- 1、有哪些信誉好的足球投注网站(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。。
- 2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载。
- 3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
- 4、该文档为VIP文档,如果想要下载,成为VIP会员后,下载免费。
- 5、成为VIP后,下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后,不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
- 6、成为VIP后,您将拥有八大权益,权益包括:VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
- 7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传,每下载1次, 网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等,对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档
查看更多
The learning styles of community college art students
The learning styles of community college art students Introduction(1/2) Community colleges have witnessed a changing student body during the past several decades (Cohen Brawer, 1996). The nontraditional students, also known as new students (Cross, 1971), include women, minorities, older adults, the academically underprepared, and those in lower socioeconomic strata. To accommodate the distinctiveness of new students, community colleges will need to assess the instructional techniques of their faculty to determine the congruence between teaching strategies and students learning styles. Introduction(2/2) Matching learning styles with teaching styles is particularly appropriate in working with poorly prepared students (Claxton Murrell, 1987). Literature review(1/2) The Kolb Learning Style Inventory (1985) was the instrument selected for this study because of its readability and ease of scoring. Literature review(2/2) Methods(1/3) The purpose of the study described in this report was to determine a demographic profile and the learning styles of community college art students. 200 students from 5 community colleges in southern Illinois Kolb Learning Style Inventory regularly scheduled two-dimensional studio and art history/appreciation classes One hundred students were enrolled in transfer courses, and 100 were in noncredit community education classes. Methods(2/3) The LSI is a 12-item, self-report questionnaire that asks respondents to rank order four sentence endings with each item. The sentence endings are ranked, 4 to 1, with 4 being the most characteristic of the persons learning style and 1 the least characteristic. The LSI generates four raw scores emphasizing the persons preference for CE, RO, AC, and AE, plus two combination scores that indicate the extent to which the person emphasizes abstractness over concreteness (AC-CE) and the extent to which a person emphasizes action over reflection (AE-RO). Methods(3/3) Results(1/2) It was hypothesi
文档评论(0)