A Study of the Relationship between Students ’ Learning Styles and Instructional Inputs in a Teacher Education Programme of IGNOU

Unlike conventional institutions, which are selective and thus create class barriers, open institutions take education to the doorsteps of in-service teachers who can study at any time in their lives. In the conventional system, teacher education involves formal institution-based programmes which give little emphasis to real school-based practice, while in an open system in-service teachers’ work can be combined with professional development activities. In this respect, open and distance learning (ODL) contributes significantly to the emergence of a work-oriented learning system and is more effectively than the conventional system of teacher education.


Introduction
In the Open University system of India, teacher education programmes for in-service teachers from the primary to university stages are offered through an open distance learning mode.These programmes are growing in importance as they meet the professional needs and technological requirements for a teaching-learning system.
Unlike conventional institutions, which are selective and thus create class barriers, open institutions take education to the doorsteps of in-service teachers who can study at any time in their lives.In the conventional system, teacher education involves formal institution-based programmes which give little emphasis to real school-based practice, while in an open system in-service teachers' work can be combined with professional development activities.In this respect, open and distance learning (ODL) contributes significantly to the emergence of a work-oriented learning system and is more effectively than the conventional system of teacher education.
The curricular inputs in ODL teacher education programmes incorporate various kinds of learning elements, such as the study of distance learning materials; the use of training manuals for organizing various kinds of school-based practical sessions; group activities during workshops held at Study Centres; the use of ICT-based media packages and interactive learning processes; and continuous assessment and feedback.These inputs are adapted to suit different curricular objectives, as well as the learning practices of the target groups of learners.
Learning style refers to the characteristic strengths and preferences of learners for responding to stimuli in the environment and processing informationit is a behavioural pattern developed for any new learning.This approach to learning emphasizes that individuals perceive and process information in very different ways.The learning style theory implies that how much individuals learn has more to do with whether the education experience is geared to their particular styles of learning than whether or not they are 'smart'.
A comprehensive definition of learning styles that has been adopted by leading theorists in the field is given by Keefe (1979), as follows: … the composite of characteristic cognitive, affective and physiological factors that serve as relatively stable indicators of how a learner perceives, interacts with, and responds to the learning environment.
In open distance learning systems, the learners adopt different kinds of learning style in the context of different background factors as well as instructional inputs.It is worthwhile to explore the kinds of learning style of ODL students in teacher education with special reference to the instructional inputs in teacher education programmes.

Grasha-Reichmanns' student learning styles
Anthony Grasha and Sheryl Reichmann (1996) focus more on students' preferences for the learning environment.They identified six different learning styles viz.independent, avoidant, collaborative, dependent, competitive and participant: 1. Independent style: Independent students prefer independent study, self-paced instruction, and working alone on course projects rather than with other students.They like to think for themselves and are confident in their learning abilities; and they prefer to learn content that they feel is important.They are confident learners that don't have the need to confer with others.
2. Dependent style: Dependent learners look to teacher and peers as a source of structure and guidance, and prefer authority figures to tell them what to do.They show little intellectual curiosity and learn only what is required.

Competitive style:
Competitive student learn in order to perform better than their peers.They see the classroom as a win-lose situation in which they must win.They like to be the centre of attention and to receive recognition for their accomplishments in class.

Collaborative style:
Collaborative learners learn through sharing and cooperating with their teacher and peers in small group discussion and group projects.
5. Avoidant style: Avoidant learners are not enthusiastic about learning content and attending classes.They are reluctant to learn and uninterested in participating in class activities with their teachers and peers.They do not enjoy learning and generally try to avoid it at all costs.They are uninterested and overwhelmed by what goes on in class.
They may not even want to attend class.
6. Participant style: Participant learners are eager to learn and enjoy classroom activities and discussion.They take responsibility for their learning, and are eager to do as much class work as possible.They are highly motivated to meet the teacher's expectations, enjoy going to class and take part in as many of the course activities as possible, both required and optional.

Instructional Inputs
The field of education, especially distance education, is becoming heavily dependent on sound instructional strategies for delivering teaching.The first generation of distance education depended solely on the print medium, but today's fifth generation now involves an intelligent flexible learning model.The number of institutions adopting information and communication technology (ICT) has been growing (Reddy & Srivastava, 2003), and ICT is diminishing the 'distance' in distance education.Using information technologies, students can decide on their studies, learning time and place, and resources in a better way (Hussain & Safdar, 2008).Rather than using only one kind of technology, distance education institutions may now use various technologies for delivering instructions.Such an approach involving the use of multiple media has been hailed by Peters (2005) as a big step forward.IGNOU too uses multiple media (including print and other mass media) and modes for delivering its instruction for its various programmes, including its Bachelor of Education (BEd) programme.As Figure 1 shows, the main instructional inputs used in the BEd course by distance learners are:

Review of Related Literature
Gunawardena, Jayatilleke and Lekamge (1996), who studied the learning styles of open university students in Sri Lanka, found that the dominant style in their entire population (BSc and PGDE students) was that of the assimilator, which was followed by both the converger and diverger learning styles.The least frequent style was that of the accommodator.The pattern was similar for both males and females.Also, Diaz and Cartnal (1999) carried out a comparative study of student learning styles in an online distance learning and an on-campus class.Correlational analysis revealed that the on-campus students displayed collaborative tendencies that were positively related to their need to be competitive and to be a 'good class member'.Thus, the on-campus students appeared to favour

Instructional Inputs
Print Based Study Material (SLM)

Radio and Television
Workshops E-learning Teleconferencing Practical sessions in real school situations collaborative styles to the extent that they helped them to obtain class rewards.In contrast, online students were willing and able to embrace collaborative teaching-learning styles if the instructor made it clear that this was expected, and gave them guidance on meeting this expectation.Online students appeared to be driven more by intrinsic motivation and clearly not by the reward structure of the class.Online students were more independent and on-campus students more dependent in their learning styles.Also, Manochehr's (2006) comparison of the learning styles of students involved in online learning and traditional instructor-based learning showed that, while the learning style in traditional learning was irrelevant, in online learning it was very important.Students with assimilator and converger learning styles performed better with online learning, while those with accommodator and diverger learning styles received better results in traditional instructor-based learning.Finally, in the 2006 study by Mupinga, Nora and Yaw on 'the learning styles, expectations and needs of online students' reported that the learning styles with the highest number of students were the introvert, sensor, thinker and judger type (16%); introvert, sensor, feeler and judger type (16%); introvert, sensor, thinker and perceiver type (14%); and extrovert, sensor, feeler and judger (8.4%).The learning styles with the lowest number of students were the extrovert, intuitor, thinker and judger type (0.76%); the introvert, intuitor, feeler and perceiver type (1.53%); the extrovert, intuitor, feeler, and judger type (1.53%); and the extrovert, sensor, thinker and perceiver type (2.29%).No particular learning style was found to be predominant among the online students; and, hence, it was concluded that the design of online learning activities should strive to accommodate students with multiple learning styles.
From the above studies, it can be seen that most of the learning styles are of a co-relational type.Learning styles have been compared with instructional methods, teaching styles, and the achievement of students in general and, in particular, with the content area.Gender has been considered as a significant variable in some studies.All the research projects are related to learning, the classroom, pupil characteristics and the teacher's instructional mode.
To date, no study has been conducted on the learning styles of BEd students in open universities in the Indian subcontinent.The present study is an attempt to explore the learning styles of students on in-service distance education teacher education programmes in different institutions.The present research can make a significant contribution to our existing knowledge of learners, study behaviours and learning styles in the context of studying predominantly through learning materials and media.

The Need For and Significance of This Study
Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) was established on 20 September 1985 by an Act of Parliament.Its School of Education offers a Bachelor of Education programme (BEd) to develop the competencies and understanding needed by practising teachers for effective teaching and learning at the secondary school level.The programme offers opportunities for in-service teachers to choose, organize and share their experiences; and it includes print-based material, practicals in real school situations, workshops and e-learning.
The BEd programme offered by IGNOU is an innovative programme which utilizes self-instructional material and information technology, along with interactive personal contact programmes in which practising teachers can share their experience.It aims to develop the understanding and competencies required by teachers for an effective teaching-learning process at the secondary school stage.It is a judicious mix of theoretical and practical courses, with relevant illustrations and cases, and needs-based activities, comprising the core of each course.The instructional inputs are linked to the learning styles of distance learners.Every BEd trainee learns according to his/her learning style using different instructional inputs.A study on learning styles and instructional inputs will help us to understand the learning styles of BEd trainees and the roles of different inputs in their learning.It may also be used for dealing with issues of curriculum transaction and evaluation of various kinds of learning practices.

The Objectives of the Present Study
The objectives of this research on BEd students in IGNOU were to examine the relationships between students' different learning styles and their level of emphasis on: 1. the study of print-based materials; 2. the practicals in real school situations; 3. workshop practices; and 4. e-learning activities.

Hypotheses
1. Different learning styles and students' emphasis on the use of print-based study material are independent of each other.
2. Different learning styles and students' emphasis on practicals in real school situations are independent of each other.
3. Different learning styles and students' emphasis on workshop-practices in Study Centre are independent of each other.
4. Different learning styles and students' emphasis on e-learning practices are independent of each other.

Tools used
A descriptive survey method was used in this study.Grasha-Reichmann Learning Style Scale (GRLSS) (1996) was adopted to determine the learning style of learners; and a rating scale was used to collect data from the students about their emphasis on the different instructional inputs of the open distance learning mode viz.print-based study material, practicals, workshop activities and e-learning.

Population and sample
The population consisted of all the second-year BEd trainees enrolled in the programme at the Study Centres in Uttar Pradesh.The sample consisted of 150 final-year BEd students.Two IGNOU Study Centres -Ewing Christian College, Allahabad, and RBD College, Bijnorwere selected for data collection purposes.Seventy five trainees from each Study Centre were chosen as sample subjects according to their availability.

Data Collection
Data were collected from the sample respondents available in the programme Study Centres during extended contact programmes by administrating the questionnaire.

Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
The learning styles of trainees and the level of emphasis on the various instructional inputs were determined in category form.A chi-square test of independence was used to test the null-hypotheses of the study.The analysed data are presented in the Table 1.It can also be seen in Table 2 that the calculated chi-square values of independence between dependent and participant learning styles and the emphasis on practicals in real school situations were 4.57 and 6.02 respectively.The obtained χ²-values are greater than the Table value (3.841) at the .05level of significance with df: 1.The observed values are found to be significant.Therefore, trainee's emphasis on practicals in real school situations and their learning styles are found to be associated with each other significantly.The findings in Figure 3.1 reveal that students' level of involvement in the organization of practical activities in real school situation made them more dependent and participatory in learning activities.This figure also indicates that a large majority of learners with a high emphasis on practical activities (60%) are in a more dependent learning style category.However, the majority of learners with a moderate level of emphasis on practical activities (57.5%) were of a moderate level of the dependent learning category.The ODL students being more involved in practical activities in real school situations depends heavily on other support systems which make them high dependent learners.who put a moderate emphasis on practical activities were in the moderate category of participant learning style.School-based practicals take place in a participatory form, where learners who are highly involved in such activities take part in various kinds of planning, organizational, operational and assessment activities more than their moderate level counterparts.As Table 3 shows, the calculated χ²-values of independence between independent, avoidant, collaborative and competitive learning styles and the level of emphasis on workshops were found to be 0.13, 1.99, 0.51 and 1.37 respectively.The obtained χ²-values are less than the   .1 indicates that the majority of trainees placing a high emphasis on workshop practices (57.14%) had a dependent learning style.However, the majority of trainees with a moderate emphasis on workshop practices (59.32%) were of a moderate level dependent learning style.This reveals that distance learners participating in workshop practices were more dependent on various sources of learning than those with less involvement during workshop practices.It can be seen in Figure 4.2 that a large majority of ODL mode trainees giving a high emphasis to workshop practices (72.53%) had a participant learning style; but the majority of trainees (64.41%) who were moderate level workshop practitioners were in the moderate participant learning style category.The above description indicates that a high-level participatory learning style among learners places a high emphasis on workshop practices.the figure for their low emphasis counterparts was 71.05%.In other words, e-learning practices tended towards an independent learning style significantly.

Conclusion
ODL learners depend on other sources of learning to complete their coursework.The students' dependency on counsellors, experts, peers, mentors and other sources helped them to have greater clarity in their study of self-study materials.Therefore, it is common for high level users of study materials to be more dependent on other sources than their moderate level user counterparts.The majority of learners giving emphasis to print-based self-study materials were significantly associated with a participant learning style.The use of study materials prompted students to participate in various kinds of instructional activitiesfor instance, the handbooks, guides and course materials acted as a major source of participatory learning activities among these ODL learners.The ODL students who were more involved in practical activities in real school situations depended heavily on other support systems which made them high dependent learners.Conducting school-based practicals takes place in a participatory form, where highly involved learners take part in various kinds of planning, organizational, operational and assessment activities more than their moderate level counterparts.Distance learners' participation in workshop practices were more dependent on various sources of learning than those less involved in such practices.A high level participatory learning style gave a high emphasis to workshop practices.Finally, e-learning practices tended towards an independent learning style significantly.

Implications
Better opportunities need to be provided to encourage independent self-studies as well as collaborative learning practices.The e-learning support services, along with interactive learning sessions, must be promoted in teacher education programme.

Figure 1
Figure 1 Instructional inputs used in BEd programme

Figure 3 . 1
Figure 3.1 Emphasis on practicals in real school situations

Figure 3 . 2
Figure 3.2 Emphasis on practical in real school situationsFigure 3.2 indicates that a large majority of students (68.57%) who placed a high emphasis on real school-based practicals were in the high participant category of learning style.On the contrary, the majority of students (51.25%)

Figure 4 . 1
Figure 4.1 Emphasis on workshops practices

Figure 4
Figure 4.1 indicates that the majority of trainees placing a high emphasis on workshop practices (57.14%) had a dependent learning style.However, the majority of trainees with a moderate emphasis on workshop practices (59.32%) were of a moderate level dependent learning style.This reveals that distance learners participating in workshop practices were more dependent on various sources of learning than those with less involvement during workshop practices.

Figure 4 . 2
Figure 4.2 Emphasis on workshops practices

Figure 5
Figure 5Emphasis on e-learning practices

Table 1
χ²-test of independence between learning styles and emphasis on the use of print-based study materials Significant at the .05level,**significant at the .01levelTable1showsthat the calculated χ²-value of independence between the independent, avoidant, collaborative and competitive learning styles and the level of emphasis on print-based material were 0.49, 0.83, 0.39 and 1.37 respectively.The obtained χ²-values are less than the Table value (3.841) at the .05level of significance with df: 1.As the observed values are not found to be significant, the emphasis on print-based material and learning styles are not associated with each other in the context of independent, avoidant, collaborative and competitive learning styles.
Note: Figures in parenthesis indicatepercentages; NS = not significant.*Itcanalsobeseen from Table1that the calculated chi-square value of independence between dependent and participant learning styles and the Figure 2.1 Emphasis on print-based materials Figure 2.2 Emphasis on print-based materials Figure 2.2 shows that a large majority of high users (64.04%) of print-based study materials had a high participant learning style; while the majority of moderate users (50.82%) of print-based study materials were of a moderate level participant learning style.This indicates that, for the majority of learners, an emphasis on print-based self-study materials was significantly associated with a participant learning style.The use of study materials prompted students to participate in various kinds of instructional activities.The handbooks, guides and course materials, for example, acted as major sources of participatory learning activities among ODL learners.

Table 2
χ²-test of independence between learning styles and the emphasis on practicals in real school situations

SN Variable Emphasis on practicals in real school situations Total χ²-value High emphasis Moderate emphasis 1 Independent learning style
Note: Figures in brackets indicatepercentages; NS = Not significant.* Significant at .05 level

Table 2
shows that the calculated χ²-value of independence between independent, avoidant, collaborative and competitive learning styles and the level of emphasis on practicals in real school situations is 1.74, 1.49, 0.19, and 0.3 respectively.The obtained χ²-values are less than the Table value (3.841) at the .05level of significance with df: 1.The observed values were not found to be significant.Therefore, the level of emphasis on practicals in real school situations and the learning styles are not associated with each other in the context of independent, avoidant, collaborative and competitive learning styles.

Table 3
χ²-test of independence between learning styles and the emphasis on workshop practices in Study Centres Table value (4.731) at the .05level of significance with df: 2 (for avoidant) and (3.841) at the .05level of significance with df: 1.The observed values are not significant.

Table 4
χ²-test of independence between learning styles and emphasis on e-learning practices

value Moderate emphasis Low emphasis 1 Independent learning style
As can be seen in Table4, the calculated χ²-values of independence between avoidant, collaborative, dependent, competitive and participant learning styles and the response pattern of trainees on user levels of print based materials are 1.14, 1.22, 0.72, 1.48 and 0.60 respectively.The obtained χ²-values are less than the Table value (3.841) at the .05level of significance with df: 1.Thus, the observed values are not significant.So the level of emphasis on e-learning and the learning styles are independent from each other in the context of avoidant, collaborative, dependent, competitive and participant learning styles.

Table 4
also indicates that the calculated value of independence between independent learning style and the emphasis on e-learning is 9.44.The obtained χ²-value is greater than the Table value (6.635) at the .01level of significance with df: 1.Thus the observed value has been found to be significant, and hence the trainees' emphasis on e-learning and an independent learning style are associated with each other significantly.