but not apparent in students who tended to struggle with learning.

As we discussed our observations, we agreed with theories of John Dewey and Howard Gardner, which will be discussed in the data analysis portion of the research. Students who were highly engaged in class often had life experiences that helped them connect to the curriculum and those who did not have strengths in reading or writing used their strength in art or logic to work though problems. We questioned if we could have an impact on students' learning by helping them understand where their strengths in learning were and if they could apply them to their work in school. Our question for research became, "With limited instruction on learning styles and personality types, would students choose their strongest modes of learning in their studies, and thus, find more success in their classes?"

To determine the ways our students learned we chose three basic modes, visual, auditory and haptic. These categories were derived from Lynn O'Brien's "Learning Channel Preference" from Specific Diagnostics, Inc. in Rockville, Maryland, which was used in our research. Examples of visual learning would include eye contact with the teacher, or information being used in instruction. Auditory learning would include listening and participating in class discussions, reading outloud and oral reviews. The term, "haptic" was new to us, however, we discovered that it was the same as kinesthetic or "hands on " learning. An example of this would be the use of manipulatives in math.

We had a strong interest in trying to understand how students learned. In previous research, we focused on problems that we thought were hindering students' academic performances. Tonya's research focused on students' ability to understand the connection between completing their homework and success in academics. While there was no hard evidence to prove that completing homework resulted in better test grades, Tonya learned that students who experienced academic success were able to set goals and follow through with homework, participation and activities to obtain these goals. She found other variables, such as parent involvement, affected homework performance beyond the students' ability to reflect on the importance of the work. It was observed that when there was a lack of parental support, students seemed to experience more difficulties organizing and completing homework and passing tests. The research showed an improvement in homework completion when parents stayed in close communication with the teacher however, the research concluded with more questions about students' learning styles and varied teaching styles.

Tamie's research asked the question, "Will the use of varied teaching strategies help students be more successful?" She did not find a clear correlation between students' success and varied teaching strategies. For example, while one student performed well on a unit with a project, she did not pass another with similar work and a project. Similar to Tonya's research, it was difficult to determine which strategy worked when more than one variable was at play. We researched topics that were important to us because they focused on helping students become successful academically, yet we found no concrete evidence to answer our questions.

As we began our research this year we wanted to continue our efforts to determine what aspects of teaching could enhance students' learning. We chose motivation as our initial topic. We were both concerned about students who did not exhibit an interest in learning that was shown by other students. In order to understand how to better motivate these students we wanted to study their reflections about strategies used in our teaching. We planned to examine our students' interpretations of their learning through reflective journals that would question motivational strategies used in our teaching. From our experiences we believed that some teachers were more effective at motivating students and that certain students worked more in one class than in another. In our research we felt we would find students were motivated by various teaching styles and subject matter.

In an attempt to obtain more information, Tonya attended a motivation conference in Richmond in October. She came away from the conference without the new information she was hoping to find because the speaker spent most of his time talking about discipline problems rather than motivational strategies. In discussing this disappointment during a team meeting, we wondered if motivation was something that could be influenced. We now moved away from the topic of student motivation and toward other influences on student learning.

By November we decided the topic of motivation was too broad. This realization, and the memory of a situation from last year, caused us to redefine our topic to focus on students choices in regard to their learning. We remembered a student from last year who asked Tonya, "When are you going to assign vocabulary cards for us to make? They really help me learn the vocabulary." To this insightful realization, Tonya responded by asking why the student did not make her own, without  being assigned to do it, if vocabulary cards helped her learn. Well, Anna had never thought of that! She agreed that she should take the initiative to make them, although many in the class said they would want some credit for this work rather than simply doing it on their own.

The data we collected also helped our focus to shift from motivational strategies to the impact choice of assignments had on learning. We now wanted to know what choices students made, with respect to their learning styles, which impacted their learning? Taking this another step, we also asked, "If students were given limited instruction about learning styles, would they make choices in the way they studied or in options given in class, that matched the way they learned best?" We were supported in our thinking by Thomas Armstrong in Awakening Genius, where he stated, "students who aren't given significant choices about what they can learn or how they are able to learn it soon either give in and adapt, or give up and tune out." (Armstrong, 1998, p. 61) This idea led us to the assumption that students who were empowered in their own learning would be better prepared to make choices later in their lives.

Two experiences reinforced our interest in this research topic. When Tonya was in college, she had a literature professor who taught her the importance of maximizing her study time. The professor suggested that Tonya should study her notes at least ten to fifteen minutes per night to be more successful on her tests. Tonya reluctantly followed her professor's suggestion and found that this method helped her to take ownership for her learning. Tonya shared this experience with her students in order to help them understand the importance of taking responsibility for their own learning.

Similarly, Tamie asked her students to document how they studied. The intent was to help them realize the different ways that were available to learn. When she gave this assignment the year before, students said they studied for a particular amount of time, with no reflection about how they studied. After further discussions and explanations, the students realized the variety of ways to process and learn information. Some students used family members to help them study by quizzing, others read notes and worksheets over and a few made practice quizzes. These methods correlate to the learning styles used in this study. Auditory, visual and haptic processes were evident in the examples used by students.

We assumed students had not experienced choosing how they would acquire new knowledge because teachers made the choices for them. This assumption was reinforced when Anna commented, "when are you going to assign vocabulary cards for us to make?" We also reflected on our teaching. We believed students were limited in their opportunities to learn about how they learn or to choose how to demonstrate knowledge. They were not given options for class assignments or homework. We always used a variety of assignments during our units to reach several learning styles but students were required to complete all assignments, not those they liked best, the way they liked to study best or which suited their learning styles.

While choice was given in some classroom assignments, we were unable to allow students choice in regard to the form of assessment. It would have been physically impossible to test each student by using a different format and we were hindered by the lack of time to offer essay testing. We were also reminded of a situation with a former student that precluded us from using a preponderance of oral testing. Three years ago we taught a student who seemed able to demonstrate an understanding of material in discussion but then was unable to do so on a written exam. After discussing this inconsistency with our team of teachers, we decided to test him orally on questions he missed on final tests. While he could not correct all his errors, he was able to show mastery, which at that time was measured by a 75% or higher score on a test. We were pleased with his success, but we learned that his parents were not in agreement with our method of assessing his understanding. In a parent-teacher conference his dad stated, "Tim told me he didn't have to write his answers, that his teachers would let him tell them the answer. How's that going to help him next year or in high school when his teachers won't allow that?" We understood his parents' concerns and after more discussion, we agreed to allow limited oral testing. Tim was required to take the written exams and would only be allowed to respond orally if he was in danger of "failing" the test. We continued to use oral testing as an option for other students as well, but due to this experience we decided we must be careful about how much to allow testing that would not fit the expectations of parents and future teachers.

Indirectly, we were also limited in our assessment strategies by the new Standards of Learning. In the "SOL's" we were given a wide range of information to teach our students who were required to demonstrate their understanding on an objective test. We agreed that we would not be doing our students justice by testing in ways that were diametrically opposed to the state's method of testing. Instead, we adapted our testing to give students the opportunity to take standardized type tests in order to be prepared for SOL tests. In order to have students ready to take these new assessments, we felt students needed to be assessed in ways that closely matched the state's SOL tests.

We also perceived a difficulty with extended "hands-on" teaching/learning activities. Realizing the importance of teaching the curriculum, we were limited on the amount of time we could allot to one part of a unit, or to one unit over another. In order to teach students the curriculum for seventh grade science, Tonya had about eight days for each unit, including at least one formative test, (which checked for understanding before the final, summative test) followed by enrichment or corrective work before the summative test. In reality, she had five days in which to introduce, teach the material, check for the ability to work with the information on an independent basis, and prepare the students for the summative test. This dilemma severely limited the amount of time available for extended kinesthetic activities. Tamie found the same problem with social studies activities in previous years. The activities were engaging and helped reinforce the curriculum, but they often necessitated several days to complete. We realized we could not afford the luxury of offering such choices for each unit of study throughout the school year.

At our school, emphasis had been placed on student achievement using mastery learning techniques. In fact, this emphasis helped us formulate our research problem. At Prospect Heights Middle School, students received an A, B, C or I in all academic classes. The "I" represented an incomplete, or non-mastery of the subject taught, but allowed the student to retest after corrective work was completed and one hundred percent of their homework was completed on time.

In the past few years there have been discussions at our faculty meetings about this grading policy and whether it should continue. Some teachers believed students should be allowed more time for learning because research showed students learn at different rates. They felt the system was not in need of change, but perhaps, our teaching methods needed to be examined. Others perceived that the system was failing because more and more students were not meeting the requirements to earn the opportunity to retest. As many said, "the students are using the system!" It was felt, by many on our staff, that our students had learned to use the system in order to escape homework, class assignments and tests. These beliefs were voiced at faculty meetings, team meetings and grade level meetings toward the end of last year.

The consequence of being incomplete at the end of the school year, was to repeat the grade or attend summer school. These options also led to debate and discussion among faculty. Students were completing units, during summer school, in a few hours or a day, when the units lasted eight or more days during the regular school year. This caused teachers to question the amount of learning that students were experiencing. Some believed content was simplified in order to allow the students to pass the unit test. In regard to retention, research indicated that it was not helping this segment of the population either, since many dropped out of school before graduating. It became obvious that our practices were questionable on a number of levels.

This debate compelled us to question our teaching methods. Perhaps, there were ways to improve the passing rate while continuing to give students the time they needed to learn successfully. Our desire was to determine if student achievement could be improved by teaching students to think about their learning styles. We hoped to influence the students who were incomplete in their learning so they could obtain ownership of their learning and realize how to make improvements in their academics.  To restate our research question; what happens to academic achievement when students are aware of their strongest learning styles?

The middle school in which we taught was the only middle school in Orange County, a rural community in central Virginia. We had seven hundred and fifty students in our sixth, seventh and eighth grade classes. Our population was comprised of primarily middle class and lower middle class students, although at the northern end of our county we had a large, planned community (Lake of the Woods) which included many white-collar families.

Tonya taught seventh grade life science on a team with one hundred students who were heterogeneously grouped for all core areas except mathematics. These students were expected to complete homework assignments, projects and summative tests. As mentioned earlier, the science curriculum demanded attention to a significant amount of material, which limited the time that could be spent on discussing learning styles. Due to these constraints, we used class time, after testing, to ask students to complete surveys and information sheets. Intermittent class discussions on the subject of learning styles were included in the classes as well.

Tamie taught Work and Family Studies, an exploratory class. There were fifteen to twenty students, heterogeneously grouped, and the students moved to a different elective classes at semester break. Expectations for the class included class participation and appropriate behavior during class activities. There were few homework assignments and no summative tests to complete. It was in these classes that extended work was done on learning styles, personality traits and self-awareness. Students took a brief learning style preference test and had many class discussions on learning styles, teaching styles and the power individuals had in regard to their learning.

We continued our research with the intent of helping our students think about their learning. Did they ever think about what helped them learn? If so, did they use these methods in various academic situations to experience success? What influence did they feel they had over their learning? By combining the data we took from Tonya's entire team of students and the additional data from Tamie's students, we hoped to arrive at answers to these questions.

In order to measure success in classwork, we used our school's standard. Students scoring seventy or above on summative tests were thought to have "succeeded" in that subject. We understood this could be contested but we decided it was the accepted grading standard for our research environment, thus appropriate for this study. Students scoring below the seventieth percentile were seen as "incomplete" or unsuccessful.

In order to study students' uses of their learning styles, first we determined we would use all the students we taught, with an emphasis on those we both taught. As we analyzed our data, we determined that it was less meaningful to study students from other teams that Tamie taught because we could not control the choices offered in other core classes. We finally decided it would be most useful to limit our study to the students Tonya taught, with special attention on the subgroup we both taught.

By looking specifically at the subgroup, we analyzed the impact extra instruction on learning styles had on the choices made in relation to academic assignments. We chose not to look at the choices made in Tamie's class because we wanted our focus to be on the choices students made in regard to their academic classes. These are the areas in which the students are tested, and ultimately the areas in which we must focus our attention for improvement. We did not purposely demean the work being done in exploratory classes. In fact, we found the curriculum in Tamie's class to benefit several core classes. We were more interested in limiting our focus for this research to academic choices made by students.

Data Collection

Tonya had her students complete evaluations (Appendix A & B) on the first two units of study in order to answer questions that dealt with how the students felt they learned the material. Questions also focused on which activities helped them the most and what choices they made in regard to their learning for each unit. Next, toward the end of the semester, Tonya had her students complete a questionnaire on how they learned, which was titled "What Do You Think?". (Appendix C) The students were asked to identify examples of activities that helped them learn and why those activities helped them. We wanted to find out how the students thought they learned best after having a few class discussions about individual learning styles. We noted that during these discussions, some students who were in Tamie's class often dominated the conversation with their knowledge of their learning styles, personality traits, and various teaching styles. The balance of the students within the class were interested in the conversation but seemed less knowledgeable about the information. (This will be explained further in the "Analysis and Interpretation of Data" section of the paper.) Finally, in order to verify what the strongest learning style was for our entire study group, Tonya administered a "Learning Channel Preference" survey to all of her science students. (Appendix E) The three learning styles were, "visual, auditory and haptic." We hoped these would match the way(s) the students thought they learned best on their questionnaires.

The majority of instruction on learning styles was given in Tamie's class. Several days were used to discuss learning styles, personality types and various teaching styles that can influence the way people learn. Early in the semester, her students took the "Learning Channel Preference" survey to find how they learned best. (Appendix D) (This was the same survey mentioned above, which was used by Tonya's students although we altered it slightly which will be explained in our analysis.) The students showed a lot of enthusiasm for this activity and were eager to continue talking about their preferred learning styles. Comments such as, "I hate reading!", "Teachers talk too much," and, "I like to play review games like Jeopardy," were common and widely agreed to by most classmates. From this point, they worked together to think of specific activities that could be used in core classes that would match their strongest learning styles. It was invigorating to experience the animated dialogue which was quite different from typical classroom situations. Often class participation had been dominated by a few students, but in this instance, most students
were involved in the discussion. As we learned in later interviews, this was the first time most of them learned about how the students learn, which may explain the positive energy the students brought to the discussion.

During these discussions students realized how learning changes as we grow. Activities that had been enjoyable in the past (such as being read to) were not seen as favorite ways to learn as preteens.

While these discussions were taking place in Tamie's class, Tonya's students briefly discussed how some classes were "easier" or "harder," in relation to the way they were taught. This discussion became a forum for students to explain why they liked or disliked particular classes and teachers. Of course, the students and the teacher agreed from the beginning not to use names, for obvious reasons. However, the students obviously wanted to discuss which subjects were favorites or least favorites and why. It became apparent that many students realized a relationship between their learning preference and how that helped them in some classes. Brittany, a student we both taught said, "(The teacher's) teaching style seems to compliment many of the students' learning styles." While a survey was not taken, most students voiced their enjoyment of science and their dislike for language arts and math. This was not unanimous, however several agreed with this opinion. As a girl wrote in a journal entry from Tamie's class;

I like (math and science) best because they don't just talk all the time. They let you do stuff with a partner so that you're not always just sitting and taking notes. They let you play matching games, Jeopardy and bingo to help you learn in a fun way. In Science (the teacher) let's us do hands-on activities.

I would like social studies more if (the teacher) wouldn't talk so much and be more fun.

The final data collected was a set of interviews Tamie conducted with the students both she and Tonya taught during the first semester. We needed to ask these students, specifically, if they had made any changes in their study habits due to the additional instruction they received on learning styles. Since our primary research question asked if more instruction would lend itself to students using the information to be more successful, we needed to see if this took place.

Claims

In our research we made three claims. When we encouraged students to become aware of their learning preferences, we found that they became much more enthusiastic in discussions in our classes. We believed this pattern, provided evidence that when learning was connected directly to students' lives, students could connect new knowledge to what they already knew. This interpretation coincided with the work of Dewey, Howard Gardner and Robert Steinberg on student learning. Our experience with students who were not often successful led us to believe they had, "become so identified with (failure) that they would not risk struggling with the difficult." (Sockett, 1993 p.73) An example of one such student would be Chris, a student we both taught two years ago, who showed these tendencies. He had failed the year before and much of the time we worked with him he expressed a defeatist attitude. He would not work unless we sat with him, one on one, giving him constant encouragement while reviewing or testing orally. In class he was often doodling or preoccupied in some way, seldom focused on the class assignments or activities. In our opinion, Chris was the student Sockett speaks of who had lost the will to struggle with the difficult task of learning. Perhaps Chris would have been helped if he understood how he learned. He could then possibly feel some control over his role in the learning process. We realized there were many other factors which impacted students like Chris, however, we hoped to find ways to affect his learning that were under our control.

In our second claim, when we encouraged students to think about their learning, and to make choices among assignments to fit preferred learning with task chosen to demonstrate learning, they became more engaged in school. Once again, in our teaching experience, we had not seen much participation from students who struggled in academic classes. Their frustrations seemed to manifest in quiet, passive-aggressive habits, such as Chris's doodling and staring out the window. When classroom activities moved away from discussion, note-taking and reading toward active group projects, we saw other sides of students like Chris.

In talking with other teachers, we found we had totally different perspectives of some students. This was especially evident with students in math and science. In math, most instruction tended to be visual while in science, many hands-on or interactive group activities were used in each unit. We expected to see an increase in engagement and positive attitudes after students became aware of their strongest learning styles. Our expectations were based on the idea that students would use their strongest learning styles which would engage them in the work. This claim would not be supported in a class that did not offer choices of assignments. Our only way of testing this claim was to use the activities students chose from Tonya's enrichment and homework activities. If it proved to be a valid claim, we could assume other teachers could engage more students by offering a variety of activities in their assignments.

In our third claim we believed that students who used their strongest learning style(s) would improve academically. We realized this might be difficult or impossible to determine, however, we felt we must make the claim in order to look at any connections between academic improvements and usage of personal learning styles. As we gathered data, we saw improvements in class participation although this was hard to tie to learning styles. One student in particular began participating more in class discussions after being taught about learning styles. His scores on tests also improved in science, where choice was available in assignments. Due to his gains, we decided we would look at grades in Tonya's science class and link them with homework and enrichments that were open to choice to see if there was a correlation.

We collected data through a variety of methods. We began by asking for students' feedback on how they believed they learned. In addition, we asked their perceptions of teaching methods used in their science class. The students also completed learning style worksheets, brain stormed various activities using different learning methods and journaled about their thoughts on learning. We kept field notes and journals on classroom discussions, interviewed students on their use of their strongest learning styles, and documented choices made in regard to academic assignments. We continually looked for other perspectives by examining other sources of information that dealt with the subjects of student choices in learning and learning styles.

There were a number of concerns that caused us to question our methods used in data collection. We had questions about the effectiveness of our limited instruction on learning styles. Another limit of our study was the difficulty of following up on students' uses of their learning styles in academic classes. We also discussed the difficulty of studying a group of students that Tamie only had in class for one semester. Finally, we questioned the effectiveness of the student evaluations and learning preference surveys.

We could not be sure of the validity of the information that the students generated, but realized this would always be a question in qualitative research. In order to elicit honest responses about students' feelings on teaching styles in academic classes, we decided to conduct these discussion in the exploratory class. Some students might have felt uneasy fully expressing their views about academic classes, with Mrs. Baskerville. However, this decision, in itself, limited the amount of feedback we could obtain from students Tonya taught that Tamie did not teach. Another concern about student generated journals occurred on the last day of the semester in Tamie's class when several students did not participate in the final journaling assignment. There were a few possible reasons we realized may have led to this problem. Some students may not have felt it was important enough for them to respond, given that it was the last day and their participation would not have any effect on them or their grade for the class. Others may not have felt the research questions were worth their time to think through and respond seriously. This diminished our ability to evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction on learning styles with many students we shared the first semester. In order to obtain this information, we decided to conduct individual interviews with the subgroup of students we both taught later in the second semester.

As we read books, magazines and information from internet sources, we were energized by the stories and found connections with others' ideas and our data. In Women's Ways of Knowing, Belenky, et. al., explained how women come to "know" through their life experiences. In our analysis of our data will show our students becoming "knowers" due to their exposure to information although, many were not yet at the stage to use their knowledge to benefit them academically.

Janet Wilde Astington explains children's "theory of mind" in the November 1998 Educational Leadership (p.46) and quotes Bruner on the way he describes the term.

The new work in children's theory of mind shifts the focus onto the ways children themselves think about thinking. Bruner writes, 'the child should be aware of her own thought processes,... to be as aware of how she goes about her learning and thinking as she is about the subject matter she is studying...Equipping her with a good theory of mind.' (Bruner, 1996, p. 64)

a growing body of research brings a surprising new view of early adolescence: It is a crucial period in human development, equaled only by infancy. ... young adolescents develop abstract reasoning, giving them their first adult skills for decision making. As a result, experts say, they need more freedom at school to test their reasoning.  But most middle-grade teachers incorrectly believe their students need stricter discipline, according to one survey." (p. 84)

During interview with students who had the benefit of both of our classes, two made comments in relation to what Shapiro called "abstract reasoning," which we believe was the students thinking about how they think. Brittany and Jackie both said they found the instruction on learning styles to be beneficial because, "It made me think." Another student, Will, stated, "It (choice of assignments) gave me more freedom to learn the way I wanted to." Janice also said, "I was happy we got to choose... the enrichment kind of made me anxious to know more and do the enrichment more than once."

We believed it was our task to not only teach information from our curriculums, but also, to help the students become aware of the control they had that could be used in the learning process. We wanted our students to develop theories which were, as Bruner said, "not only about the world but about her own mind and how it works." (Bruner, 1996, p. 57).

In Zapp! in Education, the following quote is attributed to John Dewey,

What I have learned is that the purpose of education is to allow each individual to come into full possession of his or her personal power. (Byham, 1992, p.ix)

one of the goals of American education is to start students on a road toward the feelings of success and achievement that come from commitment, ownership, and responsibility for their own educational progress. We must prepare students to achieve and develop the self-confidence needed to handle the hurdles they will encounter in their lives beyond the classroom. (p.ix)

These discussions led us to believe learning style information is relatively new to most students. Only students who had both classes made the initial observations. With an understanding of this new knowledge, we felt seventh graders were exhibiting an understanding of several aspects of teaching and learning. First, students saw why some classes they were in had different atmospheres. Second, they understood why they tended to like some classes, and teachers more or less, than others. Finally, they began to understand what role they must play in their own education in order to be successful.

Students' comments on the evaluation for their "Lab Equipment & Safety" unit also showed they were connecting themes with several other classes. (Please note that student comments were quoted in their original form throughout this research.)
 

Sonya stated,

We did graphing for math. I felt really confident being
able to know this stuff. It made it easier on me.

Jessica wrote,

In Teen Living we did graphs and I thought that was really cool because it was easy for me because I already new how to do it and I helped other people who didn't.

Leigh Ann mentioned,

In search we are reading 'The Hot Zone' and that book has a lot of lab and research in it. The book talked bout equipment I might not have known other wise.

In the "Biome" unit, Brittany found,

I was in Sunday School and we were talking about Joseph, and the climate. My mom (Sunday School teacher) asked what a Biome was. I raised my hand and my mom almost had to tape my mouth shut, because I answered her question in so much detail.

The problem is to unify, to organize, education, to bring all its various factors together, through putting it as a whole into organic union with everyday life." (Dewey, 1990, p. 92). When students begin to tie events and learning experiences together, it better enables them to understand how they make sense of new information.

Understanding is fostered through discussion and collaboration, with the child encouraged to express her own views better to achieve some meeting of minds with others who may have other views. (Bruner, 1996, p. 56).

The data collected during this research focused on the students' perception of their own learning. We attempted to phrase questions on unit evaluations and individual interviews in such a way to have students think about how they learn as well as what specific strategies helped them learn best. We separated the data into six categories which were: Visual, Haptic, Visual-Haptic, Auditory, Visual-Auditory and Visual/Haptic/Auditory (All). We chose to use these categories because they were used on the "Learning Channel Preference" survey given in our classes. The survey was simple, short and easy for our students to understand, which made it a good choice for our purposes. The survey was given to us by a colleague who had taught study skills and found this to be a valuable tool to help children learn more about how they learned. We read the students' notes on their evaluation forms and determined which learning style category fit their comments.

When we sorted our data, we attempted to place comments into the three main categories of visual, haptic and auditory. We then realized there were combinations that we must include. For example, on Michelle's biome unit evaluation, she said the activities that benefited her learning were, "takin notes then goin home to make flashcards." She later mentioned her enrichment activity that helped her to be more excited about what she was learning. "I picked the poster because its fun to put art and learning togather." Her comments included both visual and haptic activities, so that is the category we used when we placed her evaluation.

We also had difficulty determining what activities would fit the six categories. One student wrote, "the enrichment helped me the best." The "enrichment" was an individual activity students completed during the units. They were given the opportunity to choose from a variety of activities to enrich their understanding of the information in both units. At this point we needed to review what activity the students' chose before we could categorize them. An example would be the students who chose to make a review game using information from the unit. Initially, we thought this game would be a visual activity but upon further analysis and much discussion, we decided it must also be considered a haptic activity and possibly an auditory activity.

In order to determine what category it would best fit, we researched kinesthetic learning. According to the Center for New Discoveries in Learning,

a kinesthetic learner,prefers to learn through their bodies or feelings. If they can touch
it and feel whatever they are learning about, the KINESTHETIC learner will process and remember the information quite well. (School Smart Kids, 1996).

We found the bulk of the evaluation forms fit in the "visual-haptic" and "all" categories. There were eight evaluation forms which had comments that matched the visual category, seven visual-auditory, two haptic and only one student's comments fit the auditory category alone. After discussing our findings, we decided it was logical that we would find these groups to match most of the forms since the activities in the units were basically visual and haptic, with the auditory comments coming from class discussion and reading in class. We actually pondered how ten of the remaining evaluations could have fit into the single categories of auditory, haptic or visual. We then realized those were the three categories we expected all evaluations to fit in as we began sorting our data.

It should also be explained that the two units were different in the teaching styles and learning styles used. The first unit was, "lab equipment and safety" and the second was "biomes." During the lab equipment unit, students were constantly given the opportunity to look at the equipment and use them for their intended purposes. Their lab for this unit involved lighting a Bunsen burner, using several pieces of lab equipment in the process. It would be natural for the students to remember the lab because it was very exciting for them to actually light the Bunsen burner by themselves.

The biome unit included much more book work, reading about the individual biomes and looking at pictures of each. Students had to do more research to understand organisms that lived in each biome since they could not experience each one. The differences in the units made it all the more interesting to note that the bulk of the comments on the evaluations fell into the visual/haptic or in the category that mentioned all three learning styles. However, fifteen students' comments for both units fit the visual/haptic category and only eighteen from each unit made comments that used all three learning styles. At this point of our analysis, we once again realized that our claims needed qualifications because the activities in science lent themselves to these learning styles. We believed that it would be unusual for a student to not make mention of lighting a Bunsen burner or doing a nature activity when completing an evaluation of a unit with such assignments.

We wanted to find out more about how students believed they learned best, after having discussions on learning styles. In order to obtain this information, Tonya administered a short questionnaire which asked specifically how the students thought they learned best and asked them to give examples of activities that best suited their needs. (Appendix C) We read the answers and separated the questionnaires into the learning style categories that fit the students' comments. We found eighty-nine percent of the eighty-eight students made comments that fit all three learning style categories. There were five percent who gave answers that fit the visual/auditory category. Only three percent gave answers that fit the visual category and visual/haptic categories. (see graph, appendix G)

According to research conducted by Barbe and Milone, in an average classroom 25-30 percent of the students would be visual, 25-30 percent would be auditory 15 percent haptic and 25-30 percent with mixed learning styles. This does not coincide with our study or that of Fiske (Fiske, 1992, p. 64). However, Reiff states in Learning Styles that, "most students learn with all their modalities" (Reiff, 1995, p. 17). The differences in these findings may have been best explained by Howard Gardner. "Children may well exhibit one style with one kind of information (such as being impulsive in the musical realm) while exhibiting a contrasting style with other information (such as being reflective when working on a jigsaw puzzle). The most comprehensive analysis of individual differences may need to chart both the styles and the contents, in order to determine which styles seem yoked to specific contents and which may operate across the board, at least in the case of a particular individual (Gardener, 1993, p.44).

Upon analysis, we discussed many factors that may have impacted the results of this questionnaire. For example, the format of the questionnaire was a concern. The students were given a list of choices of activities. They were to circle those which helped them learn best. Of the seventy-eight students whose answers fit all three categories, most circled at least five activities. We felt it was too convenient to have so many choices for the students to select. Perhaps it would have been more valid for them to list their own ideas of activities that they felt would benefit them.

Another possible flaw of the questionnaire was the way in which the questions were asked and the fact that the students were in science when they completed them. Typically, students were given a wide variety of ways in which to acquire new information that would fit all learning styles. Although Tonya directed the students to think about options from other classes, most examples were from science assignments and activities. In this case, it might have been more productive to have asked students to complete these questions in a neutral setting.

It was difficult to determine the validity of our results from the questionnaire. However, the choices and the comments that students generated in explaining their choices were in support of each other. While Katrina circled a variety of activities that benefited her learning, she supported her choices with the following,

The notes let me go back and study without using my book. the questions help me Figure out what is what. The group activities helps because you might know something that somebody else doesn't know, and somebody might know some thing you don't know.

you can share ideas,...we tried to think about what the parts looked like.

draw and explain what happens in a cell during mitosis.

Because when we do group activities I can rember the stuff, and the overhead notes and worksheets are somewhat helpful because when I write the stuff I remember it ... a big poster of a cell with food was really fun (because I got to work with food)

The four questionnaires in the visual/auditory category did not have any reference toward haptic learning. Each made comments that fit both visual and auditory categories, but each seemed to favor one in particular.

Katrina P. stated,

Notes, Notes I love notes. I go home I will put tests together for myself. I just think I can do almost anything with notes.

Notes from the overhead - I look over them and write it down I rember it better

I get it Throw My By talking I hear it I know it.

In the visual/haptic category the three students involved mentioned their preference for working alone, writing things to learn and completing activities that involved creativity. Matt H. commented,

Usually something you do by yourself is easy... I have to write it... we really learn whats what and whats where. (In reference to a cell project)

I like working by myself because I work better when I'm alone... because I think writing things down helps me learn... It was fun thinking of ways to show the consequences of unsafe behavior.

The remaining three questionnaires seemed to fit the visual category. However, we did not find distinct academic similarities or differences. Sonya made detailed reference to her writing ability,

I was able to use my writing ability and improve it. I could work on my punctuation and spelling. I was able to do something I enjoyed and at the same time get ideas on how to write another one or make mine better.

I learned about the anmial and culture and where they live all about a bomioe

After reviewing this portion of our data, Tamie realized that all the students we shared during the first semester had shown evidence of using all three learning styles as evidenced by their answers to the questionnaire. We wondered if this meant that these students were more aware of learning styles in general and knew the importance of using a variety of methods to learn new information. We expected to see students who had more instruction on learning styles choosing their strongest style in their studies but this was not always evident from the questionnaires. Rather than reflecting on their strongest learning style, most emphasized all three. Exceptions to this would include Stephen's comments on the activities that worked best for him.

After completing the learning preference test in Work and Family Studies, Stephen's scores were equal in the auditory and haptic categories and he made a comment that reflected these strengths.

They (group projects and activities) work for me because when we do group things we talk, and I remember things that are said better than things that are wrote.

I learned how the cell was made & so I have a picture in my mind.

everybody is working together, you learn from other people & their ideas. Studying w/ someone else is a lot better because you try harder to impress the other person.

I enjoy doing projects (working with other people). I like having a specific written out thing to study or to due (worksheets + notes). I play games with them and others to help me learn them.

Another area in which students had little experience was the arena of choice in academic assignments. We found students needed practice making these choices because they had been told what to do for most, if not all, of their school careers. "We tell them what they are to study, and what will happen to them if they don't study it." (Armstrong, 1998, p.61) Ferree, Fox and Kubiak made a similar observation in their study, Motivation for the Millennium - Student Autonomy Across the Curriculum. "Many of our students have been conditioned through years of schooling to be passive learners. To suddenly expect them to make major decisions concerning their education is unreasonable." (Ferree, et. al., 1997, p. 36)

When choice was given on an assignment, students were at a loss as to how to complete the work. For example, Tonya gave her students the option of making vocabulary cards or their own choice of a way to practice the required vocabulary for a homework assignment. When the assignment was due, only eight students, in one class, had the homework completed on time. This was unusual because students had completed this assignment for previous units. It is interesting to note that the students who did complete their homework all made the vocabulary cards, none used their choice to create an optional way of using the vocabulary words. When asked why they had not completed the assignment, those who did not said they didn't know what to do. Examples of optional ideas had been discussed when the assignment was given, however, we felt students were still unsure of exactly what the teacher wanted, or what activity to complete.

With this information we felt students were untrained in the area of choice. Rather than using their power to choose their own assignment, they may have chosen not to complete the assignment at all. While we know in some cases students can be successful without additional assignments to reinforce learning, we felt it was a dangerous precedent to establish. We hoped these students learned to use their own learning styles to help themselves. However, we found they needed direction in what choices they made.

There was also evidence in our data to show students were glad to have the opportunity to choose from enrichment activities. Will stated in the lab equipment & safety unit, he liked having choice because,

YOU HAVE FREEDOM TO LEARN HOW YOU WANTED TO. I CHOSE TO MAKE A COMIC, AND IT HELPED ME BY MAKING ME THINK OF MORE AND MORE POSSIBLE MISTAKES

IT GAVE ME MORE FREEDOM TO LEARN HOW I WANTED TO. I CHOSE TO DRAW THREE BIOMES.

I like having a choice of enrichment because I can pick something to do that I enjoy doing I chose the mural of a biome and I did research to find out more stuff or facts about the creatures within their biome.

I liked and hated having a choice. I was too excited and I couldn't figure out which to do. I did the mini biome. It helped me learn the material by being able to do something myself.

Next we analyzed the "Learning Channel Preference" results. The Learning Channel Preference test was originally split into three sections, labeled with each learning style we had discussed. In an attempt to raise the validity of this test, we reorganized the thirty statements and removed the labels to keep students from purposefully answering to a learning style they felt they preferred. (Appendix E) The students were to rank each statement with a one, two or three according to how often it applied to them. Three represented that it most often applied, two it sometimes applied and one meant it never applied.

The results were grouped according to high scores for the various learning styles. Those which had ties were put together in combination categories. For example, a survey which had the same score for visual and haptic were placed in the "visual/haptic" category. (Appendix H) Fifty-two percent of the students had their highest rating for haptic statements. The visual category had the second largest percentage with seventeen percent. Auditory was next with ten percent. There were ties in the remaining preference tests which gave combination groups. Seven percent had visual/haptic as their strongest learning preference, six percent tied visual/auditory and finally five percent had auditory/haptic equal with one another. Only three percent of the tests had students choosing all three learning styles equally from the thirty statement preference test. This data showed only ten percent of the students had auditory as their highest score. This finding coincides with beliefs of former education editor of The New York Times, Edward B. Fiske in, Smart Schools, Smart Kids: Why Do Some Schools Work? In this book, Fiske states:

After all the papers were placed in a group we worked to see if there were any matches between the students’ evaluations, questionnaires and learning preference surveys. We were surprised by what we found. The data demonstrated a great deal of inconsistency among students’ comments. As we explained earlier, the information from the evaluation forms, questionnaires and learning preference tests were not in agreement in most cases. Only a few students had comments on their evaluation forms which matched thoughts from questionnaires or their strongest learning style(s) from their preference test. It was especially interesting to note that the students we shared the first semester did not make a stronger connection with their strongest learning styles and their study habits.

After discussing this lack of connection, we realized our expectations were probably a bit lofty, especially when one considered that these students had little or no experience with thinking about learning styles. It was also presumptuous of us to have expected students to use their strongest learning styles in their studying when it did not match the assignments being given. Quite simply, they did not have to, so they did not! We also believed there would have been more use of personal learning styles if there was emphasis placed on them for a prolonged time period and from more teachers. The students from our first semester were given their interviews half-way through the second semester, long after they had completed Work and Family Studies.

Our experience with middle school students led us to believe that they do not form learning habits easily, and not without continuous reminders. We felt the idea of using one’s personal learning style in all class work is unrealistic if those teachers were not having dialogue about the subject in their classes. This was one area we agreed needed to be changed. If teachers realized the importance of students using their strongest learning styles, they must incorporate the expectation in their class discussions and assignments.

Finally we analyzed the effect learning styles had on the students we shared the first semester. (While we also shared students during the second semester, we did not include them in this analysis due to time constraints.) As we mentioned earlier, we interviewed the students we shared mid-way through the second semester. In the interviews each student was asked five questions. First they were asked if they remembered their strongest learning style(s). Then they were asked if they studied any differently than they had before they were instructed on different learning styles. Next, they were asked how they studied for each class. The students were also asked if they felt they had control over their own learning. Finally, they were asked if they thought it was beneficial to be instructed on different learning styles. These interviews were conducted during lunch by Tamie on a one-on-one basis. We expected the students to be more honest without the involvement of other students. In addition, a former teacher asking the questions might have alleviated any anxiety on the part of the students.

The results of the interviews were interesting, although there were only twelve students involved in the interviews. We anticipated that some of the students would not remember their particular learning style(s.) It had been at least eighteen weeks since we had studied the terms and used them in Tamie’s class. The terms were rather new to them, especially the word, "haptic," as we expected. While most of these students tested as haptic learners, they could not recall the actual term. It was interesting that they described what they thought they were, in regard to strongest learning style(s). Jessica D., a visual learner, recalled, "I would have to see the paper to remember...I think I tied the one you do things with visual." Her comments throughout the interview continued to reinforce the use of visual actions in her learning. In order to study in science she said, "Mrs. B. gives us a choice of documenting how we studied or making flash cards. I liked making flashcards because I like seeing the words." To study she said, "In science I get stuff out, read through it, my Mom quizzes me. In math I look over my notes and try problems. In social studies, I read information from the worksheets and try to pick out important stuff." It was apparent that she was using her visual strengths although during the interview she never stated it as her strongest style. Jessica represents the student who completed most of her work, paid attention in class and seemed to have an innate understanding of how she learned before she was taught the learning style terms. However, she said it was beneficial to learn how she learned because it, "helped me do what it said I was."

There were four students who had no recollection of their strongest learning style(s) without being given a few reminders. Two of these students were able to describe how they thought they learned best although they did not seem to understand the importance of using their strongest learning styles. For example, Brandon said he did not remember his learning style but after a reminder he said, "one with tell or explain." Earlier in our analysis of the questionnaire on how students think, Brandon was our only auditory learner. The only comment he made was, "She just keeps saying it over and over and I get it." During his interview he was equally brief in his answers and he did not show that he understood how he learned. When asked if he used what he learned in regard to learning styles he simply said, "No!" He did not explain this although when asked if he had control over how he learned he said, "I control some of it. I don’t know how." Kevin thought he might be a visual learner after the prompt but said he made "no changes" in his study habits and when asked why not he said, "I don’t know." Like Brandon, Kevin stated he had control of his learning when he said, "I learn differently than the teachers teach." However, he finished the interview saying that learning about learning styles was not beneficial to him.

The other two students who were unable to recall their strongest learning styles said they had made changes in how they studied. Stephen, a haptic learner, asserted that he,"tried to do things interactively instead of on paper." Jessica B., also a haptic learner, said, "I talk to my mom and cousins to get them to quiz me." They both said they controlled how they learned. Stephen said, " Half and half - I control how I interpret it. They control how to give it to me." Jessica B. said, " Both - me because for studying (if/when she studies) and listening during class. Them (teachers), to teach us." They also agreed that learning about learning styles was beneficial. Stephen said, "It teaches you that you’re better at learning some things." Jessica B. said, "I didn’t know how I learned! I study some now."

The remainder of the students seemed to understand their learning styles and the importance of them although they did not always use them. For example, Jackie, a haptic learner, said she "studied her science notes, looked through the books and worksheets for social studies and reviewed her math homework and notes." Brittany said, "I study like I always do. I look through notes and stuff. Why not, its working!" These students were successful in the past and may not have seen the need to make changes, as Brittany pointed out. While many of these students tested as haptic learners they showed strengths in at least one other learning style. This could explain why they were not using their strongest learning styles and still finding success in school.

In reviewing information on learning styles, we found the research to show that all students could learn successfully when information was presented in a way that fit their style of knowing and thinking. The three learning modalities which we used to categorize our students were also used by Dawn Markova, Ph. D., in her book The Open Mind Exploring the 6 Patterns of Natural Intelligence. We shared her interest to learn why some students could sit and listen while others had to be active in order to acquire new knowledge. In her study, she realized that the brain was triggered in different ways to process information for different people. She compared different modes of thinking to different computer languages, all able to successfully process information but in different ways. While behavioralists believed children could be brought up to become anything the parent trained them to be, we would agree with Gardner, Markova and other authors on the subject of learning styles, who believed natural tendencies dominate in a person’s life. As Gardner stated, "We are all so different largely because we all have different combinations of intelligences. If we recognize this, I think we will have at least a better chance of dealing appropriately with the many problems that we face in the world."

Students must also feel a sense of caring from the teacher in relation to their acquisition of knowledge. Lambert and McCombs, "found that what students like best about school are teachers and other people who care about them." (Lambert and McCombs, 1998, p. 381). We found this to be true in our research as well. We felt our students enjoyed the opportunities for a deeper understanding of themselves because they made connections with us through our class discussions. We would again agree with Lambert and McCombs that, "Effective learners operate best when they have insight into their own strengths and weaknesses and access to their own repertoires of strategies for learning." (p. 178).

As with most research, we felt our work led us to ask more questions yet gave us positive feelings about what we were able to learn. While we expected to find students who had more instruction on their learning styles to benefit , we did not gather evidence to support this expectation. We realized there were several possible explanations for our outcomes. Students were only asked to explain how they learned in one of their core classes in which they were instructed in all three learning styles. The majority of the instruction on learning styles took place in an exploratory class which is not perceived by the students as a class that carries as much emphasis on academics as their core classes. Moreover, this class only lasted one semester, so the students Tonya and Tamie shared were not given extended opportunities to expand on their knowledge of their learning styles.

Another point we must consider is population with whom we were working. The middle school student is at an age that naturally questions authority. While we were expounding the virtues of those who use their strongest learning styles, it could well be expected for many of our pupils to turn a deaf ear, simply because they were not at a level of maturity to accept our ideas.

Our data supported our expectations, to a degree, yet did not fulfill them. We were hoping to see an increase in class participation and success on final (summative) tests due to the students’ use of their strongest learning styles. We also expected to see students who had more instruction on their strongest learning styles to use them in their core classes. While our data did not support those expectations, we saw some students making statements which connected their learning to specific activities that matched their learning styles. We believed there were students at the point of understanding their own learning who were able to grasp our instruction and emphasis in order to use the knowledge to their benefit. However, for the most part students did not show an increase in use of their learning styles after instruction and discussion, nor did they participate more in class or find more success in their learning.

There are several ideas we would add to this research to help extend this study. Our first thought would be to have all core teachers understand and emphasize the use of varied learning styles in their instruction. This would reinforce the importance of the practice to the students and raise teachers’ expectations for their students. By doing this, teachers would be helping students to see the need to take a leadership role in their learning. "Realistically, a teacher cannot be expected to have a different lesson for every child in the classroom, however, lessons can reflect an understanding of individual differences by appropriately incorporating strategies for a variety of styles. Understanding theories of style can help teachers become better planners to meet the learning needs of their students." (Reiff, 1995 p. 6). She further stated, "Variability or flexibility on the part of the teacher seems to be the key to consistently improving achievement and attitude." (Reiff, 1995, p. 20).

In order to create a professional community of reflective practitioners, we must begin using the language and teaching the expectations with our students. Students must begin by being empowered in their own learning and become emancipated from feeling unable to direct their own learning. Encouraging learning, by teaching them in ways they learn best and empowering them to use their strongest learning styles, may be the best way to support children’s learning. A students’ learning is a journey to new places. If students are aware of their strengths they will be able to find success, and enjoy the path they are following. Sockett reminds teachers, "to encourage a child is to give the child particular kinds of support..." (Sockett, 1993 p. 73) We believe the "support" is information that enables them to be confident in their learning. As moral professionals, this encouragement through knowledge is power for the student in her journey.

The research would also need to include questioning of the use of learning styles in another setting. We believed the answers students gave were biased because of the setting in which they were given. The science curriculum lends itself to hands-on activities, visual and verbal instruction. These teaching/learning activities are not as readily available to the other core academic classes for various reasons. We believed it might have been more meaningful if the questioning of the use of learning styles had taken place in an environment that was somewhat neutral so students would not have given feedback that was weighted toward one subject area. We also believed it would have been beneficial to study the learning styles of students in other contexts in order to see if various styles of learning are used successfully.

Finally, we felt our research would have been more powerful if students had prior knowledge of their learning styles. Most of the students involved in this research had never been asked about how they learn. Given this information, we felt we were at a disadvantage, as well as the students. We were unable to instruct and expect totally positive results on this subject in less than one school year. Our students were unable to be initiated into the realm of learning styles and be expected to show results that included the use of this new knowledge in such a short span of time. If our students were instructed on various learning styles as they entered school we believed we would have assessed a totally different population. While it was not possible in a one year study, we question what effect the knowledge of learning styles would have on students after many years.

Tamie came to the teaching arena somewhat by accident. After working in retail sales for several years, she was a "stay-at-home" mother, taking substituting jobs about three days a week which gave her her first experience teaching. When she was offered an opportunity to teach in the middle school, she accepted the chance to get into teaching with an open and optimistic mind.

At the time of this study, her educational experience included a bachelor of science degree from James Madison University with a major in political science, and a minor in paralegal studies. After beginning to teach, she added numerous hours in education classes to complete her requirements to teach. Now, finishing her requirements for a masters degree from George Mason University, she hopes to continue her education in other directions.

The first year teaching was extremely challenging but nonetheless rewarding. The job was to teach math, social studies, language arts and some science to a group of sixth, seventh and eighth graders who had been labeled, "emotionally disturbed" by the county’s special education and psychological specialists. Having no endorsement for this area, this task was daunting, to say the least. As a substitute it had been rather easy to encourage students to do their work. Trying to get emotionally disturbed students to do academic work was a totally different situation. At this point, Tamie began to wonder what could be done or what could be changed in our current educational system that could help these students find success in academics.

The second year a new opportunity became available and Tamie took a position as a seventh grade social studies teacher. History was a personal and family passion that she hoped to share with her students, especially those who had not had the opportunity to travel. That year, and the following year were exciting, challenging

and fulfilling but there was always the desire to find ways to spark the interest of more students.

In her fourth year teaching, Tamie reached a point that almost ended her short career. The group of students on her team were different than any other group she had, except possibly those in her first year of teaching. This group had a relatively high percentage of students who showed negative behaviors which then influenced other students. Classes were constantly disturbed by outbursts, fights or general disruptions. The atmosphere seemed to be charged with a negative energy, emanating from students who exhibited behaviors which hurt their learning, and the environment for others. Once again, the nagging question from the first year returned; how can teachers help students find success and enjoyment in learning?

Since third grade Tonya knew she wanted to become a teacher. That year she experienced a person who, in her eyes, was just so caring and showed an overall love for the profession and the children she taught. All through school, the remainder of elementary, middle, high school and her college career, Tonya was excited about entering the classroom and beginning to "educate the world," so to speak. She wanted to share her positive educational experiences with children and take them to their fullest potential in their learning.

Tonya desired to return to her hometown county to teach but there were no positions available at the time so she took a third grade position in a neighboring county and began her career as a teacher. She was in this county for two years, teaching all subject areas. Following her second year, she took a position in her old elementary school teaching fourth grade. There she taught language arts, math and all the science for the fourth grade. After her third year, because of cutbacks in the county and her lack of seniority,she was asked to move to another school in the county. She then took a position as a seventh grade life science teacher at the county middle school, Prospect Heights Middle School. This is the position she held during this research.

Tonya values each year of her teaching experience; however, as much as she hated her move from fourth grade to seventh she now sees how much growth she had undergone in the past five years of her career. In the elementary schools she was not allowed to use her organizational or leadership skills in any other capacity other than her classroom. However, while at Prospect, she was able to become team leader as well as facilitate and serve on many committees. She believes this has helped her to become more effective in her classroom as she can share these growth experiences with her students who are also continuing to grow.

Growth is a key to Tonya’s educational efforts. Regardless of the year she taught or where she taught in Orange County, her students usually had fewer "Incompletes" than other students. In our school system, we support a mastery learning theory. All students are expected to learn the given material but we understand that some students may learn the material a little slower than others, so we give "Incompletes," also known as "I’s," to those students with lower than 70% on summative tests. Even though Tonya’s "I’s" have increased each year, her numbers are fewer than those in other core classes. Is it the curriculum she teaches or is it the way she teachers it that appeals to the students? If it is the way she teaches the material, then how can she reach everyone so that no one has "I’s"? This is something that she has pondered each year.

Armstrong, T. (1998). Awakening Genius In The Classroom. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Astington, J. W. (1998, November). Theory of Mind Goes to School. Educational Leadership, 56, 46-48.

Belenky, M.F., Clinchy, B.M., Goldberger, N.R., Tarule, J.M., (1997).

Women’s Ways of Knowing. New York: Basic Books.

Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture Of Education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Byham, W. C. PhD (1992). Zapp! in Education. New York: Fawcett Columbine.

Chapman, R. (1998, April) . The Arts Improve Student Performance. The Education Digest, 63, 58-60.

Dewey, J. (1990). The School And Society and The Child And The Curriculum. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Ferree, D., Fox, M., Kubiak, B. (1997). Motivation for the millennium - Student Autonomy Across the Curriculum. Potomac Senior High School.

Fiske, E. D. (1992). Smart Schools, Smart Kids: Why Do Some Schools Work?. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Gardner,H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic Books.

Glesne, C., Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming Qualitative Researchers An Introduction. New York: Longman.

Hirsch, E.D. Jr. (1996). The Schools We Need & Why We Don’t Have Them. New York: Doubleday.

Kovalik, S., Olsen, K. (1993, October). What Is the "Best Available Knowledge" About How the Human Brain Learns? Quality Outcomes-Driven Education, 13-16.

Lambert, N. M., McCombs, B. L. (1998). How Students Learn Reforming Schools Through Learner-Centered Education. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Levine, J. (1998). The Enneagram System Understand Yourself To Understand Your Students. Learning & the Enneagram. Milton, MA.  (18 Mar. 1999).

Markova, D. PhD (1996). The Open Mind: Unlocking The Pattern of Your Natural Intelligence For Insight, Creativity & Better Communication. Berkeley: Conari Press.

Maykut, P. Morehouse, R. (1997). Beginning Qualitative Research A Philosophic And Practical Guide. London: The Falmer Press.

O’Brien, L. (1985). Learning Channel Preference, Rockville, MD: Specific Diagnostics, Inc.

Oliver, A. (Feb. 1997). Plugging into Multiple Intelligences. The Education Digest, 61-64.

Presseisen, B. Z., et. al. (1993). Learning and Thinking Styles: Classroom Interaction. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association.

Reiff, J. C. (1995) What Research Says to the Teacher Learning Styles. Washington D.C.: National Education Association.

School Smart Kids! New Discoveries in Learning Vol. 1 no. 4 Windsor, CA (1996). The Center for New Discoveries in Learning (18 Mar. 1999).  www.howtolearn.com/ndil3.html

Shapiro, J. P. (1995, October 23). Teenage wasteland? U.S. News & World Report, 119, 84.

Sockett, H. T. (1993). The Moral Base For Teacher Professionalism. New York: Teachers College Press.

Sternberg, R. J., Spear-Swerlilng, L. (1996). Teaching for Thinking. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

---

 

---

 

---

 

---

 

---

---

---

---

---

 
 
 
 

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---