Learning Style Preferences among College Students
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
The purpose of this study was to determine what factors other than individual preferences affect undergraduate students’ learning style preferences, if learning style is influenced by gender, age, college affiliation and/or type of activities. A total of 185 students from the University of Bahrain, Bahrain, participated in an online VARK (Visual, Aural, Read/Write and Kinesthetic) for younger people questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of 16 items about learning style preferences and three about participants’ demographics. The results showed that participants generally preferred multi-modular learning style with both kinesthetic and visual learning styling being most preferred while Reading/Writing was the least preferred. Furthermore, there were statistically significant differences between students learning styles based on age and gender, but it was a moderate difference. What mostly affected the preferences, however, was the type of activities or tasks, something which in turn resulted in some difference among colleges. This suggests that VARK preferences need to be related to activity type rather than be observed at individual reference. Recommendations were provided at the end of the study.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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