Learning styles determine how an individual takes in
and processes information. Four different learning
style models exist namely the personality model,
the social interaction model, instructional preference
model and information-processing model (24). The
VARK learning inventory is a type of instructional
preference model which assesses the student’s
learning preference for visual, aural, read/write and
kinesthetic modalities.
In the present study, a multimodal learning style
was observed in 53.84% students of the first year
and 51.28% students of the fourth year. Similar
studies conducted on dental students using the
VARK inventory have observed 48%-59% students
with a preferred multimodal learning style (10, 21,
25-27).
Learning preferences may or may not change over
time and the data is conflicting. In the present study,
no significant change was observed in the number of
students preferring multimodal or unimodal learning
style over four years of dental curriculum. The results
are comparable to a study wherein when the learning
styles of undergraduate medical students were
assessed using VARK and ASSIST (The Approaches
to Study Skills Inventory for Students) questionnaires,
the results showed that 69.9% had a multimodal
learning preference in the first year which changed
to 67.5% in the final year (28). However, results of the present study differ from a longitudinal, VAK
questionnaire-based study on undergraduate medical
students where a unimodal learning style in first-year (62.31%) changed to a multimodal preference
in the final year (52.26%) (16). An assessment of
the learning styles of undergraduate students using
other leaning inventories such as Kolb’s Learning
Style Inventory (8) and Gregorc Learning Style
Delineator (9) have shown that the learning styles
may change over time. In the present study, the
possible reason for an insignificant transition from
first to the fourth year of dental course, could be
partly explained by the fact that there is an adequate
hands-on training imparted in anatomical dissection,
pre-clinical training on manikins and in basic
sciences involving spirometry, sphygmomanometry,
hematology, pharmacology and pathology practical
work. In subsequent years of dental curriculum, there
is also an exposure to clinical work in both medical
and dental subjects apart from dental laboratory work
related to patient care. Teaching styles, type of
curricula, learning preference and other individual
differences may account for variations from the above
studies.
The present study also observed that among the
unimodal group, the kinesthetic learners were more
(28.21%) followed by the aural learners (10.26%) in
first-year with a similar trend in fourth year (21.79%
and 16.67% respectively). Similar findings were
observed in studies conducted by other investigators
on dental students (21, 27, 29). Still others have
observed a predominant read/write followed by the
visual mode (25) and an aural followed by the
kinesthetic mode among unimodal dental students
(30). The predominant kinesthetic unimodal
preference in the present study as compared to other
studies could be due to individual differences such
as age, gender, previous education system in
schools, upbringing, personality, social and cultural
background of the students or attributed to the effect
of differences in teaching methods, preclinical
training and varied curricula apart to name a few.
The significant increase in the mean visual scores
and the mean aural scores observed in the present
study contrasts with a study where no significant
difference was observed when the three learning
styles (VAK) were compared over the years (16). A
similar study on dental students showed no
significant change in the mean VARK scores in the
first and second year (27). In the present study, a
significant increase in the mean aural scores could
partly be due to an increased academic load in fourth-year resulting in greater didactics. Learning through
aural lectures has been the traditional mode of
learning where rote memorization is taught to the
students right from schools. Also, the selection
criterion for admission to the institute is based solely
on a national level theoretical entrance examination
which makes learning through memorizing an indelible
and ingrained part of learning over the years. The
possibility that a considerable number of students
are from various states and hostel inmates remain
high. Growing up, studying and learning together in
the hostels further encourage group discussions.
Moreover, regular assignments, tutorials and
seminars encourage learning through the aural mode.
The active participation, question-answer sessions,
discussions and recall of previous lectures in
subsequent classes could also have contributed to
the increased aural scores. Additionally, clinical
postings, in both medical and dental subjects, involve
patient interaction where chairside group discussions
are common.
The present study also observed a significant
increase in the visual scores of students over the
years. With the ever-expanding syllabi of dentistry,
learning has become exhaustive which could have
encouraged students to adopt to simplified learning
using flowcharts, labelled diagrams and highlighting
or underlining the text.
The process of learning is complex. A vast array of
factors such as previous education taught in schools,
differences in dental teaching methods and training
world over, aptitude, intelligence, curiosity/fascination
or disinterest for a subject, socioeconomic status,
social and cultural background greatly influence
learning. Also, exposure to external variables such
as modeling or observation of tasks, focus or
concentration of the learner, attributes of the model
(attractiveness or method/style of teaching), student-teacher relationship and influence of the peer group
affect learning to a great extent. So, to accommodate these individual learning variations, a multimodal
approach of teaching, employing diverse and
integrated approaches, would be beneficial to a wide
array of phenotypically, emotionally, socioeconomically
and culturally diverse students in a class. Educators
are encouraged to adopt different methods of
teaching involving seminars, active participations,
demonstrations, instructor-driven group discussions,
simulations and web-based learning to inculcate
interest.
The mere preference of a student for learning neither
implies that he/she is lacking in others nor that if
taught in a non-preferred style, hampers the learning
process (31). However, it just leads to a better
understanding and subsequently, more retention of
information. VARK should not be considered the sole
criterion for assessing the learning preference or to
deliver instructions in a particular manner but rather,
solely as one of the criteria involved in the complexity
of learning.
The strength lies in the longitudinal nature of the
present study which evaluates the students’ learning
preferences over time so that information delivery
could be adopted to their needs. The present research
also has few limitations. The study is a single centric
study (single institute of a single city) and needs to
be conducted on a larger sample size and a wider
scale. Secondly, it needs to be conducted in
institutes where different methods of undergraduate
teaching are employed.
Further research could be conducted to know if a
correlation exists between the learning preferences
of students and classroom attendance and/or
academic performance. Secondly, with the advent of
different curricula in dental education, such studies
can be conducted to ascertain if the type of curricula
has any effect on the learning preferences of
students.
Conclusion
A significant increase in the mean visual scores and
the mean aural scores from the first to the fourth
year of dental course was observed. The educators
must be cognizant of the differences that may exist
in the learning preferences of students and adopt
varied and integrated approaches of teaching to make
it more assimilating and retentive.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
