IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v8y2018i4p2158244018809408.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Investigation Into the Relationship Between Iranian EFL High- and Low-Proficient Learners and Their Learning Styles

Author

Listed:
  • Ali Derakhshan
  • Farzaneh Shakki

Abstract

It is also hypothesized that proficiency level may have a voice with respect to learning styles. Therefore, to throw light on this issue, the present investigation targeted the relationship between Iranian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ learning styles and their levels of proficiency at Golestan University, Gorgan, Iran. To this end, 120 EFL learners majoring in Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) and English Literature were randomly selected based on the Rubrics of Common European Framework of Reference (A1-C2) to participate in this study. They were then divided into low-proficient (A2-B1) and high-proficient (B2-C1) learners. The instruments used in this study were an International English Language Testing System (IELTS) Mock exam through which the participants’ levels of proficiency were determined and Reid’s Perceptual Learning Style Questionnaire to identify learners’ perceptual learning style preferences. The questionnaire enclosed 30 statements allocated to each modality based on a five point Likert scale, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The results of independent samples t-test and Spearman correlation coefficient revealed that there existed some significant relationships between students’ learning style preferences and levels of proficiency. It was found that learners with high levels of proficiency favored Kinesthetic and Tactile learning styles more than other preferences, namely, Auditory, Visual, Group, and Individual learning style preferences. In addition, the low-level students were much inclined toward Visual and Group styles. Regarding the necessity of understanding learners’ different styles, the implications of the study are discussed to consider the importance of individual differences.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali Derakhshan & Farzaneh Shakki, 2018. "An Investigation Into the Relationship Between Iranian EFL High- and Low-Proficient Learners and Their Learning Styles," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(4), pages 21582440188, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:4:p:2158244018809408
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244018809408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244018809408
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244018809408?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rajshri Vaishnav, 2013. "Learning Style and Academic Achievement of Secondary School Students," Working papers 2013-5-1, Voice of Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jung-Yu Lai & Li-Ting Chang, 2021. "Impacts of Augmented Reality Apps on First Graders’ Motivation and Performance in English Vocabulary Learning," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ashish K. Makwana, 2013. "Agricultural Education In India: Challenges And Prospects," Working papers 2013-12-25, Voice of Research.
    2. Niharika Amarsinh Rana, 2014. "Effectiveness Of Collaborative Learning On Reading Comprehension Of Grade Viii Students," Working papers 2014-03-04, Voice of Research.
    3. Fakhra Yasmin & Ahsan Akbar & Zhang Yan, 2016. "An Exploration of Learning Styles Preferences of Higher Education Students in Pakistan," International Journal of Learning and Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 6(4), pages 49-59, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:4:p:2158244018809408. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.