INTRODUCTION
TEST RESULTS
The VARK Questionnaire was the first evaluation the class was to take. The quiz measured your strengths in learning areas, comparing your willingness or comfort in working within four categories of learning: visual learning, aural learning, reading and/or writing, and kinesthetic learning. My particular score was [Visual:8 Aural:5 Read/Write:10 Kinesthetic:6]. Meaning I had a Multimodal learning preference with a strong leaning towards Visual and Written Learning. I believe this result is mostly accurate.
For clarity I will start with the weaknesses. Aural processing has always been an area of struggle for me, as well as most people with Asperger's Syndrome. Most kids and adults have problems with auditory processing, there seems to be a strange mental block that keeps people with AS from absorbing what is said to them. This is often frustrating for instructors and makes the person appear stupid, when really they just need information repeated several times before it is absorbed. This is a huge problem since public education and college curriculums consist of mostly lecture classes, with very little time to repeat information or slow down, especially not for the dumb kid who keeps asking the same questions over and over again.
So it makes sense that I do twice as well learning from books and notes than I do from audio. Textbooks don't have the same immediacy as speaking. If I miss something or don't understand a concept in a book then I can go back and reread or study it as long as I need to until I grasp it. Visual aides help as well and I'll often find myself stopping mid-chapter to analyze a new chart or graph. I'm very imaginative and retain anecdotes and visual images in my head better than facts or numbers. I can build just about anything if I have instructions in front of me.
That brings me to some of the issues I have with this evaluation. First off, is the "Multimodal" learning preference. The website stated that 60% of the evaluated fall under the multimodal learning preference and that it is rare for one person to be solidly in a single learning preference. I suppose this is true, but I feel it would be better to then specify what Multimodal means, something like "Visual-Kinesthetic Multimodal" would be a more helpful result than simply "good at lots of things multimodal". If 60% of the population is good at multiple learning then it's safe to assume that whatever method you use to teach is a good one for a large group and there's no need for specification.
Also the VARK test doesn't combine categories or demonstrate what strength would work best with another category. Most likely they were just keeping it simple but I find I get the most enjoyment when the kinesthetic and read/writing preferences are combined, even though one is considerably weaker than the other. Also, I'm kind of stuck in a world that reveres aural learning despite my weakness, and I have difficulty combining that with my strength. My handwriting is slow and difficult so while I'm taking notes I'm concentrating on keeping what I just heard in my head and miss what was just said. It's particularly disastrous when dealing with lists or quotes.
"Could you repeat that about three more times? ... What are you going to do with that bat?"
TEST RESULTS 2
The main difference between the two tests is that the results measure not only one dimension of learning but how it remarks compared to the other. If your results are in the middle then there is no real preference on way or the other. If the score is at a 1 or 3 then that probably means you have some distinction towards that direction, but the difference is probably a question or two. You could just as easily handle the other learning style. I've noticed that the results read out similarly to personality tests I have taken for a past class. It shows a preference through comparisons in several categories, rather than comparing several preferences under one category. It's a more modern evaluation since it's harder to poke holes through it.
My results with this test were generally unremarkable. As with the "Multimodal" result most of the results were middling. It was either one way or the other but only slightly. I did get a moderate lean towards visual learning and intuitive learning. We already know that I am a visual learner, though the intuitive learning is new. For the most part when I learn I either get it right away or am completely lost. The best course of action here would be to look through the book or my notes until the subject clicks. More speaking usually makes me more lost since it just becomes more to process.
CONCLUSION
Due to the difficulties during my years of public school I have tried several learning styles and practices to improve my education. I have my developed some of my own strategies to help deal, such as a sticky note pad system that lets me eliminate projects as I do them to prevent being overwhelmed by long lists and tricky schedules. Evaluations are useful, but all they can do is give insight. What you do with the results is what really gives them value, otherwise they only serve as entertaining surveys like the thousands of homemade ones on social networks.
I took numerous evaluations in a career class at the Northern Virginia Community College and several more when I signed up to be diagnosed for Asperger's a few years ago, so I already had a good base to compare these tests with and nothing really surprised me. The only thing that really surprised me was the Intuition result. It was very specific and my brain does seem to function in starts and stops with sudden flashes of brilliance and understanding. Now it's up to me to figure out a way to work with that and use it for the future.
WORKS CITED
Felder, Richard M., and Barbara A. Soloman. "Felder & Soloman: Learning Styles and Strategies." Richard Felder: Resources in Science and Engineering Education. 17 Sept. 2010. Web. 15 Nov. 2010. .
Fleming, Neil D. VARK -- A Guide to Learning Styles. Web. 15 Nov. 2010. .
No comments:
Post a Comment