Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cornwell, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Manfredo, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Kolb'S Learning Style Theory Revisited

John M. Cornwell

Tulane University

Pamela A. Manfredo

Tulane University

The use of nominal-level analysis of four primary learning styles (PLS) (i.e., doing, thinking, watching, and feeling), based on the Learning Style Inventory demonstrated their discriminant/convergent validity but not the validity of Kolb's learning style types (LST) (i.e., accommodator, diverger, converger, and assimilator). The LST typology is derived from the difference of two sets of ipsatively scored variables-a circumstance that contributes to its lack of validity, whereas the PLS categories are based directly on the rank ordering given by subjects. The PLS category, thinking, was associated with having higher scores on a mental ability measure, whereas doing was associated with higher levels of learning and performance on an origami paper-folding task (i.e., an archetypical doing task).

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 54, No. 2, 317-327 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164494054002006
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Organizational Research MethodsHome page
A. J. Towler and R. L. Dipboye
Development of a Learning Style Orientation Measure
Organizational Research Methods, April 1, 2003; 6(2): 216 - 235.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Research on Social Work PracticeHome page
J. J. Koob and J. Funk
Kolb's Learning Style Inventory: Issues of Reliability and Validity
Research on Social Work Practice, March 1, 2002; 12(2): 293 - 308.
[Abstract] [PDF]