Vol.

I (LXIII)
No. 1/2011

80 - 85

Students learning style and Multiple Intelligence profile

Mariana Norela, Andreea Ramona Lauren iub
a,b

Transilvania University, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Brasov, Romania

Abstract
The changes in society - the transition from Information Society towards Knowledge Society led to
significant and unprecedented effects on learning. Because people must develop globally-valued skills
when knowledge is produced with an increasing speed, efficient learning to learn abilities are mandatory.
The present study represents the first stage, observant stage of an experimental research that aims to
evaluate the implications of the counseling for learning upon students achievement.
The main objective of this study is to evaluate awareness level and the preferences of their own learning
styles form Linksman R. approach and Gardner's Multiple Intelligences for the 109 full-time students
compared to 108 distance learning students. The comparison of the learning styles and multiple
intelligences students profile showed significant differences between the programs of study (full-time and
distance learning).
Keywords: learning styles, Gardner's multiple intelligences, Knowledge Society, students, learning to learn
ability

1. Introduction
The explosion of information together with new technologies and communication
are key aspects and requirements in the same time. Education in the era of Knowledge is
directly influenced by economic, technology and social changes. Taking into
consideration Carnoy and Castells point of view: "In a society where education,
information, and knowledge are the critical sources of wealth and influence, class
formation takes place in the classroom." (Carnoy, Castells, 1999), we consider that these
changes of rapport between Education and Knowledge (Cucos, 2006), (knowledge being
mainly transmitted through the educational system), alter both the teachers and the
students perception upon learning and education. In Andy Hargreavess opinion the
knowledge society is really a learning society [] by process information and
knowledge in ways that maximize learning, stimulate ingenuity and invention and
develop the capacity to initiate and cope with change. (Hargreaves, 2003). Under these
conditions the way that people learn will be different. Lifelong Learning must include
efficient learning to learn abilities, global abilities in order to use the most of their own
possibilities, but in the same time to valorize all the opportunities that technology and
society offers. Personality traits as learning styles, intelligence, motivation, selfperception and self-confidence, cognitive style, brain lateralization, and so on, together
with sociological and environmental factors and specific characteristics of the tasks are
only some of the elements that develop the learning to learn abilities.
Many studies and researchers tried to find out more about the learning process, we try
to evaluate the profile of learning styles and multiple intelligence for student from two
Corresponding author. Tel.\fax: +40 0268-416185;
E-mail address: mariananorel@unitbv.ro

Students learning style and Multiple Intelligence profile

81

different program study form a specific specialization in the actual conditions of

Romanian Educational System.
1.1. Linksman Learning style

The learning style is considered to be "a specific and preferential matrix for processing
the learning tasks, in order to adapt the strategies to the required environmental
conditions." (Neacsu, 1990, 2003, 2006) Thus, learning style involves consistent, stable
strategies, independent of the specific characteristics of learning tasks. Dunn & Dunn
observed that over time the personal learning style it is possible to change. The changes
are different when the learner is an adult.
We agree with (Dumitru, 2000) that have a broader meaning than cognitive styles,
meaning that they include, in addition, cognitive functioning, psychomotor and affective
elements, but also "certain features of the training sets and instructional prescriptions that
accompany actual learning achievement."
Although in literature there are many classifications of learning styles, one of the most
popular types used in educational practice has three categories: visual, auditory and motor
or practical.
We will use for this study the typology of (Linksman, 1999) which shows the
characteristics of learning behavior analyzer dominance criterion involved in learning:
visual, auditory, tactile and kinesthetic. This categorization was selected because we
believe it differentiates more accurate the motor type through tactile and kinesthetic.
1.2. Gardner's Multiple Intelligences
Gardner Multiple Intelligences Theory represents a definition of human nature, from a
cognitive perspective. This theory explains how these preferences refer not only to
preferred learning styles, as well as their behavioral and working styles, and their natural
strengths. The eight intelligence types (linguistic intelligence, logical-mathematical
intelligence, spatial-visual intelligence, musical intelligence, bodily-kinesthetic
intelligence, naturalistic intelligence, interpersonal intelligence and intrapersonal
intelligence), that a person may possess (Gardner suggests most of us are strong in three
types) indicates not only the persons capabilities, but also the manner or method in which
they prefer to learn and develop their strengths - and also to develop their weaknesses.
(Gardner, 2010). According to the same author each individual has the capacity to
develop these intelligences at an accepted level, if he is encouraged and if he benefits of
special adequate training (Gardner, 2006).
2. Methodology
2.1. Objective
In this study we try to assess the learning style and multiple intelligences profiles of the
student from Education and Psychology specialization in the Romanian educational
system and according to the Bologna Declaration provisions.
This study is the first stage, observant stage form an experimental research that aims to
evaluate the implications of the counseling for learning on students results. The first main
characteristics we wanted to evaluate are learning style and multiple intelligences
(important independent variables for the experiment) that correlate with efficient learning
to learn abilities. These abilities refer to using best preferences and abilities, but being
aware of your weaknesses, managing efficient their learning process and having the skill
to find new opportunities to learn.
The main objective of this study is to evaluate the configuration profile, the awareness
level and the preference regarding learning styles and multiple intelligences of students

Mariana Norel, Andreea Ramona Lauren iu

82

the full-time students, integrated in a Full-time program compared to those from the
Distance Learning program. The research is based on Linskman approach and on
Gardners Multiple Intelligences Theory.
The specific objectives of this study were:
Objective no. 1 To evaluate if the students know the differences between different
learning styles and intelligences types;
Objective no. 2 To evaluate the level of awareness of their own characteristics
concerning learning styles and multiple intelligences;
Objective no. 3 To diagnose the particularities of the structure of the learning
styles and multiple intelligences for Distance Learning and Full-Time programs
students.
2.2. Participants
The participants of the study were only 214 valid cases out of 250 voluntary students
from the Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Bachelors Degree Programs.
The distribution of the study participants has the following characteristics:
Programs of study: Full-time (FT 50,2%) and Distance Learning (DL 49,8%);
Year of study: First year (53%) second year (29,49%) and third year (12,9%);
Specializations: Psychology (30,9%) and Education (Pedagogy for Pre-school and
Primary Education 59,4% and Pedagogy 9,7%);
Age: Mean 27 years old, 69,6% between 18-30 years old and 30,4% between 30-56
years old.
The population of the study it is balanced from the type of the program (50,2%FT 49,8% DL), but unbalanced from the other two criteria because there are few students in
the third year and the specialization Pedagogy it is less represented then the others one.
The reason for this presence it is influenced by the number of the total students at this
specialization.
2.3. Instruments
For this research were used three questionnaires two of them constructed for this
purpose only and the well-known Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Questionnaire. The
order the subjects were asked to complete the instruments it is respected in the
presentation of the instruments as well:
The first Questionnaire was constructed for this purpose only in order to assess the
awareness level of learning style and multiple intelligences the preferences and the
interdependence between them. This short questionnaire (six items) included also some
factual data about the respondents, important for the differential analysis.
The second was the Questionnaire of Personal Learning Style (Linksman, 1999, p.13)
consisted of 17 items which differentiates four learning styles: visual, auditory, tactile
and kinesthetic.
The third was Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Questionnaire (coord. Gliga, L.,
Spiro, J., 2001, p. 51) with 78 sentences that assess eight styles of intelligence: linguistic
(L), logical-mathematical (LM), spatial-visual (SV), bodily-kinesthetic (BK), musical
(M), interpersonal (INER), intrapersonal (INTRA) and naturalistic (N). There are others
styles with one up to five styles combined (COMB).
2.4. Procedure
For this study were applied directly or by e-mail the three instruments presented above
in the period October-November 2010.

Students learning style and Multiple Intelligence profile

83

2.5. Data analysis

The collected data were encoded, introduced and analyzed with the program Statistical
Package for Social Sciences (SPSS var. 14.00).
3. Results
The results shows that 38,9% of the students know the learning styles and are aware of
their dominant one (Awareness of the Learning Styles-ALS). 19,9% of participating
students are wrong about their learning style, they believe to have another style than the
questionnaire showed.
Concerning the Awareness of the Gardner Multiple Intelligences (AMI) the situation
is much different. 71,4% declare that they do not know this typology of intelligence,
22,1% demonstrate that they know the typology and their own intelligence preference and
6,6% confound with other typologies or with another intelligence. So, the learning style is
more popular then multiple intelligence preference but the percents are among 20% of
the investigated population.
Dominance of the Learning Styles (DLS) for the Psychology and Education Sciences
participating students are mostly Visual (35,98%), Kinesthetic (21,96%) and Tactile
(12,62%). There was found a significant statistical correlation between the Visual and the
Kinesthetic style of rho=0,17, p<0,00. Comparing the results for distance learning and
full-time (see Figure 1.) we can observe that there are important differences. The percent
of the Visual style it is more than double at the students from distance learning, and the
most dominant style for the full-time students is the Kinesthetic one. The differences
between the two specializations are among 20% - full time students are more Visual than
the distance learning (47,8% compare to 21,4%) but the distance learning are more
Kinesthetic (31,6 % compare to 14,3%).This finding is very interesting and makes us
wonder if these preferences for the mostly first year students were the one who made
them chose the study program.
50,0%

30,0%

Percent

Percent

40,0%

30,0%

20,0%

31,6%

47,6%

20,0%
21,4%

20,4%

10,0%
15,3%

11,2%

10,0%

18,1%
14,3%

13,3%

6,7%

0,0%
a -visual

0,0%
a -visual

b-auditory

c-tactile

d-kinesthetic

others combined

b-auditory

c-tactile

d-kinesthetic

others combined

DOMINACE OF LEARNING STYLES FOR FULL-TIME STUDENTS

DOMINACE OF LEARNING STYLES FOR DISTANCE LEARNING

Figure 1. Comparison of Dominance of the Learning Styles for distance learning students (left)
and full-time students (right)

The structure of the Dominance of Multiple Intelligences (DMI) for the population
investigated it is presented in Table 1. As you can see the most frequently types of
intelligences are Bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence and Interpersonal intelligence followed
by the Intrapersonal intelligence. We have excluded from the analysis the combined
multiple intelligences types. The preoccupation for the human and society could be
predictable for the Psychology and Education but not the Bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence.

Mariana Norel, Andreea Ramona Lauren iu

84

This type of intelligences occupies the first place in the top of preferences for distance
learning students and the third place for full-time students. Intrapersonal intelligence it is
also found at the two programs of study second and third place.
As a surprise there was found un insignificant correlation (-0,49, p<0,5) between the
dominance of the Learning Style and the Multiple Intelligences, because the learning
style is related to the way people thinks.
Table 1. Dominance of Multiple Intelligences
Multiple Intelligences
Whole population Distance Learning
Linguistic Intelligence
1,42%
1%
Logical-Mathematical Intelligence
7,08%
4,9%
Spatial-visual Intelligence
6,13%
8,7%
Bodily-Kinaesthetic Intelligence
13,21%
15,5%
Musical Intelligence
7,55%
4,9%
Interpersonal Intelligence
13,21%
10,7%
Intrapersonal Intelligence
11,79%
12,6%
Naturalistic Intelligence
11,32%
14,6%
Combined
28,3%
27,2%

Full-time
2%
8,2%
4,1%
10,2%
9,2%
16,3%
12,2%
6,1%
31,6%

A high level of awareness of the learning style correlate with awareness of the multiple
intelligence Spearmen Correlation 0,26, p<0,05. and the correlation between awareness
of the multiple intelligence and the period of education has the same value. So, we can
believe that the more a person learns, the more he knows about his Multiple Intelligence.
There is such a correlation with both the awareness of the Learning Styles but it is only
rho=-0,16, p<0,05.
4. Discussions
The students that attended more years of formal education and the ones from full-time
learning are more aware of their learning style preferences. For the whole participating
population, between 30% and 40% are aware of their own ways to learn. Concerning the
multiple intelligences preferences the percent is between 15% and 20%. By this result we
can believe that the learning styles are better known and more accessible.
It is surprisingly that the structures for both learning styles and multiple intelligences
preferences are so different from one learning program to other, by the same
specialization. This could mean that different education forms shape different preferences
or that different preferences determine the decision of following one educational program
or other. We tend to believe the second hypothesis because there are more first year
students and they have auto evaluate in the beginning of first term.
Ideas for future research as to see if others specializations have different structure of
intelligences or learning style or if the differences between Full-time and Distance
Learning are available to another specializations.
These results will be used in the second stage of the research the need analyze in order
to develop a module of counseling for efficient learning to learn abilities. We consider
that is very important to know the structure of these two important characteristic of the
learning process in order to help students use the befit of the dominant learning style or
styles and multiple intelligences to try to develop more the others.
References
1.

Carnoy, M., Castells, M. (1999). Globalization, the knowledge society, and the network state:
Poulantzas at the millennium. (p. 15) Retrieved from

Students learning style and Multiple Intelligence profile

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

8.
9.

85

http://scholar.google.ro/scholar?q=Globalization,+the+knowledge+society,+and+the+network+sta
te:+Poulantzas+at+the+millennium.&hl=ro&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart
Gliga, L., Spiro, J., coord (2001). Differential Training Application of the Multiple Intelligences.
Buzau: Tipogup Press.
Cucos, C. (2006). Informatization of the education. Aspects of training virtualization. (p. 22), Iasi:
Polirom.
Dumitru, I. A. (2000). Developing Critical Thinking and Efficient Learning. (p. 21), Timisoara:
West Press.
Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple Intelligences. New Horizons. Bucharest: Sigma Printing Press.
Gardner, H. (2010, November 15). Multiple intelligences. Retrieved from
http://www.businessballs.com/howardgardnermultipleintelligences.htm
Hargreaves, A., (2003, November 15).Teaching in the Knowledge Society. Professional Voice.
Volume 4, Issue 1. ( p. 13) Retrieved from
http://www.aeuvic.asn.au/professional_files_PV_vol4iss1_hargreaves.pdf
Linksman, R. (1999). How to Learn Anything Quickly.( p. 16), Bucharest: Teora.
Neacsu, I. (2006, November 15). Independent Academic Learning. Methodological Guide. (p. 16).
Retrieved
from
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16664784/Invarea-academic-independent-IoanNEACSU