Title: Explore the correlation between Honey and … Research Project Produced by Gill Payne‐...

Action Research Project Produced by Gill Payne‐ DTLLS�

Page 1 of 39

Title:

Explore the correlation between Honey and Mumford’s Learning Styles and Neil Fleming’s VARK Models in 2 different groups of learners.


Page 2 of 39

Contents: Title: .............................................................................................................................................. 1

Explore the correlation between Honey and Mumford’s Learning Styles and Neil Fleming’s VARK Models in 2 different groups of learners. ....................................................................................... 1

Contents: ....................................................................................................................................... 2

Action Research Project ‐ DTLLS ..................................................................................................... 4

Section 1 ....................................................................................................................................... 4

Reasons ......................................................................................................................................... 4

Benefits ......................................................................................................................................... 4

Appropriateness of Action Research ............................................................................................ 5

The Plan ........................................................................................................................................ 5

Presentation of the Data .............................................................................................................. 5

Unit 8, Assignment 2 ..................................................................................................................... 6

Unit 8, Assignment 3 ...................................................................................................................... 9

Unit 8, Assignment 4 ........................................................................................................................ 13

Original Hypothesis .......................................................................................................................... 13

Results .............................................................................................................................................. 13

Analysis of Data for Honey and Mumford Questionnaires ............................................................. 14

Female Results (Sample Size = 15) ................................................................................................... 14

Overall comments about the female preferences on the Honey and Mumford Model ................. 15

Overall comments about the male preferences on the Honey and Mumford Model .................... 17

Comparison of Styles by Gender ................................................................................................... 18

Comparison of Activist Style ............................................................................................................ 18

Comparison of Reflector Style ......................................................................................................... 18

Comparison of Theorist Style ........................................................................................................... 19

Comparison of Pragmatist Style ...................................................................................................... 19

Honey and Mumford Learning Styles ............................................................................................ 20

All Females (Sample Size = 15) ......................................................................................................... 20

All Males (Sample Size = 14) ............................................................................................................ 20

All (Sample Size) = 29 ....................................................................................................................... 20

Analysis of Data for VARK Questionnaires ..................................................................................... 21

Unit 8, Assignment 5 ..................................................................................................................... 24

References .................................................................................................................................... 27

Results Sheet ................................................................................................................................ 32

Interpretation ............................................................................................................................... 33


Page 3 of 39

Multimodal Study Strategies ........................................................................................................... 33

V = Visual Learner ......................................................................................................................... 34

A = Auditory/Aural Study Strategies .............................................................................................. 35

R = Read/Write Study Strategies ................................................................................................... 36

K = Kinaesthetic ............................................................................................................................ 37

Appendix 2 .................................................................................................................................. 38

Raw Data ‐ Honey and Mumford ................................................................................................... 38

Appendix 3 .................................................................................................................................. 39

Raw Data ‐ VARK .............................................................................................................................. 39


Page 4 of 39

Action Research Project - DTLLS

Section 1 Identify an area for research, using a problem area for you which you want to explore further. Discuss your reasons for choosing this area of study and how it is going to be of benefit to you in your own teaching practice. Explain how action research is appropriate for this study. Research question/hypothesis/title The research question/hypothesis/title is to explore if there is any correlation between Honey and Mumford’s Learning Styles and Neil Flemings’ VARK model in groups of learners who work in 2 different occupational areas; Engineering and Customer Service. The objectives of the research that I am going to focus on are to see if: 1. There is any sort of correlation between the VARK Learning Styles model developed by Neil

Fleming and the Honey and Mumford Learning Styles model with individual learners. The purpose of this is to see how I might amend my training design to incorporate my findings.

2. To see if the results yielded from the completed questionnaires for the VARK Model are in line with what people intuitively think that they are. Anecdotal evidence indicates that the results that people get are not always aligned.

3. To see if there is any noticeable difference in the way that people learn if they are new or relatively new to a job.

4. To see if there are any marked preferences in style in people who work in different occupational areas.

5. To see if there is any apparent gender differences in style.

Reasons I have chosen this for the following reasons:

• I am an advocate of David Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle on which the Honey and Mumford Learning Styles are based and have used this model for a number of years.

• I have some empirical ‘evidence’ for some of the areas that I wish to research and want to see if my thoughts are borne out by actual evidence, rather than my opinion.

• As a lot of the evidence will come from people who work in the same industry but with differing levels of experience in the job, I want to see how I might modify my training delivery to accommodate any differences, if indeed, I find any.

• I also want to see how the results might influence the methods that I use if I am working within people who are relatively new into their job role.

• I am also aware of my own preferred learning styles and am aware that this has a definite impact on my training style. I want to see if the results of my research indicate that I need to make any significant changes to the way that I deliver training.

Benefits My overall aim is to use the research findings to improve my own training design and delivery style. If there are any significant patterns in my research, I can consider how I might need to build changes into the design for specific client groups, whist maintaining the integrity of the learning cycle. I am also not convinced that questions in the VARK Learning Styles questionnaire give valid results. Again, this is based on a feeling, rather than research. As an example, I am working with a group of learners who are very visual learners, but the VARK model does not necessarily show this. I wish to use Action Research to explore the above areas to see if there is a problem.


Page 5 of 39

Appropriateness of Action Research According to Dr Stephen Waters-Adams1, ‘Action research is a practical approach to professional inquiry in any social situation’. The approach that I intend to take is to obtain completed questionnaires from different client groups and then analyse the results. I shall tell them that they are taking part in this research. I have already had requests from a number of trainers who would like to see the results of this research. I also intend to talk to a sample of people about the results. If the results indicate that the VARK model does not appear to give a coherent result, I shall attempt to redesign it and then try it out on a number of learners to see what the results are. A simplified model of the Action Research Cycle, taken from the above report is as follows:

The Plan 1. Issue the questionnaires to groups of learners within the target groups and explain why I want the

information. I shall also offer to make the report available to them once I have completed it. 2. As I train trainers, I shall also ask people that I am training in that group to issue the

questionnaires to their own groups of learners. This will have a dual purpose, as they can analyse the results of the people that they will be working with. One again, the learners will be advised that they can see the report once I have completed it. These questionnaires will be issued and returned by the end of June 2012.

3. I shall then analyse the results based on the 5 objectives listed. 4. If I need to redesign the VARK Learning Styles Model, I shall have this completed by the end of

July 2012. 5. I will go back to a sample of those that have completed them and get the results back by the end

of August.

Presentation of the Data I intend to represent the data graphically. This will look at the results of each of the analyses: 1. Honey and Mumford results. 2. VARK Learning Style results. 3. Results by gender. 4. Results by learning group. 5. Combination of results.

Planning

Action

Monitoring

Reflection


Page 6 of 39

Unit 8, Assignment 2 Research the existing literature on your area of research and discuss any principles, ideas, issues and solutions, which may have been addressed through this literature. Identify where there are gaps in the existing knowledge and formulate a hypothesis based on this.

This assignment will look at literature relating to the VARK (Visual, Aural, Reading/Writing, Kinaesthetic) and Honey and Mumford Learning Styles Models.

Research into the VARK (Visual, Aural, Reading/Writing, Kinaesthetic) Model The research into this model comes from the developer of the model itself, Neil Fleming2. The principles expressed within the model are that we have preferences for the way that we learn. On his website2, Fleming states that we need to be aware of bias in the results obtained from the model. As examples, he identifies that learning to do certain activities may have in-built bias e.g. learning to swim or knit is not likely to favour a teaching/learning style of reading and writing and lawyers may have a preference for reading and writing. Fleming also emphasises that most people are multimodal and use 2,3 or all 4 modes to help them learn and that none of the modes of learning are superior to others. Fleming does not assert that his model shows how we learn. The website also identifies that he does not wish to see the results of any more research projects. Although his website does identify how many people have completed the questionnaire on-line, the results of the analysis are not published. One interesting question on the website is this:

1. ‘If I use all four modes in my teaching will that improve learning for all my students? Not necessarily! It may confuse some learners who might prefer that Read/write modes were used more often or some learners might want a bigger emphasis on Visual teaching strategies. Learners like variety to prevent boredom but using all four modes in a brief learning session can be counter-productive. Using variety within several sessions is helpful’.

For me, the key statement here is that ‘in a brief learning session, using all 4 modes can be counter-productive’. I would tend to agree with this. As Fleming developed this model, it is important that I take into account the results that he has published, although in themselves, they are also inconclusive as although the website states how m any people have done it on-line, the results are not published.

My Own VARK Questionnaire Results

My own scores were:

• Visual: 4 • Aural: 9 • Read/Write: 10 • Kinaesthetic: 8

I therefore have a multimodal (ARK) learning preference. I agree with these results for me. I know that I am not a great visual learner. Fleming states that the way that we learn does not necessarily influence the way that we teach others. However, in my own case, I believe that the methods that I choose as a trainer are influenced by my own style. This is not an attempt to influence the learners. It is merely that when I design training, the visual side of things is not always uppermost in my mind. It is something that I am trying very hard to rectify. As an example, a major client group of mine have learners who are very visual (as well as kinaesthetic) and I need to ensure that I build visual things in.


Page 7 of 39

I can find no research about the content of the questionnaire, although Fleming does state that it was revised in 2010. Please see Appendix 1 for the VARK Learning Styles questionnaire.

The Honey and Mumford Learning Styles Questionnaire This model looks at our preferences on how we learn. I cannot add the questionnaire as an Appendix to this Honey and Mumford’s copyright prevents me from storing any part of it electronically. Interestingly, I can find it on the internet from many organisations by typing in ‘Honey and Mumford Questionnaire’ in Google. I have no idea if the institutions who have done this have obtained express permission for this, but as I have not, I do not intend to infringe copyright. The questionnaire can also be completed on line from http://www.peterhoney.com/ who will charge £10.80 per copy for the analysis. The Honey and Mumford Learning Styles Model is very much grounded in the Kolb Learning Cycle. In simplistic form, the 4 stages of the Kolb Learning Cycle are4:

There are 4 styles within the Honey and Mumford Model, based on each stage of the Learning Cycle. These styles are: 1. Activist (having an experience), 2. Reflector (reflecting on that experience), 3. Theorist (drawing conclusions), 4. Pragmatist (putting into practice). The maximum score for any of the 4 stages is 20 points. The questionnaire itself is statistically normed. As a rough interpretation, the most popular learning style is that of a Reflector, closely followed by the Pragmatist and Theorist and some way behind, comes the Activist. This information is a summary from the ‘The Manual of Learning Styles’3 produced by Honey and Mumford themselves. The principal areas for my research have been a report by Coffield et al (2004) called ‘Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning - A systematic and critical review’ 3. The report itself appears to be critical of many different learning styles. As an example, they state that Peter Honey is ‘besotted with the learning cycle’ and give 3 reasons for this: 1. They state that Honey does not provide any evidence for the Learning Cycle being essential to

the learning process. I would argue against this, as in ‘The Manual of Learning Styles’3, the results of their initial analyses are shown for a variety of different occupational areas. They also reference their material in Chapter 10.

2. The report also criticises the model as they state that it helps ‘people to identify where their learning weaknesses lie’ so that the learning process can be improved. I suspect that this statement in the report depends on personal opinion on the Learning Cycle. It is cited as a weakness, although anything that can aid the learning process must be useful. (That is MY opinion!).

1. Concrete Experience

2. Reflection3. Abstract Conceptualisation

4. Active Experimentation


Page 8 of 39

The Report also makes comments about the work done by Furnham et al (1999) which looks at links personality and Learning styles. The essence of this is that only 8% of the performance of 200+ telephone sales people could be attributed to learning style. The report looking at the following 4 measures: 1. Internal Consistency, 2. Test-retest reliability, 3. Construct validity, 4. Predictive validity, The only one that applied to the Honey and Mumford model is the test-retest reliability. The results of this report were clearly more in-depth than the research that I have done, although I would be most interested in looking at personality and learning style at a later stage. The Manual of Learning Styles3 clearly identifies the link between the Learning Cycle and its questionnaire. However, it does not claim to be a manual which tells people how to learn or how to teach. Once comment says ‘It is clear that people vary not just in their learning skills but also in their learning styles. Why otherwise might 2 people matched for age, intelligence and need, exposed to the same learning opportunity react so differently?' Honey and Mumford have produced a lot of statistics looking at the norms for a variety of different occupational areas. This does include Engineering Graduates but does not look at gender specifically, nor does it look at Customer Service. My own interest in the Honey and Mumford Model came when I first did a Trainer Qualification. This was in 1987. I started the qualification when I was 2 weeks into a new job. I scored the maximum of 20 as a Reflector and had a high preference for the Theorist and Pragmatist styles with a low preference for the Activist style. As part of my personal development, I redo the questionnaire every couple of years. This, in itself, is not the easiest activity to do now as I must make sure that I am not subconsciously choosing the answer to reaffirm what I believe I am. One example of retesting myself in the mid -1990s was that I scored 0 as a Reflector. For the first time in a while, I actually stopped to reflect on the results. This was symptomatic of my life at the time. I was extremely busy and trying to be all things to all people. I decided to take stock and ensure that I did reflect on my career (and, indeed, my life). Over the years, I have consistently shown a very strong preference for the Theorist and Pragmatist styles. The latest results for me show that I have a very low preference for the Activist role, a low preference for the Reflector (although erring towards the moderate) and strong and moderate preferences for the Theorist and Pragmatist styles. This is quite a departure from previous results.

My Hypothesis Within my project, I would like to test 2 different variables. These are any apparent preferences in learning styles between males and females. It will also look at 2 different occupational areas: Engineering and Customer Service. My hypothesis is that I will find a difference between the ways that men and women like to learn. I think that the results will show that men reflect less than women. In addition, I think that there will be some differences in the learning styles of those in an Engineering role and those that work in Customer Services. I also think that there may be some differences between the way that men and women learn on the VARK Model. I think that more women than men will prefer the Auditory and Reading/Writing style and that more men will prefer the Visual and Kinaesthetic styles.


Page 9 of 39

Unit 8, Assignment 3 1. Select a range of appropriate methodologies for researching this hypothesis and discuss how these fit

the principles of action research and how they will benefit your own research project. How are you going to collect the data you need for your research? Will it be quantitative or qualitative or both? How many people will be involved? Will these people be willing? How can you minimise the risk of bias? Are there any ethical considerations? What timescales will you use? How will you record and monitor?

The Methodology I asked two clients if I could use the Learning Styles Questionnaires with their staff as part of a programme. I advised the clients of what I intended to do with the data and that none of it could be attributed back to them.

The VARK Learning Styles questionnaire is attached as an appendix to Assignment 2 and I have explained why I have not attached the Honey and Mumford one for reasons of copyright.

The first group were all males. Most of them are on a Training Programme to be Construction Engineers. They have already achieved a technical degree.

The second group were a mixture of males and females, although there were more females than males. They work in a Customer Service Environment.

How I collected the raw data I explained the principles of the learning styles questionnaires to the groups that I worked with. This was done in June and July of 2012.

All of the Construction Engineers were present at the same time.

The Customer Service staff took the questionnaires away with them and brought them to the second day of a training course. These were done in 2 groups and the course was the same one.

When I did this, I stressed that there were no right or wrong answers. I also explained the basic features of each of the models. As I used the published questionnaires and explained this to them, I believe that I minimised the risk of bias.

I asked them to guess what their preferred learning styles would be before they completed the questionnaires. Once they had completed them and got their results, I asked them how close their guesses were to the actual results.

I also observed the way that each person tackled the exercises.


Page 10 of 39

Quantitative and Qualitative Data To restate, my hypothesis is as follows:

• Within my project, I would like to test 2 different variables. These are any apparent preferences in learning styles between males and females. It will also look at 2 different occupational areas: Engineering and Customer Service.

• My hypothesis is that I will find a difference between the ways that men and women like to learn. I think that the results will show that men reflect less than women.

• In addition, I think that there will be some differences in the learning styles of those in an Engineering role and those that work in Customer Services.

• I also think that there may be some differences between the way that men and women learn on the VARK Model. I think that more women than men will prefer the Auditory and Reading/Writing style and that more men will prefer the Visual and Kinaesthetic styles.

Quantitative Data In total, there were 19 males and 22 females. Of these, all Construction Engineers were male and 3 of the Customer Service staff were male. Not everyone completed both of the questionnaires. (Quantitative)

I have all of the completed questionnaires, although due to the bulk of them, I have not included them as evidence.

Qualitative Data Initially, I asked each group if they had ever come across learning styles in any other context. There was an overwhelming negative response from both groups.

The qualitative approach for this was planned to come from observing the Construction Engineers as they completed the questionnaires and asking them beforehand what results they are expecting.

With the Customer Service staff, I asked them what they thought about the results after they had completed them.

As the completion of the questionnaires was done as part of a training programme, the discussions were group discussions, rather than individual discussions.

Other Methods for Qualitative Analysis I could have carried out one‐to‐one discussions with each person who agreed to take part and explore why they believed that the results were right or otherwise.

This would perhaps have given me better results.

However, the people were based all over the country and (in particular) the Customer Service staff work in a pressurised environment and I did not think that it was appropriate to ask them (or their employer) to give up more of their time.

Willingness of participants All of those present were told why I wanted the information and I asked for their help.

I did not force anyone to complete the questionnaires, and the choice came from each individual as to whether they completed both questionnaires, or just one of them.


Page 11 of 39

Minimising Bias When I asked for help, I used the published questionnaires developed by Honey and Mumford and Neil Fleming (VARK Model) and explained the basic principles to them.

I also stressed that there were no right or wrong answers. I think that this was an important point to make because some people could jump to conclusions about which they thought might be better responses than others. It could also lead to less confident people copying what their colleagues put.

Having said that, the customer service staff did take the questionnaires away with them. When I discussed the results with them on the second day, they told me that they had completed them by themselves.

Thus, I believe that I minimised the risk of bias in this way.

I do not believe that my own preferred learning style has impacted on the way that I introduced this to the learners.

I do know that I have to work hard on not letting my own preferred styles impact on my training delivery, though. I have a tendency to try to give too much information to groups in my Theorist style, when I am only delivering a session in which the learning outcomes are low order within the cognitive domain of Bloom’s Taxonomy5. I also know that I am not a visual learner and have to work hard to build visual things into my sessions).

The only bias that I might have is in introducing the questionnaires to both groups. I did explain the Kolb Learning Cycle6(in outline) and asked them what they thought of it as a model. As I have mentioned in many of my assignments, I am a believer of this learning cycle, although I do not try to introduce it in an evangelical manner.

Recording the results I have analysed the data and some of it is presented in graphical format. I have also summarised the data in its raw form. This will be included in Assignment 4 for this unit.

Monitoring the results This will be the subject of different application. How I monitor the results will depend on my analysis. However, as I cannot guarantee that I will get the same groups back together, I shall implement any significant results on future longer programmes.

As a trainer, I do not have the luxury of working with the same groups of people unless they are working on a longer programme.

Ethical Considerations As I have described what I have done in the above text, I do not believe that there were any ethical considerations that I needed to take into account.

There were no political considerations as there is no right or wrong way to learn (although, we can improve on how we learn). Completion of the questionnaires would have no impact on the individuals.

One of the companies has asked to see the results of the analysis and I have agreed to do this.

I have fed back the results to the other company for their consideration, as it appears that the learning style may have implications on the accuracy of their work. (This is in Assignment 4).


Page 12 of 39

Individuals chose whether to put their names on the questionnaires. As I collected them from specific groups, I knew if they were Construction Engineers or Customer Service staff.

Justification of chosen strategy I chose the strategy that I did to minimise inconvenience to the learners and their employer.

The groups that I chose were selected as one group had all male learners and the other was predominantly female.

In hindsight, now that I have carried out the analysis (in Assignment 4), I believe that for future continued research into learning styles, I shall get candidates for long programmes to complete the questionnaires at the beginning and then build in structured approaches to review how they are learning when I carry out one‐to‐one reviews. This will also build a review of the learning styles questionnaire results into it.

In addition, I shall get people at different stages of their learning to complete the questionnaires again to see if there are any differences in style as they become more familiar with the job role.


Page 13 of 39

Unit 8, Assignment 4 Collect the information you need using the methodologies you have chosen.

Present and analyse the data you have collected. Use Charts and Diagrams where possible.

Original Hypothesis • Within my project, I would like to test 2 different variables. These are any apparent preferences

in learning styles between males and females. It will also look at 2 different occupational areas: Engineering and Customer Service.




Results The following pages show the data that has been plotted graphically.

Appendix 2 shows the raw data for the Honey and Mumford questionnaires and Appendix 3 shows the raw data for the VARK Model.

Anecdotally, when I observed the Construction Engineers completing their questionnaires, I noted that those who had a strong or very strong preference for the Activist style on the Honey and Mumford Model completed both of the questionnaires very quickly and did not bother to read the interpretation.

Those that scored strongly or very strongly as Theorists were the ones that queried the questions or disagreed with their wording. They also tended to argue with the results.

Quite a number of people commented that they were surprised at the scores that they got on the VARK questionnaire. This was from both the Construction Engineers and the Customer Service staff. Many observations made were that the scores for the Visual and Kinaesthetic preferences were lower than they expected them to be.


Page 14 of 39

Analysis of Data for Honey and Mumford Questionnaires

Female Results (Sample Size = 15)

Analysis of Results Activist Preferences

This appears to show that this group of people tend towards a medium to very strong preference for the Activist Style with 10 of the 15 females falling into this category. This is not what I expected at all.

Reflector Preferences

This appears to show a tendency towards the medium to strong preference with 9 of the 15 falling into this category. I expected the results to be more towards the strong to very strong preferences.

Theorist Preferences

This appears to show a tendency towards the medium to low preference with 12 of the 15 falling into this category. I think that this is probably in line with what I expected, with only 3 females showing a strong or very strong preference.

Pragmatist Preferences

This appears to show a fairly balanced preference across the styles with 10 of the 15 falling into the strong, medium or low categories. I think that this is more balanced than I expected.

0

2

4

6

Female Activist

Female Activist 0

2

4

6

Female Reflector

FemaleReflector

02468

Female Theorist

FemaleTheorist 0

2

4

6

Female Pragmatist

FemalePragmatist


Page 15 of 39

Overall comments about the female preferences on the Honey and Mumford Model Each of the 4 styles has at least one person who has each of the categories of preference from very low to very strong.

As a global comment, this would appear to show that in this sample, the females will jump in and have a go (Activist) and when they get it wrong, spend ages trying to figure out why (Reflector). However, once they have figured it out, they will put what they have learned into practice (Pragmatist). They won’t tend to analyse the reasons for this in too fine a detail (Theorist).

As I have worked with the company with the Customer Service staff for a number of years, this observation could be borne out. I am told that it takes about a year to fully learn the job. In the early stages, new staff have to carry out certain simple tasks without knowing the reasons why they are doing them, so they are thrown in at the deep end (Activist).

It is a high pressured environment that they work in and if they make a mistake, all processes need to be looked at. These processes will include what they have instigated in the Customer Service Role and what other teams within the organisation have done. They then need to reflect on these. (Reflector). Mistakes have to be rectified very quickly to meet customer requirements and if this mistake is attributable to the Customer Service member of staff, then they may be subject to disciplinary action. They need to learn from these mistakes and put things right very quickly. (Pragmatist). What they are not very good at is finding the root causes to problems, drawing conclusions and then devising a system to tackle problems. (Theorists).

When the company takes on new staff, if they cannot cope with the way that they have to learn the job, they tend to leave very quickly.

As an observation, does the way that someone learns have an impact on their choice of career and their ability to adapt?


Page 16 of 39

Male Results (Sample Size = 14)

Analysis of Results Activist Preferences

This appears to show that this group of people tend towards a medium to low preference for the Activist Style with 9 of the 14 males falling into this category. This is not what I expected at all.

Reflector Preferences

This appears to show a tendency towards the strong to very strong preference with 9 of the 14 falling into this category. Again, this is not what I expected at all.

Theorist Preferences

This appears to show a tendency towards the medium to very strong preference with 13 of the 14 falling into this category. This is definitely in line with what I expected.

Pragmatist Preferences

This appears to show a fairly strong preference towards the strong to very strong with 10 of the males falling into the medium upwards categories. I think that this is in line with what I expected.

0123456

Male Activist

Male Activist01234567

Male Reflector

Male Reflector

01234567

Male Theorist

Male Theorist012345

Male Pragmatist

MalePragmatist


Page 17 of 39

Overall comments about the male preferences on the Honey and Mumford Model Although it is not a marked result, there are some gaps in preferences for 3 of the styles amongst this group. (No strong preferences in the Activist style, no low preferences for the Theorist style and no very low preferences for the Pragmatist style).

In this sample, there does appear to be a tendency towards a preference for the Reflector, Theorist and Pragmatist styes.

At the time of the completion of the questionnaires (July 2012), the group were almost at the end of Year 1 of their programme. They all had some sort of technical degree prior to starting on the programme and for most of them, it was their first job.

At this stage of their programme, they have had only limited exposure to on‐job training as most of the programme has been theoretical in nature.

The reason why I have mentioned this, is because over the years that I been using Honey and Mumford (23 years!), I have noticed that people who are new into jobs have a higher preference for the Reflector style (along with an aversion to the Activist style).

With this particular group, analytical skills are very important. Thus, the preference for the Theorist role did not surprise me at all.

Within this organisation, there are a group of staff (some 120 men) who have all been apprentices in the same company. Anecdotally, although they were not included within this sample, they have shown a very interesting learning styles profile. As I have been working with this company since 1995, I have encountered many of the 120 staff as they have gone through their apprenticeships. (My role has been to work with their trainers). Although I do not have the evidence, almost all of the staff, when apprentices, have shown a very strong preference for the Activist style and a very low preference for the Reflector and Theorist style.

These preferences have tended to stay with people as they become experienced. However, I have noted that those who go on to supervise the work team or develop permits to ensure safety from the system, show a different learning style (with an aversion for the Activist style).

When I have observed the trainers with the apprentices, it is clear to see that the apprentices want to do the practical activities and show a marked disinterest in the theory of their job (which is an integral part of the training). Trying to get them to reflect on what they have done can also be a chore, so the trainers need to work hard to use a mixture of techniques to attempt to engage them.


Page 18 of 39

Comparison of Styles by Gender

Comparison of Activist Style

When compared side by side, this shows that this group of females has a stronger preference for the activist style than the group of males. This was not what I expected at all and is also at variance with results that I have observed over the years.

This appears to be the most popular female learning style according to this group.

My comments above indicate that I do not believe the results that have been obtained. This is not the case, although the results do surprise me. I need to gather more data.

Comparison of Reflector Style

I expected this to show a more marked preference for this style by females than males. It does appear to show a higher preference for this style of learning in females, although in my sample, more males had this as a very strong style.

The results that I have observed over the years tend to show that those who are relatively new into a job role will have a far greater tendency to this learning style than those who are experienced in the job. This may have had an impact on the groups of learners, as the Construction Engineers were a year into a 3 year programme and had limited on‐job experience.

0

2

4

6

Female Activist

Female Activist 0

2

4

6

Male Activist

Male Activist

0

2

4

6

Female Reflector

FemaleReflector 0

2468

Male Reflector

Male Reflector


Page 19 of 39

Comparison of Theorist Style

I expected males to have a greater preference for this style and although the preference for this style amongst the females is higher than I expected, it does appear to show that in this sample, the males’ preferences are much stronger than the females.

Indeed, this is the most popular style amongst this group of males.

As my comments on page 5 indicate, this is not always the case amongst males, though. Comparison of Pragmatist Style

I expected this to be more popular with males than females. The results do tend to show that in these groups, it is slightly more popular with males than females.

02468

Female Theorist

FemaleTheorist 0

2468

Male Theorist

Male Theorist

0

2

4

6

Female Pragmatist

FemalePragmatist 0

12345

Male Pragmatist

MalePragmatist


Page 20 of 39

Honey and Mumford Learning Styles

All Females (Sample Size = 15)

All Males (Sample Size = 14)

All (Sample Size) = 29

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Very Stong Strong Medium Low Very Low

All Females Activist

All Females Reflector

All Females Theorist

All Females Pragmatist

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


All Males Activist

All Males Reflector

All Males Theorist

All Males Pragmatist

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


All Activist

All Reflector

All Theorist

All Pragmatist

AnaNote onstyle. Th

All Fe

All Ma

All (Sa

Action

alysis o the analysishe x‐axis sho

emales - V

ales (Sam

ample Si

Researc

of Dats. The y‐axisows the diffe

VARK (Sa

mple Size

ze = 41)

ch Projec

a for Vof the graphrent styles.

ample Siz

e = 19)

ct Produc

VARK Qhs show the

ze = 22)

ced by Gi

Questinumbers of

ll Payne‐

ionnaipositive resp

‐ DTLLS�

ires ponses for ea

Page 21 of 39

ach

Analy

I have reremoved

Anecdotvisual an

I would single an

Analy

Althougthe audiresponswhereas

The resukinaesth

Anecdotprefer vCertainlya marke

Again, a

Analy

This tenappears

Action

ysis of Re

eproduced thd, this appea

tally, many ond kinaesthe

also like to mnswer to eac

ysis of Re

h there are aitory and reae for any of ts the maximu

ults for this ahetic.

tally, my obsisual and kiny, the group ed preference

s with the fe

ysis of Re

ds to show f to be the le

Researc

esults - Fe

he graph aboars to show a

of the group etic styles we

make the comch question.

esults - M

a few spikes ad/write stylthe various lums for fema

also tend to s

servations ofnaesthetic leathat I referre for the kina

emales, some

esults - A

fairly balanceast popular.

ch Projec

emales

ove. If Persoa fairly balan

did indicate ere as low as

mment that w

Males

in these resues. Note thearning styleales tends to

show a highe

f working witarning and med to in my aaesthetic sty

e of the male

ll

ed responses

ct Produc

on 4 (purple nced approac

that they we they were.

when the qu

ults, it does tat the scale es (e.g. the mo be higher (

er preferenc

th men over more of an avanalysis of thyle and an av

es expressed

s across the s

ced by Gi

bar) and Perch across the

ere surprised

uestionnaires

tend to showon the y‐axismaximum scoeven when d

e for the rea

the years, isversion to rehe Honey anversion to the

d surprise at

styles, althou

ll Payne‐

son 6 (orange 4 learning s

d that the pr

s were comp

w slightly mos shows a lowore for any odiscounting P

d/write style

s that they haeading and wd Mumford e other style

the results.

ugh the kina

‐ DTLLS�

ge/brown bastyles.

references fo

pleted, they a

ore preferencwer general of the styles Persons 4 an

e than the

ave a tendenwriting and auLearning Styes.

aesthetic styl

Page 22 of 39

ar) are

or the

all put a

ces for

is 5, nd 6).

ncy to uditory. yles have

e


Page 23 of 39

Prior to completing the questionnaires, many of the people thought that their preferred style in the VARK Model would be kinaesthetic. This does not tend to be borne out from the results that I have here.

In addition, the visual learning style has got 2 zero responses which surprised me.

Most of the people have a multi‐modal preference on the VARK model.


Page 24 of 39

Unit 8, Assignment 5

Write up your results and conclusions. What have you learnt from this? Are there areas you can improve? What has not been answered? Refer to your hypothesis and the existing literature. Put forward recommendations for further research. Think about what knowledge you have gained from carrying out an action research project. Are there skills you need to improve? How can you continue to hone your Action Research skills?

Results and Conclusions Please refer to Assignment 4 for an analysis of each section of the research.

My overall conclusions are inconclusive. I think that the work that I have done has raised more questions than given me answers.

Some of the conclusions that I have drawn in Assignment 4 are as follows:

1. The results that I have obtained are not in line with what I expected. I have provided various statements in Assignment 4 about my previous experience of working with the Honey and Mumford Learning Styles questionnaire over the years and have added examples to illustrate some differences between my research results and those that I have observed over the years.

2. However, the results do show that all of the different learning styles are represented with no single style standing out.

3. I was most surprised with the results from the female group in that they appeared to favour the Activist Learning Style which is not what I expected. I did provide a possible explanation of this in Assignment 4.

4. I was also surprised by the apparent preferences for the Reflector style in the group of males, Once again, I provided a possible explanation for this.

5. The anecdotal evidence from the learners involved, indicated that they themselves were surprised at some of the results, and felt that the visual and kinaesthetic styles would be higher than they were.

6. I have concluded that the VARK questionnaire itself could perhaps benefit from being rewritten. Although I do agree with my own personal results (in Assignment 2 for this unit), I did receive some comments from the learners that they did not always relate to the questions asked. For example, one of the questions asks what the individual do if ‘A group wants to learn about the parks or wildlife reserves in your area’. Certainly, this is a question that I cannot relate to in its current form. (My personal bias as a Theorist might also come in here).

7. My main conclusions appear to be that the results that I got from the research are at odds with some of the observations that I have got over the years.

8. I have also concluded that both questionnaires can only be used as an indication of learning preferences and that I will be wise to continue to build in something for all styles in my training session design.


Page 25 of 39

What have I learned? The main points that I have learned are in the Conclusions above.

For me, I think that the main point is that I have had a gut feeling about what learning styles will be most popular with different groups of people over the years. The results that I have obtained from my small sample do not bear out what my gut feeling was.

I think that I must therefore not give in to my gut feeling without having the evidence to back it up.

Having said that, some of the comments made by individuals seem to confirm my gut feeling.

What has not been answered? Original Hypothesis

• Within my project, I would like to test 2 different variables. These are any apparent preferences in learning styles between males and females. It will also look at 2 different occupational areas: Engineering and Customer Service.




I have covered the 4 areas that I wanted to.

In Assignment 2, I stated that the principal areas for my research have been a report by Coffield et al (2004) called ‘Learning styles and pedagogy in post‐16 learning ‐ A systematic and critical review’ 1. I also referred to the Manual of Learning Styles written by Peter Honey2 and the VARK Model as defined by Neil Fleming3.

The results that I have obtained are not conclusive although no‐one appears to have published research into any differences in the way that men learn and women learn.

Recommendations for further research In line with what has not been answered, my main recommendations for further research would be:

1. Where possible, get people to complete Learning Styles Questionnaires at the beginning of a development programme and again, when they have settled in to it. I suspect that there might be some differences in style for the Honey and Mumford questionnaire and not so many for the VARK Model.

2. Research should be carried out with larger numbers of participants, so that any clear patterns can be seen.

3. The wording of the VARK questionnaire should be altered and piloted with some willing volunteers. I would suggest that these might be people who are being trained as trainers, so may have more of an interest in this.

4. It would also be useful if those who are being trained as trainers could ask their own learners to complete the questionnaires.


Page 26 of 39

Think about what knowledge you have gained from carrying out an action research project What I have learned has been described above.

The main knowledge that I gained (in addition to what I have covered in the section called ‘What have I learned?) has been that the whole process took a lot longer than I expected it to.

I also believe that I thought that I would get some conclusive results, but the project has left me with more questions than answers. The raw data is in a tall pile in the office and I also thought that I had collected more data than I actually did, so in reality, the sample sizes were quite small.

The results that I obtained do show that people tend to have a variety of different ways in which they learn, which is confirmed by the existing research into both models.

The original hypothesis was probably too ambitious.

I also learned how to put data into Excel and produce graphs from them. These are embedded into Assignment 4 for this unit. I am very poor at using Excel, so this was an unintended consequence of doing the research which I did not expect.

Are there skills you need to improve? I think that I carried out the research in a satisfactory manner, although my sample size was not big enough.

How can I continue to hone my Action Research skills? When I am training people in lots of different areas, (Presentation Skills, Project Management and Contract Management are examples of this), part of the learning is that ‘To fail to plan is to plan to fail’.

Although I planned this research, I did not expect it to take as long to interpret the data and draw conclusions. In addition, the individuals from the companies that gave me permission to work with their staff were fully aware of what I was doing and why I wanted to do it. However, although I explained to the participants concerned why I wanted them to participate, they did not have the ‘What’s in it for me’ motivation. (This is described in Assignment 3 for this unit).

To a certain extent, the people that took part were hands off, as they were not my own learners. I think that in future any research that I do will need to be with people that I am working with over a period of time i.e. my own learners. I can then hold discussions with them over a period of time and also review their progress.

The follow up cannot take place with the original participants as I shall not see them again.

I like to think that I am articulate and can put forward a logical argument, but I found it very difficult to put into words what I wanted to say in Assignment 4.


Page 27 of 39

References

1. Action Research in Education Paper, Dr Stephen Waters-Adams Faculty of Education, University of Plymouth, 2006

2. http://www.vark-learn.com/english/index.asp [Accessed 30 November 2012] 3. Coffield, Moseley, Hal, Ecclestone, 2004 ‘Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning - A

systematic and critical review’, Learning and Skills Research Centre 4. Honey P.and Mumford A. 1992 ‘The Manual of Learning Styles’, Peter Honey

Bibliography 5. http://www.businessballs.com/bloomstaxonomyoflearningdomains.htm [accessed 18 January

2013] 6. http://www.businessballs.com/freepdfmaterials/kolblearningstylesdiagram.pdf [accessed 18

January 2013]


Page 28 of 39

Appendix 1

VARK Learning Styles Questionnaire Choose the answer(s) which best explain your preference and tick the box next to it. Tick more than one if a single answer does not match your perception. Leave any question that does not apply blank.

1. You have a problem with your heart. You would prefer that the doctor:

a. Used a plastic model to show what was wrong. b. Showed you a diagram of what was wrong. c. Described what was wrong. d. Gave you something to read to explain what was wrong.

2. You are about to purchase a digital camera or mobile phone. Other than price, what would most influence your decision?

a. The salesperson telling me about its features. b. It is a modern design and looks good. c. Trying or testing it. d. Reading the details about its features.

3. Do you prefer a trainer or teacher who uses: a. Diagrams, charts or graphs. b. Demonstrations, models or practical sessions. c. Question and answer, talk, group discussion, or guest speakers. d. Handouts, books, or readings.

4. You want to learn a new program, skill or game on a computer. You would:

a. Use the controls or keyboard. b. Talk with people who know about the program. c. Read the written instructions that came with the program. d. Follow the diagrams in the book that came with it.

5. A group wants to learn about the parks or wildlife reserves in your area. You would: a. Take them to a park or wildlife reserve and walk with them. b. Give them a book or leaflets about the parks or wildlife reserves. c. Show them internet pictures, photographs or picture books. d. Talk about, or arrange a talk about parks or wildlife reserves.

6. You are helping someone who wants to go to the airport, town centre or station. You would:

a. Go with her. b. Tell her the directions. c. Write down the directions. d. Draw, or give her a map.

7. You are going to cook something as a special treat for your family. You would:

a. Ask friends for suggestions. b. Cook something you know without the need for instructions.


Page 29 of 39

c. Look through the cookbook for ideas from the pictures. d. Use a cookbook where you know there is a good recipe.

8. You are using a book, CD or website to learn how to take photos with your new digital camera. You would like to have:

a. Examples of good and poor photos and how to improve them. b. A chance to ask questions about the camera and its features. c. Diagrams showing the camera and what each part does. d. Written instructions with lists and bullet points about what to do.

9. I like websites that have: a. Audio channels to hear music, radio programs or interviews.

b. Things I can click on, shift or try.

c. Interesting written descriptions, lists and explanations.

d. Interesting design and visual features.

10. You have finished a competition or test and would like some feedback. You would like to have feedback:

a. Using examples from what you have done. ̀

b. Using a written description of your results.

c. From somebody who talks it through with you.

d. Using graphs showing what you had achieved.

11. You are not sure whether a word should be spelled `dependent' or `dependant'. You would: a. See the words in your mind and choose by the way they look.

b. Write both words on paper and choose one.

c. Find it in a dictionary.

d. Think about how each word sounds and choose one.

12. You are going to choose food at a restaurant or cafe. You would: a. Choose something that you have had there before.

b. Listen to the waiter or ask friends to recommend choices.

c. Choose from the descriptions in the menu.

d. Look at what others are eating or look at pictures of each dish.

13. Remember a time when you learned how to do something new. Try to avoid choosing a physical skill, e.g. riding a bike. You learned best by:

a. Listening to somebody explaining it and asking questions.

b. Watching a demonstration.

c. Written instructions – e.g. a manual or textbook.

d. Diagrams and charts ‐ visual clues.

14. You are planning a holiday for a group. You want some feedback from them about the plan. You would:

a. Describe some of the highlights.

b. Phone, text or email them.

c. Use a map or website to show them the places.


Page 30 of 39

d. Give them a copy of the printed itinerary.


Page 31 of 39

15. Other than price, what would most influence your decision to buy a new non‐fiction book?

a. A friend talks about it and recommends it.

b. It has real‐life stories, experiences and examples.

c. Quickly reading parts of it.

d. The way it looks is appealing.

16. You have to make an important speech at a conference or special occasion. You would:

a. Write a few key words and practice your speech over and over.

b. Write out your speech and learn from reading it over several times.

c. Make diagrams or get graphs to help explain things.

d. Gather examples and stories to make the talk real and practical.


Page 32 of 39

Results Sheet

Circle the response(s) to each question that ticked on the questionnaire.

For example, if you have ticked responses (c) for Question 1, do this:

Question Number

V A R K

1. b d a

Complete the table below with your answers:

Question Number

V A R K

1 b c d a

2 b a d c

3 a c d b

4 d b c a

5 c d b a

6 c b d a

7 c a d b

8 c b d a

9 d a c b

10 d c b a

11 a d b c

12 d b c a

13 d a c b

14 c a d b

15 d a c b

16 c a b d

Totals

Then add up how many you have circled in each column and put your answers in the boxes provided.

c


Page 33 of 39

Interpretation This Learning Styles Model is based on 4 different ways in which individuals learn. V = Visual A = Auditory/Aural R = Reading/Writing K = Kinaesthetic (doing) Many of us learn by using a combination of different styles. However, some people have a marked preference for only 1 or 2 styles. This may mean that if a different style is being used by the trainer, the individual switches off. For example, if you are a visual/kinaesthetic learner, you want to see things visually and then do something. If the trainer is talking to you only, this may switch you off as you do not learn by listening. The following is an interpretation of the styles. This model has been produced by Neil Fleming. More information can be obtained from http://www.vark-learn.com/english/index.asp The following is reproduced from his model.

Multimodal Study Strategies If you have multiple preferences you are in the majority as approximately 60% of any population fits that category. Multiple preferences are interesting varied. For example you may have two strong preferences V and A or R and K, or you may have three strong preferences such as VAR or ARK. Some people have no particular strong preferences and their scores are almost even for all four modes. For example one person had scores of V=6, A=6, R=6, and K=6. She said that she adapted to the mode being used or requested. If the trainer or supervisor preferred a written mode she switched into that mode for her responses and for her learning. Multiple preferences give you choices of two or three or four modes to use for your interaction with others. Positive reactions mean that those with multimodal preferences choose to match or align their mode to the significant others around them. But, some people have admitted that if they want to be annoying they may stay in a mode different from the person with whom they are working. For example they may ask for written evidence in an argument, knowing that the other person much prefers to refer only to oral information. If you have two almost equal preferences please read the study strategies that apply to your two choices. If you have three preferences read the three lists that apply and similarly for those with four. You will need to read two or three or four lists of strategies. One interesting piece of information that people with multimodal preferences have told us is that it is necessary for them to use more than one strategy for learning and communicating. They feel insecure with only one. Alternatively those with a single preference often "get it" by using the set of strategies that align with their single preference. We are noticing some differences among those who are multimodal especially those who have chosen fewer than 25 options and those who have chosen more than 30. If you have chosen fewer than 25 of the options in the questionnaire you may prefer to see your highest score as your main preference - almost like a single preference. To read more about Multimodality you can download an article written by Neil Fleming from http://www.vark-learn.com/english/index.asp

V =

You waYou are

yo

Action

Visual

ant the wholoften swayeu know wher

Researc

l Learn

le picture so ed by the loore you are in

ch Projec

ner

you are probk of an objecn your enviro

ct Produc

bably holisticct. You are inonment. You

ced by Gi

c rather thannterested in care probabl

ll Payne‐

n reductioniscolour and laly going to dr

‐ DTLLS�

st in your appayout and deraw somethi

Page 34 of 39

proach. esign and ing.


Page 35 of 39

A = Auditory/Aural Study Strategies

If you have a strong preference for learning by Aural methods (A = hearing) you should use some or all of the following:

INTAKE

To take in the information:

• Attend training sessions. • Attend discussions and tutorials. • Discuss topics with others. • Discuss topics with your teachers. • Explain new ideas to other people. • Use a tape recorder. • Remember the interesting examples, stories, jokes etc. • Describe the overheads, pictures and other visuals to somebody who was not there. • Leave spaces in your notes for later recall and 'filling'.

SWOT - Study without tears

To make a learnable package:

Convert your "notes" into a learnable package by reducing them (3:1)

• Your notes may be poor because you prefer to listen. You will need to expand your notes by talking with others and collecting notes from the textbook.

• Put your summarised notes onto tapes and listen to them. • Ask others to 'hear' your understanding of a topic. • Read your summarised notes aloud. • Explain your notes to another 'aural' person.

OUTPUT

To perform well in any test, assignment or examination:

• Imagine talking with the examiner. • Listen to your voices and write them down. • Spend time in quiet places recalling the ideas. • Practice writing answers to old exam questions. • Speak your answers aloud or inside your head.

You prefer to have this page explained to you. The written words are not as valuable as those you hear. You will probably go and tell somebody about this.


Page 36 of 39

R = Read/Write Study Strategies

If you have a strong preference for learning by Reading and Writing (R & W) learning you should use some or all of the following:

INTAKE

To take in the information:

• Lists. • Headings. • Dictionaries. • Glossaries. • Definitions. • Handouts. • Textbooks. • Readings – library. • Notes (often word for word). • Trainers who use words well and have lots of information in sentences and notes. • Essays. • Manuals (computing and laboratory).

SWOT - Study without tears

To make a learnable package:

Convert your "notes" into a learnable package by reducing them (3:1)

• Write out the words again and again. • Read your notes (silently) again and again. • Rewrite the ideas and principles into other words. • Organise any diagrams, graphs ... into statements, e.g. "The trend is..." • Turn reactions, actions, diagrams, charts and flows into words. • Imagine your lists arranged in multiple choice questions and distinguish each from each.

OUTPUT

To perform well in any test, assignment or examination:

• Write exam answers. • Practice with multiple choice questions. • Write paragraphs, beginnings and endings. • Write your lists (a,b,c,d,1,2,3,4). • Arrange your words into hierarchies and points.

You like this page because the emphasis is on words and lists. You believe the meanings are within the words, so any talk is OK but this handout is better.

You are heading for the library.


Page 37 of 39

K = Kinaesthetic

Intake

• Use all your senses ‐ sight, touch, taste, smell, hearing ... • Field trips. • Examples of principles. • Trainers who give real‐life examples. • Applications. • Hands‐on approaches. • Trial and error. • Exhibits, samples, photographs... • Solutions to problems, previous exam.

SWOT ‐ Study without tears Convert your notes into a learnable package by reducing/summarising them.

• Your notes may be poor because the topics were not 'concrete' or 'relevant'. • You will remember the "real" things that happened. • Put plenty of examples into your summary. Use case studies and applications to help with

principles and abstract concepts. • Talk about your notes with another "K" person. • Use pictures and photographs that illustrate an idea. • Go back to the manual or procedure.

• Recall the experiments or what you did. • Write practice answers, paragraphs... • Role play.

Output

• Write practice answers, paragraphs. • Practice. • Role play.

You want to experience the exam so that you can understand it. The ideas on this page are only valuable if they sound practical, real, and relevant to you.

You need to do things to understand.


Page 38 of 39

Appendix 2

Raw Data - Honey and Mumford Total Respondents = 31

Total Male = 16 of which 1 was in a Customer Service role.

Total Female = 15 ‐ all in Customer Service roles.

Group Activist Reflector Theorist Pragmatist Preference

Females 4 1 2 1 Very Strong

Males 3 3 6 2

All 7 4 8 3

Females 1 5 1 5 Strong

Males 0 6 3 4

All 1 11 4 9

Females 5 4 6 3 Moderate

Males 5 2 4 4

All 10 6 10 7

Females 3 4 3 4 Low

Males 5 1 0 4

All 8 5 3 8

Females 2 1 3 2 Very Low

Males 1 2 1 0

All 3 3 4 2


Page 39 of 39

Appendix 3

Raw Data - VARK Please see Appendix 1 in Assignment 2 for this unit, for the questionnaire that was used.

The maximum score for each of the 4 style areas was 16.

There were 16 questions and 4 answers to choose from for each question. Respondents could choose none of the responses or 1, 2, 3 or 4 of them.

In the following table, the numbers along the top highlighted in blue, are representations of the question number in the VARK questionnaire.

Males Total respondents = 19

Style 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Visual 2 4 1 2 6 1 3

Auditory 0 2 4 2 3 2 2 3 1

Reading/ Writing

0 2 4 4 2 5 1

Kinaesthetic 0 2 4 2 3 8 1 2 1

Females Total respondents = 22

Style 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Visual 1 1 3 7 4 2 1 3

Auditory 1 2 3 3 5 2 1 1 1

Reading/ Writing

2 3 2 1 5 1 2 2 1 1 1 1

Kinaesthetic 1 1 3 5 7 3 1 2

Date post:	02-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vuongkhanh
View:	215 times
Download:	2 times

Title: Explore the correlation between Honey and … Research Project Produced by Gill Payne‐...

Documents