learning - Academic Conferences Limited

Michaela Drozdová et al.
very few students possess the depth learning style. This can be explained by wrongly designed
questions in the questionnaire or by the composition of the set of the tested students.
Results of cluster analysis which discovered five dominant clusters divided according to type of
perception tell us that this property is very important for definition of virtual students: set of properties
that describes group of students with similar properties. Finding of these virtual students will be the
goal of the future work. The definition of virtual students can be very useful in eLearning. It is much
easier to design the course for only five types of students instead of trying to design it for every
individual student and all possible combinations of his properties.
Analysis of principal components revealed that evaluated properties except type of perception are
independent. For practical use it is more appropriate to distinguish the four types of perception,
because there is clear way of using this information in eLearning.
LPQ questionnaire proved to be suitable for using directly in adaptive learning process. It will be
presented to untested students at the beginning of the lecture. We plan to do more analysis of results
of this questionnaire on students that will participate in adaptive learning.
Acknowledgments
This publication is supported by the ESF project OP VK CZ.1.07/2.3.00/09.0019 title Adaptive
individualization of study through eLearning.
References
Felder, M. R., Soloman, A. B. (2009) Index of Learning Styles [Online], Available: http://www.ncsu.edu/felderpublic/ILSpage.html
[2009-05-10].
Fleming, N. D. and Mills, C. (1992) “Not Another Inventory, Rather a Catalyst for Reflection“, To Improve the
Academy, vol. 11, pp. 137-155.
Fleming N. D. (2009) VARK -- A Guide to Learning Styles [Online], Available: http://www.varklearn.com/english/index.asp
[2009-05-10].
Gregorc A. (1979) “Learning/Teaching Styles: Their Nature and Effects”, Christian Education Journal, vol. 4, pp.
62
Kolb D. A. (1984) Experiental learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, Engelwood Cliffs,
NJ, Prentice Hall
Kostolányová, K., Šarmanová, J., Takács, O. (2010) “Learning Characteristics”. Proceedings of the 9th European
Conference on eLearning, Porto, pp. 107—107.
Mareš, J., Skalská, H. (1993) “Česká verze dotazníku LSI, zjišťující styly učení u žáků základních
škol”, Pedagogický výzkum a transformace české školy, pp. 54.
Mareš, J. (1998) Styly učení žáků a studentů, Praha, Portal
Novotný, J. S. (2010) “Individualization of teaching through eLearning: Development of Students? Learning
Profile Questionnaire”, Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Distance Learning, Cieszyn.
Sternberg, J. R. (1999) Thinking styles, Cambridge: University Press.
Šarmanová, J., Kostolányová, K. and Takács, O. (2010) “Intelligent Tutoring in ELearning System“, 9th European
Conference on eLearning, Porto, pp. 794-796.
Tait, H. & Entwistle, N. (1996) “Identifying students at risk through ineffective study strategies”, Higher
Education, vol. 31, pp. 99-118.
Takács, O., Šarmanová, J. and Kostolányová, K. (2009) “Results of analysis of learning styles”, Proceedings of
ICTE2009, Ostrava, pp. 205-210.
Takács, O., Kostolányová, K., Šarmanová, J. (2010) “The use of adaptive individualized eLearning at
teaching”, IMSCI 2010, Florida, pp. 147—152.
Ward, J. H. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American
Statistical Association, 58, 236.
194