Dental Students' Educational Achievement in Relation to Their Learning Styles: A Cross-Sectional Study in Iran
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: In recent decades, many studies have been carried out on the importance of Kolb experiential learning theory (ELT) in teaching-learning processes and its effect on learning outcomes. However, some experts have criticized the Kolb theory and argue that there are some ambiguities on the validity of the theory as an important predictor of achievement. This study has been carried out on dental students' educational achievement in relation to their dominant learning styles based on Kolb theory in Mashhad University of Medical Sciences (Iran). METHODS: In a cross sectional study, Kolb Learning Style Inventory (LSI Ver. 3.1) as well as a questionnaire containing students' demographic data, academic achievement marks including grade point average (GPA), theoretical and practical courses marks, and the comprehensive basic sciences exam (CBSE) scores were administered on a purposive sample of 162 dental students who had passed their comprehensive basic sciences exam. Educational achievement data were analyzed in relation to students' dominant learning styles, using descriptive and analytical statistics including χ2, Kruskal-Wallis and two-way ANOVA tests. RESULTS: The dominant learning styles of students were Assimilating (53.1%), Converging (24.1%), Diverging (14.2%) and Accommodating (8.6%). Although, the students with Assimilating and Converging learning styles had a better performance on their educational achievement, there was no significant relationship between educational achievement and dominant learning style (P≥0.05). CONCLUSION: Findings support that the dominant learning style is not exclusively an essential factor to predict educational achievement. Rather, it shows learning preferences of students that may be considered in designing learning opportunities by the teachers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it