An investigation into the gap between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning styles at school of foreign languages, thai nguyen university

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES TRẦN THI ̣ NGÂN AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE GAP BETWEEN TEACHERS’ T

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

TRẦN THI ̣ NGÂN

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE GAP BETWEEN TEACHERS’

TEACHING STYLES AND LEARNERS’

LEARNING STYLES AT SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES,

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY

TÌM HIỂU KHOẢNG TRỐNG TRONG PHONG CÁCH GIẢNG DẠY CỦA GIẢNG VIÊN VÀ PHONG CÁCH HỌC TẬP CỦA SINH VIÊN

TẠI KHOA NGOẠI NGỮ, ĐẠI HỌC THÁI NGUYÊN

M.A COMBINED PROGRAMME THESIS

Field : English Teaching Methodology Code: 60140111

Hanoi, 2017

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

TRẦN THI ̣ NGÂN

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE GAP BETWEEN TEACHERS’

TEACHING STYLES AND LEARNERS’

LEARNING STYLES AT SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES,

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY

TÌM HIỂU KHOẢNG TRỐNG TRONG PHONG CÁCH GIẢNG DẠY CỦA GIẢNG VIÊN VÀ PHONG CÁCH HỌC TẬP CỦA SINH VIÊN

TẠI KHOA NGOẠI NGỮ, ĐẠI HỌC THÁI NGUYÊN

M.A COMBINED PROGRAMME THESIS

Field : English Teaching Methodology Code: 60140111

Supervisor: Assoc Professor Dr Le Van Canh

Hanoi, 2017

AUTHORSHIP DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and it contains no material previously written by other people or published in both online and printed version This is true copy of the thesis, including any required final versions, as approved by

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Associate Professor Le Van Canh for his excellent supervision and careful guidance in the completion of this thesis He provided me with valuable experience and comments, and I always greatly appreciate it

I am grateful to teacher, Dr Tran Thi Nhi for her inspiration and endless encouragement throughout my academic life Without her tremendous support in the past four years, my dream of becoming a tertiary teacher would not become true

I would also acknowledge the principals and the heads of departments of School of Foreign Languages, Thai Nguyen University who permitted the research

I thank all of my research participants who have contributed to this study

Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents and my husband for their unconditional love and support throughout my life

ABSTRACT

English language teaching and learning styles play a crucial role in the success of both teachers and learners Research has shown that a match between learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and achievements (Cornett 1983) According to Willing (1988 p.1) “An effort to accommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methodologies and course organization can result in improved learner satisfaction and attainment” Whereas, the mismatch between teachers‟ teaching styles and learners‟ learning styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students‟ frustration and demotivation in learning but also greatly affects their performances Instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may become overly critical of the students or begin to question their own competence as teachers Despite its extreme importance, the matter of match or mismatch between these two factors received very little attention in our teaching and learning context Therefore, this paper aims to investigate the major teaching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign Languages, Thai Nguyen University Also, it is going to point out the intertwine relationship between teachers‟ teaching styles and learners‟ learning styles as well

as the importance of matching them in Vietnamese context It also investigates into the perceptions of teachers and students on this matter, together with their major teaching and learning style preferences Moreover, recommendations and suggestions on how to understand teachers and learners‟ preferences and bridge the gap between them will be discussed

LIST OF TABLE

Table 2.1 Definitions of learning styles 8

Table 2.2.Grasha’s identification of teaching styles 25

Table 3.1.The Likert Scale of the Learning Style Questionnaire and the Teaching Style Questionnaire 38

Table 3.2 The Major, Minor and Negative Learning/Teaching Styles 39

Table 4.1.Demographic Information: Gender and Year at University 43

Table 4.2:Demographic Information: Years of studying English 43

Table 4.3: Demographic Information: Studying Major 44

Table 4.4.Students’ Learning Styles Preferences 45

Table 4.5 Teachers’ Demographic Information 47

Table 4.6.Teachers’ Teaching Styles Preferences 48

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study 29

Figure 3.2 Qualitative data analysis procedure 40 Figure 4.1 Students’ major, minor and negative learning styles 45

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AUTHORSHIP DECLARATION i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii

ABSTRACT iii

LIST OF TABLE iv

LIST OF FIGURES v

TABLE OF CONTENTS vi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Overview 1

1.2.Rationale of the study 1

1.3 English Languages Teaching and Learning at School of Foreign Languages - TNU (SFL-TNU) 3

1.4 Objectives of the study: 4

1.5 Research questions 5

1.6 Structure of the study 5

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1 Overview 6

2.2 Theoretical background 6

2.2.1 Learning styles 6

2.2.1.1 Introduction to Learning styles 6

2.2.1.1 Definition of learning styles 7

Table 2.1 Definitions of learning styles 8

2.2.2 Different theories and models of learning styles 9

2.2.3 Elements of Learning Styles 13

2.2.4 Teaching styles 14

2.3 Literature review of related studies 18

2.3.1 The relationship between teaching and learning styles 18

2.3.1.1 Matches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning styles 18

2.3.1.2 Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning

styles 20

2.3.2 Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles and learning styles 23

2.3.2.1 Studies in learning styles 23

2.3.1.5 Studies in teaching styles 25

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 29

3.1 Overview 29

3.2 Conceptual Framework 29

3.4 Research method 30

3.4.1 Quantitative research method 30

3.4.2 Qualitative research approach 31

3.5 Participants 31

3.6 Research Procedure 32

3.6.1 Research design 32

3.6.2 Research Instruments 33

3.7 Data analysis 38

3.7.1 Quantitative data analysis 38

3.7.2 Qualitative data analysis 39

3.8 Chapter summary 40

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS 42

4.1 Chapter Overview 42

4.2 Qualitative results 42

4.2.1 Results from questionnaire survey with student participants 42

4.3 Qualitative Results 48

4.3.1 Students’ learning styles 48

4.3.2 SFL-TNU teachers’ teaching styles 57

4.4 Chapter summary 63

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION 64

5.1 Overview: 64

5.2 Summary of the research’s finding 64

5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64

5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU 65

5.2.3 Matching or mismatching between teaching and learning styles: 67

5.3 Chapter summary 67

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION 69

6.1 Overview 69

6.2 Educational implication 69

6.2.1 Understanding students’ ability to accept unfamiliar styles of teachers 69 6.2.2 Understanding the existence of differences in the classroom 69

6.2.3 Implementing small class size 70

6.3 Limitation of the research 70

6.4 Suggestions for further research 71

6.5 Chapter summary 72

REFERENCES 73 APPENDICES I APPENDIX A: LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE WITH STUDENTS II SELF-SCORING SHEET V EXPLANATION OF LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES VII APPENDIX B: TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE WITH TEACHERS IX APPENDIX C: PROMPT INTERVIEW QUESTIONS WITH STUDENTS

XIII

APPENDIX D: PROMPT INTERVIEW QUESTIONS WITH TEACHERS

XIV

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview

The purpose of this chapter is to provide the rationale as well as the objectives of the research Firstly, an introduction to the existing research with regard to the match and mismatch between teaching and learning styles is presented Then, the rationale followed by the background information of teaching and learning status at School of Foreign Languages - Thai Nguyen University (SFL-TNU) is mentioned Finally, the objectives together with structure of this research are going to be included

1.2 Rationale of the study

For many teachers, the crucial concern is to try to motivate students, involve them into the lessons and activities implemented, and inspire them to learn more effectively One of the challenges to achieve that goal is there is no one-size-fits all- solution This is because students learn in so many different ways, from seeing

to hearing, playing to acting or reflecting to visualizing Similarly, different teachers prefer different teaching styles Some prefer lecturing, some like demonstrating, discussing, or others focus on rules or emphasize memorization How much and how well a student learns in a class is governed partially by his innate ability and prior background knowledge, but we cannot deny the interference of the matching between his learning preference and the teacher‟s methodological styles According

to Reid “ In order for teaching and learning to become more effective the teacher should take the students‟ needs, interests and learning styles into account”(1998, p.10)

It is undeniable people cannot perform well and produce good result if that is not his area of interest, and there is no exception in education The best outcome cannot be produced if students, who are recently considered as the center of teaching and learning process, do not enjoy and feel satisfied with activities that

their teachers provide In other words, they cannot learn well if what provided in the classroom are out of their styles Learning style theories have been cited as an effective means for helping teachers recognize the incredibly diverse needs students bring into the classroom (Felder & Brent, 2005; Hall &Mosely, 2005; Sternberg, Grigorenko, & Zhang, 2008; Williamson & Watson, 2007) According to Zapalska and Dabb (2002), an understanding of the way students learn improves the selection

of teaching strategies best suited to students‟ learning In addition, these theories provide a framework that enables teachers to knowledgably develop a variety of instructional methodologies to benefit all students (Williamson & Watson) Research has shown that a match between learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and achievements (Cornett, 1983)

Conversely when a mismatch between teaching and learning styles exists , learning can be impeded (Willing, 1985, cited in Nunan ,1998) Serous mismatch may occur between the learning styles of students in a class and the teaching styles

of the instructor (Felder & Silverman (1988); Lawrence (1993); Oxford et al (1991);Schmeck(1988)) with unfortunate potential consequences The students tend

to be bored and inattentive in class, perform poorly on tests, get discouraged about the course and may conclude that they are not good at the subject of the course and give up (Felder & Silverman (1988); Godleski(1984); Oxford et al (1991); Smith

&Renzulli(1984) Instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may become overly critical of the students or begin to question their own competence as teachers

According to Willing(1988) “Research shows that an effort to accommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methodologies and course organization can result in improved learner satisfaction and attainment.” However, the issue has not been adequately research in the SFL-TNU This is the reason why this study was conducted

As stated above, styles in teaching and learning play a crucial role in the success of both teachers and learners Previous research in this field has shown that

the mismatch between teachers‟ teaching styles and learners‟ learning styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students‟ frustration and demotivation in learning but also greatly affects their performances Moreover, with the current teaching and learning status at SFL-TNU, the researcher decided to carry out this study in order to investigate the teachers‟ style preferences and students‟ learning style preferences to see whether they are matched or not The results of this study will be analyzed and discussed in order to help to bridge the gap between teaching and learning process Recommendation for teachers and students at School of Foreign Languages – Thai Nguyen University will be suggested with the objective

of enhancing both teaching and learning quality and experience

1.3 English Languages Teaching and Learning at School of Foreign Languages

- TNU (SFL-TNU)

SFL-TNU is one of the important language training faculties/universities in the North of Vietnam There are five languages being taught here including English, French, Chinese, Russian and Korean, in which English language is predominant

As for English language, SFL is training students with two main majors: English Education and English Language Those who belong to the former are supposed to serve as English teachers at secondary and high schools and students of the latter type have more free choices of work in such places as non-government organizations, foreign companies, and so on The majority of students share quite similar background since they mostly come from rural areas in the North of Vietnam

Under the 2020 Foreign Language Project, SFL-TNU has declared the English language standard for graduation According to that, students are required

to achieve C1 level as described in the Common European framework of reference for languages This is really a big challenge to English language teaching and learning at this school

At SFL-TNU, Communicative Language Teaching, an approach to second or foreign language teaching which aims at developing communicative competence in language learning (Richards, Platt & Platt, 1992) is mainly adopted The emphasis

of the training program is placed on improving students‟ communicative competence, vocational skills and 21st century skills.Six semesters focusing on practicing English skills including: speaking, listening, reading and writing are mandatory to all students Together with that, the number of theoretical periods is cut down on One interesting point in the training program at SFL-TNU is that there are several project-based courses That is, students work in small group to carry out

a real project such as making a complete magazine, acting a complete drama or making movies throughout their semester

The academic staff at SFL-TNU is highly qualified and well-trained Most of them have completed their Master degree in English Language and English Language Teaching Methodology They are very open-minded, supportive to students and innovative in applying new methods or trends into their teaching

Though the academic staff and school managers are making all effort to improve students‟ capacity and performances, the results appear to not very satisfying According to the result of the most recent certification test, out of 250 final year students taking the test, only 15 reached C1 level which is the requirement to graduate from university Many of them performed badly and just stood at B1 and B2 which are pre-intermediate and intermediate levels The emphasis then turned to question the causes of such frustrating performances of students

1.4 Objectives of the study:

The objectives of this study are as the following:

1 To identify teaching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign Languages - Thai Nguyen University

2 To examine the degree of match and mismatch between their styles

3 To provide correct insights to English language teaching and learning

at SFL-TNU

1.5 Research questions

The research questions of this study are as follow:

1 What are students’ preferred learning styles?

2 What are teachers’ preferred teaching styles?

3 To what extend do teachers’ teaching styles match or mismatch with students’ learning styles

These questions play a crucial role in the data collection and analysis process of this study

1.6 Structure of the study

There are totally six chapters in this thesis This chapter has provided an introduction into the theories of match or mismatch between teaching and learning styles, the teaching and learning context at School of Foreign Languages, TNU, the rationale, objectives and structure of the study Chapter 2 reviews the relevant literature on this matter, and it includes four main parts, namely learning styles, teachings styles, the relationship between these two factors, and previous researches

on this field Chapter 3 describes the research methodology of the study which includes the conceptual framework, research questions, research methods and procedures In chapter 4, the quantitative and qualitative data collected from both teacher and student participants will be presented Chapter 5 discusses and interprets the research result The last one, chapter 6 provides implications for language teachers and students at School of Foreign Languages, TNU, as well as the limitation of this study and suggestions for further research on this field

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Overview

Chapter one has provided readers with the background, rationale as well as the objectives of this research In this chapter, the literature related to learning styles, teaching styles, and their intertwine relationship is going to be reviewed

The first section deals with learning styles with regard to its definition, some theoretical models of learning styles It also spends a small part to discuss about learning styles in relation to Vietnamese culture The second part of this chapter focuses on teaching styles It also provides knowledge related to teaching styles‟ definition, and factors shaping teachers‟ teaching styles In the next section, the relationship between teaching and learning styles will be analyzed in depth Last but not least, some typical research in this field will be included in the final part

2.2 Theoretical background

2.2.1 Learning styles

2.2.1.1 Introduction to Learning styles

In recent year, the study of learning styles has addressed much more attention and concern from researchers and educators than ever before, and in a time when academic achievement undergoes scrutiny, it is of special importance for educators to know and practice the best possible methods for helping students learn successfully Rita Dunn, a re-owned learning styles expert, when being questioned, stated that increased testing has no point in leading to increased achievement Despite acknowledging that testing is by no means an essential aspect, she declared that higher levels of achievement would only be produced if changes in instruction happened Fortunately, in nowadays education, emphasis has been changed to the understanding of various ways that students learn, and the role this knowledge plays

in attaining academic success also receives recognition (Collinson, 2000) The

recent studies in this area indicated that teachers are those who benefit from developing an understanding of how students learn and the effect of this on their teaching (Evan and Waring, 2006)

The field of learning styles is extremely complex and this is compounded by the fact that there is an ever-increasing number of theories and models developed to address this issue In fact, these models share the same theoretical base and components while they maintain quite significant variations Concerning this issue, Collison (2000) stated that the common view among these theories is that learning styles are the combination of cognitive, affective and physiological factors that contribute to determine unique approaches of each student to effective learning

Although the existence of the difference in ways students learn has been confirmed, the practice of teachers in real-life classroom is still done by their own belief that is they typically maintain a single approach to teaching Furthermore, those who has limited understanding of different learning styles existing in their classroom are likely to seek for and utilize on paramount approach in teaching In their study in 2006, Evan and Waring found out that the majority of teachers involved in the study tended to apply an approach based much on transmitting information instead of the one which focused on the development of students‟ understanding of the lessons However, evidence in a great number of research has proven that no single approach can ensure success in learning for all students Therefore, there is no wonder in that teachers should realize the essential necessity

of developing a true understanding of differences among students and strive to provide various types of instructions that suit the differences in the classroom

2.2.1.1 Definition of learning styles

Generally, the term learning styles refer to learners‟ preferred approach to learning In other words, it is their favorite ways of receiving, absorbing, processing and retaining information In regard to language acquisition, learning styles are

students‟ preferred approach to language learning So far, there have been more than 200 definitions of learning styles Some of them are as the following:

Table 2.1 Definitions of learning styles

It can be concluded from the above-mentioned definitions that learning styles consist of four main aspects: cognitive, affective, physiological/sensory, and behavioral (Oxford, Hollaway, &Hortin-Murillo, 1992; Wallace & Oxford, 1992; Willing, 1988) The cognitive learning styles can be stated as the learners‟ preferred ways of mental functioning, while affective learning styles imply patterns of attitudes influencing learners‟ attention Physiological/sensory learning styles refer

to sensory and perceptual tendencies of learners And finally, behavioral learning styles involve the tendency of seeking situations compatible with one‟s own learning patterns

“Learning styles are internally based characteristics, often not perceived or consciously used by learners, for the intake and comprehension of new information.” (Reid, 1998, p ix)

“The term learning style refers to the general approach preferred by the student when learning a subject, acquiring a language, or dealing with a difficult problem.” (Oxford, 2003, p 273)

“Learning style is a composite of environmental and perceptual preferences, which influence our physical and sensing needs; cognitive variables, which determine how we approach, conceptualize, and structure our world; and social preferences, which arise from cognitive, personality, affective factors and which shape our behavioral tendencies in learning situations.”

(Galloway &Labarca, 1990, p 113)

2.2.2 Different theories and models of learning styles

Experienced teachers are aware of and understand the fact that students have

a sensory preference when processing new materials and through this sensory preference, they will be motivated to reach their academic potential (O‟ Brien, Oxford and Ehrman, R Lavine, 1993) Hence, it is of important value for students

to become aware of their own learning styles According to Reid (1998), each student can have one or more learning styles and their learning style is the result of the combination of both nature and nurture His conclusion suggests that while some learning styles are innate, others can be learnt

Together with their innate learning style, each learner should be encouraged

to become aware of various learning styles that exist and experiment with them According to Kinsella “a learning style refers to an individual‟s natural, habitual, and preferred way of absorbing, processing, and retaining new information and skills which persist regardless of teaching methods or content area.” (1995, p 171) Cornett defines learning style as “a consistent pattern of behavior but with a certain range of individual variability Styles then are overall patterns that give general direction of learning behavior.” (1983, p.9).Learning styles can be seen as a general description of how a learner prefers to absorb information

Having said previously, there is an ever-increasing number of theories and models regarding learning styles Statistically, between 1902 and 2002, there were

no fewer than one hundred models concerning learning styles published While sharing the same theoretical foundation and components, these models maintain their unique perspectives, focusing exclusively on students‟ preferences or abilities (Hall &Moley)

Though it is impractical to address each learning model in this context since there exists a wide variety of learning models, it is necessary to mention some most significant models including Kolb‟s learning model, Gregorc Learning Style Model

Multiple Intelligences, the Myers - Briggs Type Indicator, and Dunn and Dunn learning styles model

Kolb’s Learning Model

It is first worth recalling Jung‟s theory psychological types which states that all conscious mental activities occur in two perception processes (sensing and intuition) and two judgment processes (thinking and feeling) Those who perceive through sensing see the world through their senses - vision, hearing, touch, and smell They observe what is real, factual and actually happening Meanwhile, others perceive through intuition by reacting to or focusing on the image created by their mind They pay more attention to the abstract dimensions of the reality As for two judgments processes, thinking is identified as reaching decisions in a logical way and feeling is approaching a decision through a subjective, perceptive, empathetic and emotional perspective

Kolb‟s learning style has it root in Jung‟s theory of psychological types, however, it exhibits some differences according to Felder (1996) The difference is that Kolb‟s learning model classifies learners into four types based on their preferences for how to take information and how to internalize it The former aspect which focuses on how students take information divides them into those who prefer concrete experience and those who prefer abstract conceptualization The latter one, emphasizing students‟ preferences of how to internalize information separates them into those who utilize active experimentation and those who employ reflective observation (Felder) The combination of the above mentioned preferences results

in the four following learning styles: accommodators, diversers, assimilators and convergers (Loo, 2004) Kolb‟s learning model is an attempt to incorporate them into a four stage circle that helps to guide students systematically from concrete experience to the development of concepts

Gregorc Learning Style Model

This is a model, based in phenomenological research as well as Kolb‟s experiential learning cycle, that defines learning style as “distinctive and observable

behaviors that provide clues about the mediation abilities of individuals and how their minds relate to the world and, therefore, how they learn” (Gregorc, 1979, p 19) Gregorc claims that individuals have natural predispositions for learning along four bipolar, continuous mind qualities that function as mediators as individuals learn from and act upon their environments Those mind qualities are abstract and concrete perception, sequential and random ordering, deductive and inductive processing, and separative and associative relationships The Gregorc Style Delineator (GSD) provides metrics on the first two qualities, perception and ordering, giving an individual a score from 10 to 40 in each of four learning styles

of Concrete-Sequential (CS), Abstract-Sequential (AS), Abstract-Random (AR), and Concrete-Random (CR), with a maximum of 100 points for all four Gregorc describes Concrete and Abstract as orthogonal to Sequential and Random Although the scores indicate the individual‟s innate dispositions for one, two, three, or all of the styles, individuals can improve their use of the mind qualities that do not score high

Multiple Intelligences

According to Denig (2004), the theory of multiple intelligences was developed by Howard Gardner due to his opposition to the idea that a single construct could measure accurately a person‟s intelligence Since being formed, the theory has resonated a wide number of researchers and educators This theory support the thing that we all know to be true: A one-size-fits-all approach to education will invariably leave some students behind Gardner argued that there exist at least eight types of intelligences including linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic The ninth intelligence which is existential should also be potentially included The distinctions among these intelligences are supported by studies in child development, cognitive skills under conditions of brain damage, psychometrics, change in cognition across history and within different cultures, and psychological transfer and generalization

A variety of these intelligences characterize most people, but at varying levels of

development and exhibited strength (Jacobs -Connell 2000) Despite being criticized to lack of experimental research to support, the theory has somepractical implication to education According to Denig (2004), Multiple Intelligences theory recognizes the importance of each type of intelligence and changes instructional practices and teaching methodologies to employ and integrate students‟ interests and abilities in an effort to maximize learning

The Myers - Briggs Type Indicator

Myers - Briggs learning model is also inspired by Jung‟s theory of psychological types The author stated that variation in human behavior results from basic differences in the perception and judgment processes Though expanded from Jung‟s theory, Myers and Briggs added another dimension They argued that each individual has a preference for either a judgment function or the perceptive function They are of the opinion that children have enough command of their mental processes to be able to use their favorite process more, develop and trust it more meanwhile they tend to ignore the processes that they are not in favor of (Briggs and Myers, 1980, p.2-3)

Nevertheless, they also argued that a single process is not enough for individuals to be balanced People need to adequately develop a second process which is not equal as the primary one, just as an auxiliary process To be more specific, if one‟s preference is judgment, it is necessary for him or her to develop the perceptive function process as an auxiliary one and vice versa

Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles Model

Dunn (1990) defined learning styles as “the way in which individuals begin

to concentrate on, process, internalize, and retain new and difficult information” (p.353) According to this model, learning styles is stated to consists of twenty elements that affect students learning, encompass the learners‟ environment, emotionality, sociological preferences, physiological characteristics The following specific elements are generated from the broad categories: sound, light, temperature, seating design, motivation, task persistence, responsibility, structure, learning alone,

in pairs, in groups, perceptual strength, time of day, need for intake, mobility, and global or analytic, impulsive or reflective (Dunn & Burke, 2006) The Dunn and Dunn model stresses capitalization on individual learning styles by modifying the instruction (Denig, 2004; Dunn et al., 2001) In addition, the focus of learning styles relies squarely on the process of education and how things are taught as compared to addressing what is taught and the product to be achieved, as is the case with Gardner‟s approach (Denig; Dunn et al.)

2.2.3 Elements of Learning Styles

Each of the above-mentioned model identifies learning styles elements within its scope of viewing learning styles, and this results in a wide range of factors for consideration It is appropriate and beneficial to include an overview of some significant elements in this study The following is a list of learning styles used in language teaching and learning

Visual/ verbal style preference: Those who are in favor of this learning

styles preference like to observe and to see information in form of texts or pictures They are highly motivated when watching television or film documentaries where both visual and verbal are information is presented Rather than listen to lecture, they are fond of reading what is written on a subject Furthermore, this type of learners may feel frustrated if only verbal instruction or explanations are given to them

Visual/ Non-verbal style preference: The outstanding difference between

this type to the previous one is that those who fall into this category learn best when being provided information in form of pictures, graphs, charts, maps, and films They learn through observation and they like to have tasks demonstrated to them rather than receive written instructions

Auditory style preference: Students of this type learn at their best from

hearing and they are able to remember informationby reading aloud Their favorite methods include audio tapes, lectures, and group discussions

Kinesthetic style preference: Those who prefer this style learn more

effectively by being physically involved in the teaching and learning process or classroom activities They always want to be active participants who are allowed to use their body energy and move around the classroom

Tactile style preference: Activities related to touching materials, building

and handing models are of special benefits for students of this style In contrast, hand-on experience may make them feel bored and frustrated

Group preference: These students work very effectively in pairs and groups

and they learn very well in this way since they are stimulated by interaction with those around them

Individual preference: In contrast to group style preference, learners of this

category always prefer to work on their own Learning will be more effective and interesting when they study by themselves (Reid, 1995)

2.2.4 Teaching styles

As mention at the beginning of this chapter, “style” should not be confused with method, for people tend to infuse different methods with their own styles (Fischer and Fischer, 1979, p.245) For instance, lecturing is a method, however, different teachers have their own unique styles when infusing this method

Like anyone else in this world, teachers have their own preferred way of perceiving and processing information It is not false to believe that they will bring and apply their own way of learning into class teaching “Research supports the concept that most teachers teach the way they learn” (Stitt-Gohdes 2001, p 136) Since a great many teachers have experienced academic success in learning environments that were instructor centered and relied heavily on lecture, it is understandable that their preferred style of teaching, at least initially, would be to repeat what worked with them

As stated in Dunn and Dunn (1979, p 241), teachers teach the way they learnt not necessarily the way they were taught Their research into individual

teaching styles found out that teachers keep the belief that the way they learn is easy and right, and as a result, they teach their students in the same manner There is a great deal of evidence from research supporting this To be more specific, in his research, Lawrence contended that the learning styles of teachers strongly affect how they teach, what they prefer to teach and the level they want to teach (Lawrence, 1984, p.78) Also, in a study conducted with education majors at University of Idaho, Heikkinen, Pettigrew and Zakrajsek found that students majoring in different subjects have strong preferences for some learning variables They also discovered a difference in learning styles between prospective elementary and secondary teachers ( Heikkinen, Pettigrew and Zakrajsek, 1985, p.85)

Teachers‟ characteristics have also been paid much attention from researchers It is important to know their teaching styles as well as their characteristics In this study, the summarization of McCarthy (1987, p 37-43) about teachers‟ characteristics based on how they learn using four quadrant model and the findings of learning styles researchers including Kolb, Lawrence, Jung, Gregor will

be presented

Quadrant one: Imaginative Learners

As teachers, they:

- Are interested in facilitating individual growth

- Try to help people become more self-aware

- Believe curricula should enhance the ability to be authentic

- See knowledge as growth in personal insight and encourage authenticity in their students

- Like discussions, group work and realistic feedback about feeling

- Care people who seek to engage their students in cooperative efforts

- Are aware of social forces that effect human development

- Are able to focus on meaningful goals

- Tend to be fearful under pressure and sometimes lack daring

- Strength: imaginative ideas

- Favorite questions: Why

Quadrant two: Analytic Learners

As teachers, they

- Are interested in transmitting knowledge

- Try to be as accurate and knowledgeable as possible

- Believe curricula should further understanding of significant information and should be presented systematically

- See knowledge as deepening comprehension

- Encourage outstanding students

- Like facts and details and organized sequential thinking

- Are traditional teachers who seek to imbue a love of knowledge

- Believe in rational use of authority

- Sometimes discourage creativity because of their dominating attitude

- Strength: creating concepts and models

- Favorite questions: What?

Quadrant three: Common sense learners

As teachers, they:

- Are interested in productivity and competence

- Try to give students the skills they will need to become economically independent in life

- Believe curricula should be geared to this kind of focus

- See knowledge as enabling students to make their own way

- Encourage practical applications

- Like technical things and hands-on activities

- Are exacting and seek quality and productivity

- Believe the best way is determined pragmatically

- Use measured rewards

- Tend to be inflexible and self-contained and lack team-work skills

- Strength: practical application of ideas

- Favorite questions: Howdoes this work?

Quadrant four: Dynamic Learners

As teachers, they

- Are interested in enabling student self-discovery

- Try to help people act on their own visions

- Believe curricula should be geared to learner's interests

- See knowledge as a tool for improving the larger society

- Encourage experimental learning - like to use a variety of instructional methods

- Are dramatic teachers who seek to energize their students

- Attempt to create new forms, to stimulate life and to draw new boundaries

- Tend to rashness and manipulation

- Strength: action and presenting challenges

- Favorite questions: What if?

It is very essential for teachers to know about their own learning styles With knowledge about their strengths and weaknesses, teachers can know how to develop various strategies to help their students learn more effectively and to help themselves to deliver better lessons that really attract and draw students‟ attention Additionally, as teachers, they should understand and accept the fact that a single teaching style cannot be effective with all students in the class and there is no single best approach that will work for everyone no matter how good that approach is (Felder & Brent, 2005; Koch, 2007; Sternberg et al., 2008)

2.3 Literature review of related studies

2.3.1 The relationship between teaching and learning styles

2.3.1.1 Matches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning styles

Educators have been increasingly interested in learning styles and related instruments for assessments, pedagogical techniques and instructional models (Hall

& Moseley, 2005; Pashler et al., 2009) Some claimed that teachers those who have better understanding of students‟ learning styles can greatly increase their effectiveness in both instruction and assessments (Hall & Moseley; Honigsfeld&Schiering, 2004; Sternberg et al., 2008) Understanding students‟ unique learning style preferences and instructional needs can assist teachers in developing a more favorable view of all students‟ abilities and thereby stimulate the development and implementation of differentiated instructional practices and the provision of intentional and personalized intervention (Evans &Waring, 2006; Honigsfeld&Schiering, 2004; Rosenfeld & Rosenfeld, 2008) Furthermore, research indicates that incorporating learning styles-based instructional strategies assists teachers in creating a comfortable learning environment, demonstrating true concern for their students, and promoting a love of learning (Honigsfeld&Schiering, 2004)

Learning style theories provide an effective means for helping teachers recognize the vast diversity in their students‟ individual learning needs as well as providing a framework from which to knowledgably develop a variety of instructional methodologies to utilize in their teaching (Cano8Garcia & Hughes, 2000; Hall & Moseley, 2005; Honigsfeld&Schiering, 2004; Minotti, 2005; Rosenfeld & Rosenfeld, 2008; Sternberg et al., 2008; Williamson & Watson, 2007)

In practical application, matching teaching and learning styles does not necessarily imply that specific learning activities must be utilized in relation to each learning style, but rather that the manner in which instruction is presented and developed should take into consideration the learning styles of the students involved (Morrison

et al., 2006) Although some teachers are hesitant to modify their teaching style, Noble (2004) reported an increase in teacher‟s willingness to incorporate learning styles research in their instructional practices when provided a tool for practical application These same teachers noticed greater levels of performance by students with and without disabilities when implementing educational strategies designed to match various learning styles Thus, when given appropriate information and support, there is potential for enthusiastic acceptance of teachers in utilizing a variety of learning styles based instructional strategies as a means of helping students achieve increased academic gains (Honigsfeld&Schiering, 2004; Noble, 2004; Rosenfeld & Rosenfeld, 2008)

Moticational theory: The need of matching teaching and learning styles:

According to Trang and Baldauf (2007), how language learners learn including how much input they take in, how long they maintain language skills after studying, how often they use strategies, and how they are willing to interact with others, and actively take part in classroom activities is strongly affected by their motivation A number of motivational theorists have come to the conclusion that factors related to teachers contribute greatest in demotivating students Jones (2006) emphasizes that teachers‟ personality and teaching styles are the greatest source of demotivation for students Additionally, Bowen and Madsen (1987) contend that teaching style is a primary determinant of student motivation Ebata (2009)claims that external motivational factors are under the control of teacher and therefore they should be aware of their teaching styles

A great number of studies on learning styles have shown that if students were taught in their preferred ways, they would be more motivated to learning and more able to achieve greater success that those who were taught with teaching styles different from their preferred one (Reid, 1987; Carbo& Hodges, 1988; Nelson, 1995; Kinsella, 1995; Hyland, 1993; Tudor, 1996) In contrast, when mismatches between teaching styles and learning styles occur,students‟ language learning may

be adversely affected (Reid, 1987; Cotazzi, 1990;Oxford, Hollaway, &

Horton-Murillo, 1992; Felder, 1995; Stebbins, 1995; Jones,1997; Ehrman, 1996; Littlewood, Liu, & Yu, 1996, Peacock, 2001; Tuan, 2011).Oxford and Lavine (1992) add that “learners whose style preference is conspicuously different from teacher‟s may be plagued by anxiety and respond negatively the teacher, the classroom, and the subject matter” (p 38) In other words, having a good awareness about the preferred learning styles of students can help teachers to understand and cope with students‟ course-related learning difficulties and ultimately help alleviate their frustration levels (Dunn, 1990; Kinsella, 1992) Reid (1996) asserts that matching language teaching styles and language learning styles can achieve equal educational opportunity in language classrooms and build student self-awareness In addition, Peacock (2001) contends that matching students‟ and teachers‟ teaching styles can motivate students to work harder in and outside classroom

2.3.1.2 Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning styles

On the contrary, opponents to the idea of matching teaching and learning styles argue that the evidence shown in empirical studies is not clearly defined and learning style instruments may not be valid and reliable For instance, Coffield, Moseley, Hall, and Ecclestone (2004), reviewed 13 different learning style models, and pointed out that “the evidence from the (learning style) empirical studies is equivocal at best and deeply contradictory at worst” (p 121) Similarly, Smith, Sekar, and Townsend (2002) reviewed 18 studies on learning styles and teaching styles and found that half of the studies were in favour of the matching hypothesis, while another half of them showed that teaching was more effective when mismatch occurs Reynolds (1997) conducted eight empirical studies, with five of them supporting of matching, the other three against the hypothesis Ford & Chen (2001) conducted three empirical studies on matching and mismatching, and concluded that matching is linked with improved achievement He also added that the effects of matching and mismatching “may not be simple, and may entail complex interactions with other factors such as gender, and different forms of learning”

(Ford & Chen, 2001, p 21) Coffield et al (2004) suggest that subject matter is also

an important factor often neglected by learning theorists on deciding the effects of matching and mismatching Those cited empirical studies which were against matching theory were not conducted in second/foreign language classrooms, and therefore may not reflect the effects of matching or mismatching of learning styles and teaching styles in second/foreign language learning Oxford and Lavine (1992) comment that matching teaching styles and learning styles may not be feasible in some programs due to limited resources Furthermore, it is difficult to match the teachers‟ and students‟ styles in all dimensions in reality They warn that both parties would be deprived of the „hidden benefits of “style wars” Deliberate mismatching allows learners to develop compensation skills for dealing with situations where style conflicts exist, such as in the business world when dealing with different people Asking teachers to adopt an unfamiliar style may also reduce effectiveness Additionally, Felder (1995) proposes that the teaching styles which learners prefer may not be the best for their learning as this may reduce the opportunity for students to extend their learning styles, which are necessary for their future development Some advocates of deliberate mismatching comment that

“constructive friction” by adopting a wide variety of teaching approaches can avoid boredom and push students to be more responsible for the content, process and outcomes of their learning Kolb (1984) believes that the aim of mismatching is to allow students to experience the tension and conflict in order to promote personal growth and creativity

Joyce, Weil, and Calhoun (2015) and Hunt (1971) point out that if the environment is matched to the development of learners, they may become satisfied with that stage and that will limit their ability to integrate new information and form new conceptual systems Personalistic psychologist, Carl Rogers (1982) also contend that learners may confine themselves to domains in which they feel safe Joyce, Weil and Calhoun (2015) add that most developmental stage theories (Erikson, 1950; Harvey, Hunt, & Schroeder, 1961; Piaget, 1952) emphasize that

accommodation is necessary if higher levels of development have to be reached For example, Piaget‟s (1952) cognitive child development theory states that the assimilation of new information will force the accommodations that will lead to the successive stages of development However, arrestation may be possible when people move upward through the Piagetian stages Joyce et al (2015) point out that having sufficient accommodation to bring about reconfiguration to a new stage requires a “letting go of the confines of one level so that the essentials of the next level can be reached” (p 367) That means it is essential for learners to face challenges in the developmental process in order to develop new levels of competence They also use Vygotsky‟s (1978) zone of proximal development (ZPD) theory to explain that the conceptual understanding and processes should be just beyond learners‟ zone of comfort, but not too demanding that learners cannot manage Joyce et al (2015) suggest that teachers should scaffold the learning process by encouragement and academic support, and educators should develop an optimal mismatch in order to maximize learners‟ levels of capacity

To summarize, understanding the preferred learning styles of students is

important for curriculum design, teacher training, material development and student orientation (Chang, 2003) Teachers should be aware of their teaching styles so as to ensure that there is no extreme mismatch between teaching styles and their students‟ learning styles Matching learning styles and teaching styles may benefit students to

a certain extent, which is according to the subject matters, level of students and other possible factors Deliberate mismatching may create constructive conflicts and benefit students in terms of their personal growth, creativity, and their ways of learning Nevertheless, there is a lack of empirical studies regarding the effects of matching or deliberately mismatching learning styles and teaching styles in second/foreign language classroom

2.3.2 Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles and learning styles

2.3.2.1 Studies in learning styles

So as to provide more evidence and get an overview of what have been done

so far in this field, a review of three famous studies previously investigating into teaching and learning styles and their intertwined relation

2.3.1.2 Willing’s (1985) study

In 1985, Willing successfully conducted a survey research investigating the learning preferences of 517 ESF learners in Australia The survey consisted of a thirty item questionnaire Based on the responses to this questionnaire, he found out that students tended to be in favor of traditional based activities to communicative based activities in the classroom In other words, they favored a teacher- centered approach than learner-centered one Activities they liked most included teachers‟ explanation, error correction, and conversation practice Meanwhile, most of them felt bored with listening and using cassettes, student self- discovery of errors and using pictures and videos

2.7.1.2 Nunan’s (1986) study

With the purpose of seek to discover and understand teachers‟ perceptions, Nunan used a modified version of Willing‟s survey His study importantly pointed out that there were obvious mismatches between teachers‟ perceptions and students‟ perceptions To be in more details, the study showed that teachers found such activities as pair-work, student self- discovery of errors and listening to tapes valuable and worth using In comparison to Willing study‟s result, the only match between teachers and students was conversation practice In this circumstance, Nunan (1989) stated that if these mismatches were not seriously taken into consideration, they could have a negative effect on learners‟ classroom behaviors, attention to activities and effort for learning

2 The association between learning styles, disciplines and year of study

3 Five hypothesis proposed by Reid and teachers‟ opinions about them The hypotheses are as following:

strength and weaknesses

failure, frustration and demotivation

materials

habit rather than biological attributes

range of styles and stretch their own styles (Reid 187,1995)

of their learning (Peacock, 2000, p.93,94)

The study was conducted with the participation of two hundred and six Chinese students who were taking EFL as part of their degree It revealed that learning styles were identifiable and it also proved Reid‟s major hypothesis which stated that

“learners have their own learning styles and learning strength and weaknesses, and that a mismatch between teaching and learning causes learning failure, frustration and demotivation”

2.3.1.5 Studies in teaching styles

Many researchers (Heimlich &Norland, 2002; Giles et al., 2006; Razak, Ahmad, & Shad, 2007; Soliven, 2003) point out that teaching style is vital for providing students with good learning experiences, while some (Akbari&Allvar, 2010; Black, 1993; Miglietti& Strange, 1998) link it to students‟ achievement outcomes However, there is still a very limited amount of research which has been done to identify teaching styles, especially in second/foreign language education

Grasha (1994) observes college classroom teaching and identifies the following five teaching styles: expert, formal authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator This is presented in Table 2.4

Table 2.2.Grasha’s identification of teaching styles

Expert Possess knowledge and expertise that students need Concerns

with offering detailed knowledge and information so as to ensure that students are well-prepared

Formal

authority

Concerns with providing students with positive and negative feedback, establishing learning goals, expectations and rules of conduct for students

Personal model Provide students with personal examples and guides students by

showing them how to do things, and encourages them to observe and emulate the instructor‟s approach

Facilitator Emphasizes teacher-student interaction Works with students on

projects in a consultative way and provides support and encouragement

Delegator Concerns with developing independent learning and encourages

students to work independently on projects or as part of teams The teacher is available as a resource person

Grasha‟s (1994) goals for developing a conceptual model of teaching style were to explore the stylistic qualities that college teachers possessed and to offer suggestions for when and how to employ them Although he identifies five different teaching styles, he suggests that categorizing teachers‟ teaching styles into “one of five boxes” is “premature” (p 142) Instead, he finds that it is possible that teachers possess each of the teaching styles to varying degrees that the teaching styles could

be blended together He therefore developed four clusters of teaching styles: Cluster

1 (expert/formal authority style – i.e traditional teacher-centered classroom processes), Cluster 2 (personal model/expert/formal/authority style – i.e provides personal modeling; guiding and coaching), Cluster 3 (facilitator/personal model/expert style – i.e emphasizes collaborative and student-centered learning processes), and Cluster 4 (delegator/facilitator/expert style – emphasizes independent group and individual learning activities) Each cluster reflects some blends of styles are dominant and others are secondary He later developed a five-point Likert scale Teaching Style Inventory (1996) to investigate teachers‟ teaching styles He finds that teachers who have higher academic rank tend to associate with the expert and formal authority styles In addition, teachers tend to use the facilitator and delegator styles when teaching higher-level classes His research also shows that the formal authority style can be more commonly found in foreign language classroom, when compared with other academic disciplines, such as mathematics and computer science Razak et al.‟s (2007) research on English for Specific Purposes (ESP) students‟ preferred teaching styles use Grasha‟s Teaching Style Inventory Their research shows that ESP students had a high preference for the facilitator style, while the formal authority style was the least preferred It also shows that the most dominant teaching style of ESP lecturers was the Expert teaching style The researchers explain that the traditional lecture-style of teaching

is dominant in the ESP classrooms they investigated is mainly because many lecturers lack experience in teaching ESL, especially most of the teachers are not degree holders of ESP teaching Stimpson and Wong (1995) point out that some

teachers tend to use a teacher-centered approach as they may feel more comfortable with a structured style in which they can control the teaching pace Grasha (1993) and Roslind (2003) also suggest that teachers‟ teaching styles can be influenced by several factors like learning goals, type of course, teachers‟ educational background, level of studies, and academic discipline

Joyce, Weil, and Calhoun (2015) categorize teaching styles by developing four “families of models” The first teaching model is the behavioral system approach that includes explicit instruction, mastery learning and direct instruction The second is the information-processing approach which includes inductive learning, concept development, intellectual development, and inquiry-based learning The third one is the personal family of models that emphasize student-centered learning, which include ondirective teaching and self-concept development The last one is the social family which includes collaborative learning and role playing They emphasize that teachers should be flexible and understand learners‟ needs before implementing those models Beck (1998) summarizes teaching strategies suggested by 25 teaching textbooks and develops a taxonomy of teaching strategies He categorizes teaching strategies into eight types: associative (i.e group learning, e.g group discussion and cooperative task groups), deliberative (i.e emphasizes thoughtful exchange of ideas, e.g debate and conference), expositive (i.e to offer information from an authoritative source to a receiving source, e.g lecture and textual readings), individualistic (i.e tailor instruction according to individual students‟ needs, e.g peer tutoring and mastery

learning), interrogative (i.e focuses on asking thoughtful and high-order questions, e.g interviews and case study), investigative (i.e inquiry learning, e.g experimentation and case study), performative (i.e involves creative expression and

a source of entertainment, e.g dramatic play and gaming) , and technological (i.e using technology, i.e video conferencing and audiotaping) Although Beck (1998) uses the term “taxonomy of teaching strategies”, instead of teaching styles, it has the same meaning as “teaching style” identified by other researchers, which is a set

of teaching strategies or techniques for the goal of teaching and learning in classroom There is no research using the taxonomy of teaching strategies developed by Beck

Furthermore, while each individual will have an innate style, learners should not only be aware of their own learning style, they should be encouraged to become aware of the variety of learning styles that exist and experiment with them When students are aware of their own learning style, and their strengths and limitations they can then learn strategies to cope with incompatible learning situations

With the objective of better understanding learners‟ learning styles and teachers‟ teaching styles so as to help to narrow the gap between them, this chapter has provided readers with a clear review of literature in this field In turn, learning and teaching styles and their characteristics have been clarified

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 3.1 Overview

In chapter one, the purpose of this study has been clearly set out, that is to investigate teachers‟ teaching styles and learners‟ learning style preferences at School of Foreign Languages - Thai Nguyen University and the extent to which they are matched or mismatched

The purpose of this chapter is to explain the design of this study First of all,

it provides readers with the conceptual framework of the study Then, it deals with research questions, methods, setting and participants, and research procedure The last part is spent on describing instruments that are employed to collect data for the study

3.2 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this study is described in figure 3.1 As explained in the previous chapters, teachers‟ teaching styles have strong influence in students‟ learning motivation and achievements and a number of studies have shown that students are more motivated if they are taught the way they prefer Serious mismatch between teaching and learning styles may lead to learning failure, frustration and demotivation

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study

of Foreign Languages, TNU

Match or Mismatch?

Implication for Teaching and Learning at SFL-TNU

3.4 Research method

In this research, the combination of both qualitative and quantitative methods

is employed It is worthy to utilize this combination in order to investigate the research questions because as Madey (1987) claimed, intrinsic qualities of each method really help to strengthen each other when they are combined According to Creswell and Clark (2007), mixing both qualitative and quantitative research design brings about more comprehensive insights to the research problems Furthermore, Gay, Mills and Airasian (2006) stated that qualitative method helps to establish what, meanwhile quantitative one helps to understand how In this study, the quantitative method is used with a questionnaire survey with both teachers and students, followed by a semi-structuredd interview with teachers - a form of qualitative method design

3.4.1 Quantitative research method

This method involves the process of collecting and analyzing numerical data with which the general condition and relationships are described and investigated According to the classification of Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2006), there are five major approaches of this method namely: descriptive research, correlation research, causal-comparative research, experimental research, and single-subject research The first approach aims at answering questions about current status of the research subject, while the second one establishes understanding of the relationship existing between two or more variables Causal - comparative approach involves determining the differences existing between individual Experimental research is conducted to provide evidence about cause and effect relationships The last type, single-subject approach attempts to understand the behavioral change in individuals

as a result of treatment applied

In this type, such numerical indices as tests or surveys are usually utilized Additionally, quantitative method involves large and random sample and it often