105 a critical link in understanding the ‗one-size-fits-all‘ dilemma and detriment faced by myriads of learners and teachers. Understanding curriculum implementation through learning styles for individual pedagogy cannot afford to ignore the legitimacy and value of learning styles theory and approach.
106 springboard for review within this chapter. Even more challenging, the reconciliation between learner-centred teaching and learner performance has revealed an ever growing concerning gap between how teachers teach and how learners learn best for individual and collective success for learners and the country at large. More so, the highly debated and recently amended, Norms and Standards for Educators in the country that has seen teachers in seven distinct roles including ‗mediators of learning, interpreters and designers of learning programmes and materials, researchers and lifelong learners and assessors, and, learning area/phase specialists‘ (Government Gazette No 20844, 2000, p. 9), assumes teachers as ‗qualified, competent, dedicated and caring‘ (Government Gazette No 20844, 2000, p. 9) leaving ‗considerable room for creativity and innovation on the part of teachers in interpreting what and how to teach‘ (Government Gazette NO 20844, 2000, p.12).
However, as Jansen (1999, p.57) in Moodley (2009) postulates that in South Africa the emphasis of curriculum reform has been a ‗symbolism of change and innovation‘ and is not concerned with that of learning objectives, content to be covered, teaching strategies, assessment procedures, and such. Jansen (1998) states curriculum ‗implementational dilemmas‘ within the South African education system as regards
‗finance and support‘, ‗conditions of schools and classrooms‘ and ‗capacity of educators‘ have not allowed for the National Curriculum Statements (NCS/CAPS, 2012) to be fully realised. Harley and Wedekind (2004) further assert that ‗when teachers are uncertain there will be failure‘. Bertram, Fotheringham, and Harley (2000) also strongly contend that teachers are ‗crucial to the success of any innovation‘. Inadequate and inappropriate training of teachers, misinterpretation and lack of understanding, the need for suitable resources and appropriate materials and substantive professional support especially at institutional level among others may be said to have led to the demise of the successful implementation and delivery of South Africa‘s curriculum policies.
Yet, amidst the aforementioned complexities in education in South Africa has emerged a learner-centred, creative and noteworthy response to understanding curriculum delivery through a learning styles approach (Moodley, 2009). A learning styles approach claims to bridge the gap between the what, why and how of curriculum implementation. Learning style theory is a cognitive response in understanding the gap between how teachers teach and learners learn best in diverse situations, and within technologically advancing 21st Century environments. It is based on the assumption that how individual children learn - their learning styles do influence how they perform, and that most children can learn given the awareness of their learning styles
107 (Dunn & Dunn, 1978). The Dunn and Dunn (1978) Learning Styles theory claims to open such learner-centred possibilities for curriculum implementation providing a conceptual and theoretical framework for transporting teaching practice into a 21st century dimension for all (Moodley, 2009).
The key research question of this empirical case study, What are school-based teachers‘ experiences of a learning styles approach to teaching South Africa‘s Intermediate Phase NCS/CAPS (2012) policy has provided the platform for critique and understanding of this literature review. Thus the main objective of this literature review was to recognise the influence teaching through a learning styles approach has had on how children learn and perform. Through a review of journal articles, books and reports based on research into learning style theories and practice conducted among American, British, Middle Eastern, Chinese and South African learners and teachers, the assumption that how children learn, their learning styles, do influence how they perform was critiqued.
This literature review thus recognised what the literature said about the definition of learning styles, its purpose and benefits for curriculum implementation, how it is implemented and used (learning style instruments), and, its influence on learner performance. There has been general consensus that meeting the cognitive, emotional and psychological needs of individual learners especially within heterogeneous environments of diverse cultures and abilities has increased since the latter part of the 20th century (Dunn &
Dunn, 1978, Tomlinson, 2009; Moodley, 2009). This has in turn increased demands on schools and teachers. However, the overall trend noted was that there is almost equal consensus in support for as there is against learning styles based approaches to teaching as a response to meeting individual learner needs.
Significantly also, research has shown that teachers after one year of implementation discontinued matching learners to their individual learning styles (Stahl, 1999). Through this literature review understanding of the rationale and reasons for this change was of noteworthy investigation.
Thus positioning itself in the field of Curriculum Studies, this literature review defined and explained Learning Style Theory. The problem of a clear definition of the topic was handled in the section on what the literature says about the meaning of learning styles. Gaps in research were highlighted through review of the purposes and benefits of a learning styles approach to teaching. Conflicts in theory, methodology, evidence and conclusions were pointed out within the influence of learning styles on learner responses. This literature review did not include a comprehensive review of learning or teaching theories, outcomes-based education
108 and assessment, or tracking of learners directly. It further did not include a review of Multiple Intelligences or Emotional Intelligences.
Furthermore, this chapter also included an in depth description, explanation and critique of the Dunn and Dunn (1978) learning styles approach to teaching in understanding curriculum implementation. The focus though applicable to all age groups was especially on school-going ages, pre-primary to high school. The main objective of this literature review was to recognise and understand the influence teaching through the Dunn and Dunn (1978) learning styles approach to teaching has had on how children learn and respond.
Through a review of several journal articles and books based on research into learning styles theories and practice, the assumption that how children learn best - their learning styles, do influence how they learn and perform was critiqued. Essentially, also it looked at how teachers teach through this approach, helping to understand teachers‘ classroom experiences and the demands of curriculum implementation.
This chapter in the main reviewed learning styles theory through a critique of research conducted among American (Matthews, 1991; Dunn & Dunn, 2009), British (Rayner, 2007), Chinese (Graf, Kinshuk & Liu, 2009), Middle Eastern (Rosenfeld & Rosenfeld, 2008, Serife, 2008) and South African (Grosser & Waal, 2008) researchers. In particular it presented the Dunn and Dunn (1978) learning styles theory and model.
Among the main researchers here Lister (2004), Tully, Dunn and Hlawaty (2006), DeBello (1990), Tendy and Geiser (1998, 1999) and Kirby (1979) are advocates for the Dunn and Dunn (1978) model. Among their critics cautioning the value and construct of the model are Tomlinson (2009), Pitts (2009), Hall (2005) and Curry (1990). This chapter further described how the Dunn and Dunn (1978) model is implemented and used (learning style inventory) looking at its influence on learner involvement and significance for curriculum implementation.
Agreeably, there seemed to be general consensus that meeting the cognitive, emotional and psychological needs of individual learners especially within heterogeneous environments of diverse cultures and abilities have increased since the latter part of the 20th century (Dunn & Dunn, 1978, Tomlinson, 2009; Moodley, 2009). This has in turn increased demands on schools and teachers. However, the overall trend was an almost equal consensus in support for as there was against learning styles-based approaches to teaching as a response to meeting individual learner needs. Yet of immediate interest was the call in most of the reports for further rigorous work in this field to establish a firm and stable theory of matching learning and teaching
109 styles, a simpler and user-friendly instrument of identifying learner styles, and, a cost, time and labour saving means of generating and implementing a learning styles approach to teaching (Moodley, 2009).
However, it is still envisaged that through this literature review and study recognition of learning styles theory and research may provide awareness into teachers‘ experiences of teaching through a learning styles approach with a further understanding of the relationship between learners, teachers and learning (Moodley, 2009). This may serve as a vital cognitive response in education to bridge the gap between teaching and learning. If recognised curriculum implementation woes may be better understood and appropriate efforts made to address them. And the call to a learner-centred pedagogy in South Africa may be better understood and handled, dispelling fear and inspiring hope (Moodley, 2009).
110 CHAPTER FOUR
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 4.1. INTRODUCTION
Conceptually, a research design is a description of the order; structure or plan the researcher adopts for a research study and may be subject to change (Mouton, 2001; McMillan & Schumacher, 2001; Henning, 2004).
A research design describes how the research is conducted to obtain sound evidence that answers the study‘s research questions (Mouton, 2001; McMillan & Schumacher, 2001, Silverman, 2010). This study asks a succinctly discursive key research question: What are school-based teachers‘ experiences of a learning styles approach to teaching South Africa‘s Intermediate Phase NCS/CAPS (2012) policy? In seeking to meaningfully answer this descriptive, exploratory question, and to clearly determine teachers‘ practices and attitudes, this chapter presents how the research design and plan for this study unfolds.
Subsequent to the opening section on Researcher Positionality and Bias, the chapter begins with a presentation of and brief discussion on the key research question and sub-questions to be answered during this study. A visual table of the processes employed is then depicted. This is followed by an in depth discussion and motivation for the adopted paradigm, style and approach taken to research supplying the study‘s framework and design. The next section on methods used for collection of data begins with a description of the site of data gathering, a primary school in Pietermaritzburg. A detailed description of and introduction to the unit of analysis, school-based teachers, and selection of the sample follows thereafter.
The four methods used in data gathering, interviews; documents; photo and artifact data, are explained and argued for thereafter. Here each method is discussed individually through presentation of the rationale and value behind its choice; its merits and demerits; plan for collection of data; analysis technique; limitations;
trustworthiness and ethics. In motivating for the above design and fit, it is envisaged that this small – scale qualitative case study may challenge further rigorous debate and research into classroom practices through learning styles. Quantitative, mixed mode studies that could measure learner achievement and schooling success through learning styles may serve to establish learning styles theory and practice for curriculum and classroom success.