Identification of Dominant Learning Styles of Students to Support Differentiated Chemistry Lessons in International Advanced Level

This study investigates the dominant learning styles of students following Pearson Edexcel International Advanced Level Chemistry in a Sri Lankan private school context in the aim of supporting differentiated lessons. The objectives of the study are to identify the learning styles of the students, to find the dominant learning style of Advanced Level students, to analyze the distribution of learning styles among Advanced Level Chemistry students and to detect association between individual student and preferred learning style. The study employs survey research design. The sample consists of seventeen students of one Advanced Level Chemistry class of international school selected through purposive sample. Standardized VARK questionnaire data is used as quantitative data collection method. Data is analyzed using descriptive statistics and Chi square test in SPSS. The computed percentage values are Visual = 19.35, Auditory = 30.32, Read/Write = 21.29, and Kinesthetic = 29.03. Auditory and kinesthetic learners together represent nearly 60% of the total learning preference. VARK questionnaire results demonstrate that there is no rigid learning style that sticks to a particular child and students exhibit a multimodal learning pattern dominated by auditory and kinesthetic styles. It indicates that students are more responsive toward interactive, discussion oriented, and hands on learning environments. This is because learning styles vary according to the context of learning. The findings of Chi-square statistics of VARK questionnaire data analysis show χ²(128, N = 17) = 136.00, p = 0.298, indicating that students’ learning style preferences are not strongly tied to individual differences, suggesting a balanced representation of VARK modalities within the sample.

Achievement Level, Learning Style, Lesson Plans

1. Al-Azawei, A., Serenelli, F., & Lundqvist, K. (2016). Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A Content Analysis of Peer Reviewed Journals from 2012 to 2015. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(3), 39–56. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/19295 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Al Hazmi, A. N., & Ahmad, A. C. (2018). Universal Design for Learning to Support Access to the General Education Curriculum for Students with Intellectual Disabilities. World Journal of Education, 8(2), 66. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v8n2p66 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Almoslamani, Y. (2022). The impact of learning strategies on the academic achievement of university students in Saudi Arabia. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 18(1), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/lthe-08-2020-0025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Boysen, G. A. (2021). Lessons (not) learned: The troubling similarities between learning styles and universal design for learning. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000280 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Burgstahler, S. (2011). Universal Design. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 11(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/2037276.2037283 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. CAST. “Universal Design for Learning Guidelines.” CAST, 2018, udlguidelines.cast.org/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Edexcel International Advanced Level Specifications Grade Statistics (Final) International Only. (2024). https://qualifications.pearson.com/content/dam/pdf/Support/Grade-statistics/International-A-level/grade-statistics-june-2024-final-international-advanced-level.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Fibriyana Safitri, Dadi Rusdiana, Achmad Samsudin, & Arif Widiyatmoko. (2024). Learning Styles in Science Education a Decade of Research (2012-2022): A Literature Review. Journal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika, 8(3), 409–409. https://doi.org/10.20527/jipf.v8i3.13095 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Fleming, N., & Mills, C. (1992). Not Another Inventory, Rather a Catalyst for Reflection. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hossein Mohsenipouya, Seyyed Fateme Monsefi, Abolfazl Hosseinnataj, Mamun, M. A., & Firoj Al-Mamun. (2024). The effect of learning styles on the academic achievement of nursing students: a cross-sectional study. BMC Research Notes, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-024-06949-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Lunetta, V. N., A. Hofstein, & Clough, M. P. (2007, January 1). Learning and teaching in the school science laboratory: An analysis of research, theory, and practice. Research Gate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283630224 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Moore, S. L. (2007). David H. Rose, Anne Meyer, Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 521–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9056-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Naro, W., Mirnawati, M., Suarni, S., & Gani, S. M. (2023). How Aspects of Characteristic-Based Learner Development: Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor Aspects. Didaktika: Journal Kependidikan, 12(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.58230/27454312.171 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Nguyen, S. (2021, October 6). What Is VARK Multimodal Learning? Examples, Types, Tips (2021). The Whatfix Blog | Drive Digital Adoption. https://whatfix.com/blog/multimodal-learning/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Peace, P., & Donald, G. (2024, November 17). Teaching Strategies Aligned with Learning Styles. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385896345 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Pearson Education Ltd. (2023). Specification Edexcel International GCSE International Advanced Level Chemistry Specification. https://Qualifications.Pearson.Com. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Rao, K., & Meo, G. (2016). Using Universal Design for Learning to Design Standards-Based Lessons. SAGE Open, 6(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016680688 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Smith, L. H., & Renzulli, J. S. (1984). Learning style preferences: A practical approach for classroom teachers. Theory into Practice, 23(1), 44–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405848409543088 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. VARK Learn Limited. (2020). The VARK Modalities. VARK - a Guide to Learning Preferences; Vark Learn Limited. https://vark-learn.com/introduction-to-vark/the-vark-modalities/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Vithanapathirana, M. (2014). Curriculum and Evaluation in the Science Education in Sri Lanka: Learning points from global research. Theme Seminar of the 43rd Annual Sessions of Institute of Chemistry Ceylon. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275045695 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study