Ge Pickworth

The psychometric properties of the Learning Style Inventory and the Learning Style Questionnaire : two normative measures of learning styles

David Kolb has provided a detailed, useful and widely accepted theory of experiential learning and learning styles. He developed the Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) to assess four learning abilities and four learning styles. Kolbs work is viewed favourably for establishing the existence of individual differences in learning styles, but the major criticism against his work is focused on his method of measuring learning styles and more specifically on the psychometric properties of the LSI. The LSI is an ipsative instrument and the limitations placed on the statistical analysis of data of ipsative measures makes it inappropriate for reliability and validity evaluation of the instrument. In this study the psychometric properties of two normative measures of learning styles, a normative version of the LSI (referred to as the LSI-Likert) and the Learning Style Questionnaire (LSQ), are investigated. A review of the literature on the LSI is presented and the development of normative versions of the LSI is reviewed. First-year university students registered for either a science or human sciences degree completed the two normative instruments. The internal reliability of the four learning ability scales was determined using alpha coefficient. The internal reliability of the LSI-Likert and LSQ was found to be relatively high. The presence of a response bias for both instruments was suspected. It appeared that the LSI-Likert was more successful than the LSQ in differentiating learning abilities and styles in the sample used. Item factor analysis demonstrated two bipolar factors in line with Kolbs theory for the LSQ. The four-factor solution for the LSI-Likert produced four factors which to some extent represented the four learning abilities.

Teaching professionalism: a South African perspective

Background: Incorporating the teaching and assessment of professionalism in an undergraduate medical curriculum is a challenging process. There are two components that require attention: the cognitive and the experiential. This article outlines how the School of Medicine at the University of Pretoria (UP), South Africa is addressing the teaching and assessment of professionalism. Aims: To embed teaching and assessment of professionalism in a revised six-year undergraduate medical curriculum. Method: This is a descriptive paper of a curriculum process that has stretched over a number of years. The eight principles regarding teaching professionalism provided by Cruess & Cruess () are used to reflect on the current strengths and weaknesses of teaching and assessing professionalism in the UP undergraduate medical curriculum.  The cognitive component of the curriculum has been addressed by introducing a series of stage appropriate, contextualized assignments in each year of the curriculum. Faculty committee structures supported the development and implementation of this component. Students’ responses to an assignment on the influence of role models provided insight into how the experiential component impacts on their professional development. Results: The teaching and assessment of the cognitive component were relatively easy to put in place. The challenge is to maintain this component. The experiential component appears to be much the same as it was prior to revision. Conclusions: Our way forward is to expand the teaching and assessment of professionalism in the experiential component. We want to facilitate faculty to develop a charter on professionalism. The principles and commitments of the charter will underlie a white coat ceremony for undergraduates. These principles will also provide guidelines for role models in their supervision of experiential learning and can inform criteria for assessment. An assessment strategy to assess professionalism in the experiential component needs to be developed and implemented.

Changing assessment practice through in situ faculty development

The aim of this article is to describe the process of an in situ staff development process with the objective to influence change in assessment practice. An in situ training course focusing on writing questions for written examinations, but also including some contextual aspects of assessment practice, was therefore developed and implemented. The anticipated change was measured against Kirkpatricks four levels for evaluating training programmes. As a whole, the reaction from the participants was positive (Kirkpatrick Level 1), and in a number of instances, learning, which includes changes in attitude, knowledge and skills (Kirkpatrick Level 2) and change in behaviour (Kirkpatrick Level 3), was observed. To conclude, the staff development initiative in the form of in situ assessment training facilitated change resulting in an improvement in assessment practice in the School in a relatively short period of time.