Table of Contents
Abstract ii
Introduction 1
-Statement of the Problem 1
-Review of Related Literature 3-6
-Statement of the Hypothesis 6
Method 7
-Participants (N) 7
-Instrument(s) 7
-Experimental Design 7
-Procedure 8
Results 9
Discussion 11
Implications 11
References 13-14
Appendix (ces)
-Appendix A- Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model 17
-Appendix B- Consent Form 18
-Appendix C- Student Survey: Global or Analytical Learner 19
-Appendix D- Pre-test 22
-Appendix E- Posttest 23

Abstract
What’s your learning style? The purpose of this action research paper was to investigate the effect of identifying students preferred learning style, according to Dunn and Dunn LSI, on increase content knowledge and on-task behavior. Using a Preexperimental design: One group pre-test-posttest design, it was found that after 4 months the students, which were group accorded to their preferred learning style, math scores increased. Discussion on whether or not the increase of the math scores should be credited to the Dunn and Dunn LSI is included. The research recommends additional research on the topic.
Key Words: Learning Styles, Dunn and Dunn LSI, Global/Analytical
Learners

Introduction
Classroom teachers and educators are aware that each student learns differently.
Through education classes and constant discussion, educators are aware that by identifying each student learning style, teaching to his or her learning style and implementing curriculum that compliments student learning can improve on-task behavior and increase content knowledge. The thought of identifying each student learning style may seem impossible and time consuming. However, with the right instrument, that is quick and effective, the process will be much more approachable.
A pressure has been placed on teachers to increase students’ grades on academic achievement test. We know that teaching to a students’ learning style will improve scores
(Dunn & Dunn, 1992). Rita and Kenneth Dunn created a Learning Style Model that is used worldwide. Research has proved the model is valid and reliable.
When teachers teach to students learning preference academic achievement increases, attitudes in learning increases and on-task behavior improves.
Statement of the Problem
Classroom teachers have the first hand experience to notice and identify problems or situations that need be addressed to improve student learning. It is our duty as pedadagogies to recognize issues that are affecting students learning and research how to implement a change. The purpose of this Action Research Project was to investigate the effect of identifying students learning styles and the impact it has on the students’ on-task behavior.

What is Learning Style?
Everyone has a learning style. Our style of learning, if accommodated, can result in improved attitudes towards learning and an increase productivity, academic achievement, and creativity (Griggs, 1991).
The term “learning style has many definitions. For many years educational researchers have been curious about how individuals learn. Educators recognize that different students learn differently. Researchers have learned a great deal overt the last fifty years about learning styles and how identifying learning styles and teaching to those styles can improve students’ test scores and increase content knowledge (Pitts, 2002). Many researchers have their own definition of learning styles. Ausubel, Novak, & Hanesian
(1978) stated that “cognitive styles” or “learning styles” have been defined as “selfconsistent, enduring individual differences in cognitive organization and function” (as cited in Wilson, 1998, 2). Keefe (1982) defined learning styles as “cognitive, affective, and physiological traits that serve as relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment” (as cited in Wilson, 1998, 2), while Gregorc (1979) describes learning styles as “distinctive behaviors which serve as indicators of how a person learn from and adapts to his environment” (as cited in Wilson,
1998, 2). Dunn & Dunn (1992) defines learning style is the way in which individuals begin to concentrate on, process, internalize and retain new and difficult academic information.

The Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model
The Dunn and Dunn model was selected for the research of learning styles, because it is a multidimensional model with reliable and valid instrumentation and strong research base (Griggs, 1991; Lovelace, 2005; Tendy & Geiser, 1997).
Rita and Kenneth Dunn have developed the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style
Model over the last twenty-five years. Rita Dunn was a professor and Director of the
Center for Study of Learning and Teaching Styles at St. Johns University, New York.
Kenneth Dunn is a professor and coordinator of Administration and Supervision
Programs at Queens College, City University of New York. The model is “built on the theory that each individual has a unique set of biological and developmental characteristics. These unique characteristics impact substantially on how a person learns new information and skills. Curry (1987) stated in a comparative analysis of the conceptualizations of learning styles and the psychometric standards of nine different instruments that purportedly measure learning-style preference, only the instrument designed to use with the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model, the Learning Style
Inventory (LSI), was rated as having good or better reliability and validity (as cited in
Neely & Alm, 1992).
The Dunn and Dunn Learning-Style Model is based on the following assumptions
(Searson & Dunn, 2001):
1. Most individuals can learn.
2. Instructional environments, resources, and approaches respond to diversified learning style strengths.

3. Everyone has strengths, but different people have very different strengths.
4. Individual instructional preferences exist and can be measured reliably.
5. Given responsive environments, resources, and approaches, students attain statistically higher achievement and attitude test scores in matched, rather than mismatched treatments.
6. Most teachers can learn to use learning styles as a cornerstone of their instruction.
7. Many students can learn to capitalize on their learning style strengths when concentrating on new or difficult academic material. (Dunn & Dunn, 1993)
The Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model includes twenty-two elements that, when classified, reveal which learners are affected by the following (Dunn & Dunn, 1992,
1993; Searson & Dunn, 2001):
Their immediate environment (sound, light, temperature, and furniture/seating designs)
Their own emotionality (motivation, persistence, responsibility
[conformity/nonconformity] and the need for either externally imposed structure or the opportunity to do things their own way)
Sociological preferences (learning alone, in a pair, in a small group, as part of a team, with an authoritative or collegial adult and wanting variety as opposed to patterns and routines)
Physiological characteristic (perceptual strengths, time-of day energy levels, and need for intake or mobility while learning)
Processing inclinations (global/analytic; right brain/left brain; impulsive/reflective)

No one person is affected by all the learning-style elements. Most people are affected by
6 to 14 elements (Dunn & Dunn, 1998).
Review of Related Literature
Although some students learn when instructions is provided through strategies that do not complement their learning styles, significantly higher standardized achievement test scores resulted among previously failing students when they were taught with strategies that complemented their learning-style preferences (Beglane, 2001;
Burke & Dunn, 2002; Dunn, Griggs, Olson, & Beasley, 1995; Lovelace, 2005). The reliability evidence and the validity evidence of the Dunn and Dunn model has had good results. A meta-analysis of forty-two experimental studies conducted with the Dunn and
Dunn model between 1980 and 1990 by thirteen different institutions of higher education revealed that students whose characteristics were accommodated by education interventions responsive to their learning styles could be expected to achieve 75 percent of a standard deviation higher than students whose styles were not accommodated (Dunn et al. 1995; Shaughnessy, 1998). In an interview with Rita Dunn conducted by Michael
Shaughnessy, Dunn commented, “practitioners throughout the United States have reported statistically higher test scores and /or grade point average for students whose teachers changed from traditional teaching to learning style teaching at all levelselementary, secondary, and college. Improved achievement was often apparent after only six weeks of learning-style instruction. For example, prior to using learning styles, only
25 percent of the Frontier, New York, school district’s special education high school students passes the required local examinations and state competency tests to receive diplomas. In the district’s first year of its learning styles program (1987-88) that number

increased to 66 percent (Shaughnessy, 1998). Lovelace (2005) conducted a Meta– analysis of experimental research on the Dunn and Dunn Model. The results indicated, on average, learning-style responsive instruction increased the achievement or improved the attitudes towards learning, or both, of all students. A North Carolina elementary school with a poverty level and minority population moved from the 30 th
percentile in reading and math on the California Achievement Test to the 83 rd
percentile in three years. The only change at that school was the introduction of learning-styles instruction (Andrews,
1990; Shaughnessy, 1998). Lemmon (1985) stated “a school in Hutchinson, Kansas, reported that when students had flexibility in taking the Iowa Basic Skills Test at the time of day and in the seating arrangement that best matched their learning styles, they achieved higher mean gain scores in reading and math than they had achieved for the previous two years (as cited in Neely & Alm, 1992). A court order in Freeport, Illinois, mandated the Freeport School District, to bring minority students up to the academic level of the majority. The Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model was implemented in the school district. As a result, all students in Freeport’s learning style classes performed better on the standardized achievement tests when using their learning style (Burke &
Dunn, 2002). In Hodgin and Wooliscroft (1997) article, a teacher describes the use learning style to ensure that all students succeed in their inclusive classroom. By identifying a students’ learning style, the teacher was able to prevent a student from having an ADHD evaluation. In South Dakota, a Aberedeen school implemented the learning style model and reported that almost every teacher in the building has experienced exciting successes related to the implementation of learning styles (Neely &
Alm, 1992). The successful implementation of the Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles

model at Corsicana High School and Brightwood Elementary School led to an improvement in the climate and culture of the schools that resulted in increase academic achievement among students and a more positive school atmosphere that continued over many years (Beglane, 2001).
Review of Related Literature
The application of learning style theory encompasses three pervasive problems: confusion in definitions, weakness in measurement reliability and validity and identification of relevant learner characteristics (Curry, 1990). While it seems like a good idea to match teaching styles or methods of instruction to a student’s particular learning style, it is obvious from the different ideas of researchers that this could be problematic.
The type of teaching method would depend on the framework used to determine students’ learning styles. Additionally, some research has disputed the idea that learning styles are stable personality traits. They observe that learning style might best be described as situational, that is, depending on the particular situation in which the learning occurs.
Moreover, they argue that many of the self-report inventories fail to differentiate between learners ("Individual differences and learning styles", 2003). Coffield (2005) advises teachers to guard against the practice of pigeonholing students into narrowly defined categories. “Our research suggests labeling a pupil as, say a ‘visual’ learner may do more harm than good” (as cited in Ivie, 2009, 177). Ivie (2009) states “most of the supporting research cited by the Dunns comes from their own in-house studies of faculty who finished their doctoral work at St. John’s University. Few of this studies meet the standard of having been published in peer-reviewed journals.

Statement of the Hypothesis
HR1: Integrating students preferred learning style will increase on-task behavior and increase content knowledge over a six-week period to 21 kindergarten students at PS
X during math time.
Method
Participants (N)
The sample for this action research paper was conducted with twenty-one kindergarten students in Brooklyn, New York. The students are from an intact class from a school with middle-to-high income families. The class is consists 11 boys and 10girls.
Of all the students 50% was White, 10% was Black and 40% was Bi-Racial.

Instrument(s)
The Learning Style Inventory -Primary Version for children in kindergarten through grade two questionnaire was used as the measuring instrument. It analyzes the conditions under which students in Grades K-2 prefer to learn new and difficult material.
Developed through content and factor analyses, it provides a comprehensive analysis of students’ learning styles. The twenty-five question are based on a 2-point Likert-type scale. The content validity is good. The test administered to measure individual students performance in math was taken from the TERC mathematics and created by the classroom teacher.
Experimental Design
The design used in this study Pre-Experimental one group pretest- posttest design.
The symbolic design is OX
1
O. The single group is pre-tested (O) exposed to a treatment
(X), and posttested (O).
Procedure
The beginning of the school year, September 2010, the researcher was assigned to her Kindergarten class. With granted permission from the school’s principal, consent forms where handed out to the parents asking them to allow they child to participate in the action research. All 21 parents granted the researcher permission.
The research began with all 21 students taking a pre-test, in October, in mathematics. No treatment was administered. Individually, students completed a survey

with the research. The research each student 25 questions in which they pointed to a happy face or a sad face. From the completed surveys the research determined if the student was an analytical learner or a global learner.
The students were then divided into groups according to learning style: Analytical or Global. Each group was then administered a second test. Analytical learner took the test at a desk. Global learners where allowed to lay on the rug or on the floor or sit on a beanbag. Both were given the same test but the test where given at different times. The
Analytical group took the test while the Global group went to music class. The Global group took the test when the Analytical group went to music class. The music class lasted for 45 minutes each. The music classes were back-to-back periods. While the
Global learner took their test, the lights were low and when the Analytical learners took their test the lights were bright.
The researcher tries to accommodate both learners when she introduces a math lesson. She starts off with a book about the topic so that the global learners can see the big picture before they get started and the researcher also did a step-by-step modeling of the math concept for the analytical learners.
Results
The Action Research was designed to determine if matching students to their preferred learning style would increase on-task behavior and increase content knowledge.
The sample size was 21. Students were group as global or analytical learners. Determined by the survey, created by the research, based on the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style inventory, 12 students were labeled global learners and 9 students were labeled analytical learners.

Table 1. Pre-test/Posttest for 21 students
Students Pre-test Without Learning
Preference
Student 1
Student 2
Student 3
Student 4
Student 5
Student 6
Student 7
Student 8
Student 9
100
80
90
80
90
80
30
60
100
Student 10
Student 11
Student 12
Student 13
Student 14
Student 15
Student 16
Student 17
Student 18
40
100
40
70
100
80
30
70
90
Posttest With Learning
Preference.
90
90
90
90
100
80
50
70
100
60
100
60
90
100
80
60
70
90
Student 19
Student 20
90
100
100
90
Student 21 80 90
Table 2.
Averages Pretest/Posttest
Class Average Pre-test
76%
Class Average Posttest
83%
At the completion of the four-month study, during the first week of December, students pre-test and posttest in mathematics were compared. As Table 1 indicates, all the students in the study group test scores improved with the exception of one, who evidently made a careless mistake. Therefore, one can conclude that matching students with their preferred learning style can increase on-task behavior and increase content knowledge.
The correlation between laying on the floor and test score was examined. A negative correlation of -0.404 was found. A correlation was not found in laying on the

floor and test scores. The correlation between sitting at a desk and test scores was also examined. A weak correlation of 0.125 was found in sitting at a desk and test scores.
The correlation mentioned suggests that where one sits does not have an effect on test scores. Referring to Table 2, the class average increase on the posttest by 7%.
Discussion
These findings support those of previous researchers and practitioners who reported that matching students to their preferred learning style resulted in on-task behavior and increase content knowledge (Dunn, 1990; Lovelace, 2005; Shaughnessy,
1995). The Dunn and Dunn Learning Style model is multidimensional and examines the environmental, emotional, sociological, perceptual, physiological and psychological elements (Dunn, 1992) in each student. The results from the action research supported the notion that students benefit from being taught according to their learning style. Each

students’ with the exception of one show improvement in their test scores, increasing the overall class average.
Implications
Although the students in the research group scores improved on their posttest, the researcher is not positive that the change could solely be credited to the Dunn and Dunn
Learning Style Inventory. Other factors may have played a role in the students’ on-task behavior and academic achievement. While the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Inventory was helpful in determining the student learning preference, the researcher believes that test scores might have increase also because the students’ felt the researcher was invested and cared about them and therefore tried their best. However, the Dunn and Dunn LSI confirmed many of the observations that the researcher recognized in the students.
This study was conducted with a group of students from middle to high economic background. Students from PS X are purposefully selected to attend the school.
Academically, the students are in good standing. The researcher is wondering if these factors played a role in the research outcome. It would be interesting to see what the outcome would be with a larger group of students with different socio-economical background and academic skills.
The most important reason for conducting a LSI is to help teachers select the best strategies and techniques to engage students to do their best learning. A good teacher recognizes that it is crucial and necessary to address the many different learners that they will encounter. Teachers, researchers and practitioners, all agree that all students can learn but all students learn differently. The next step is to make sure that students are taught according to their learning style.

Reference
Beck, C. R. (2001). Matching Teaching Strategies to Learning Style Preferences. Teacher
Educator, 37(1), 1-15.
Begalane, E. T. (2001). Principles Who Faced Obstacles to Learning Styles Instructions.
NASSP Bulletin, 85(627), 79-84. Doi: 10.1177/019263650108562709
Beliavsky, N. (2006). Revisiting Vygotsky and Gardner Realizing Human Potential
[Electronic version], Journal of Aesthetic Education, 40(2), 1-11.
Burke, K. & Dunn, Rita. (2002). Learning Style-Based Teaching to Raise Minority
Student Test Scores- There’s No Debate, Clearing House, 76(2), 103-106.
Carrier, S. J. (2009). Environmental Education in the Schoolyard: Learning Styles and
Gender [Electronic version]. The Journal of Environmental Education , 40 (3), 2-
12.
Coffield, F. C. (2005). Kinaesthetic nonsense. Times Education Supplement, 14, 28-29.
Curry, L. (1990). A critique of the research on learning styles. Educational Leadership,
49, 50-52, 54-56.
DeBello, T. (1990). Comparison of eleven major learning styles models: Variables,

appropriate populations, validity of instrumentation, and the research behind them. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities International, 6,
203-222.
Dunn, R. (1990). Rita Dunn answers questions on learning styles.
Educational
Leadership , 48(2), 15-19.
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1992). Teaching elementary students through their individual learning style: Practical approaches for grades 3-6. Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon. (372.1394 DUN- Book)
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1992). Teaching secondary students through their individual learning style: Practical approaches for grades 7-12. Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon. (373.1394 DUN- Book)
Dunn, R. (1996). 19 Easy-to-try Ways to Turn on Students. Teaching Pre K-8 , 27(3), 50-
51.
Dunn, R. (1998). Timing is Everything. Momentum, 29(4), 23-25.
Dunn, R., Denig, S., & Lovelace, M. K. (2001). Multiple Intelligences and Learning
Styles: Two Sides of the Same Coin or Different Strokes for Different Folks?
Teacher Librarian, 28(3).
Dunn, R., Griggs, S. A., Olson, J., & Beasley (1995). A Meta-Analytic Validation of the
Dunn and Dunn Model of Learning-Style Preferences.
Educational Research, 88(6), 353-362.
The Journal of
Dunn, R., Honigsfeld, A., Doolan, L. S., Bostrom, L., Russo, K., Schiering, M. S., Suh,
B., & Tenedero, H. (2009). Impact of Learning-Style Instructional Strategies on
Students’ Achievement and Attitudes: Perceptions of Educators in Diverse
Institutions. A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(3), 135-
140.
Duun, R., & Honigsfeld, A. (2006). WHAT IF CHILDREN WERE GROUPED FOR
READING WITH LEARNING-STYLE RESPONSIVE APPROACHES?
Reading Improvement, 43(2), 70-76.
Dunn, R., & Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, B. (1995).
Strategies for
Educating Diverse Learners . Fastback 384. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Griggs, S. A. (1991). Learning Styles Counseling. ERIC digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on
Counseling and Personnel Services. (ED 341 890- Microfiche- Digest in ERIC
Database)
Honigsfeld, A. & Schiering, M. (2004). Diverse Approaches to the Diversity of Learning
Styles in Teacher Education, Educational Psychology, 24(4), 487-507.
Hodgin, J., & Wooliscroft, C. (1997). Eric Learns to Read: Learning Styles at Work.
Educational Leadership, 54(6), 43-45.
“Individual differences and learning styles." Retrieved from the Internet 5/5/2010 from http://www.cee.hw.ac.uk/~alison/ctl/ctl96/INDDIFF.html
Ivie, S. D. (2009). LEARNING STYLES: HUMPTY DUMPTY REVISITED. McGill
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 44(2), 177-192.
Lovelace, M. K. (2005). Meta-Analysis of Experimental Research Based on the Dunn and Dunn Model. Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 176-183.
Neely, R. O., & Alm, D. (1992). Meeting Individual Needs: A Learning Style Success
Story. Clearing House, 66(2), 109-113.
Searson, R. & Dunn, R. (2001). The Learning-Style Teaching Model. Science and

Children, 38(5), 22-26.
Shaughnessy, M. F. (1998). AN INTERVIEW WITH RITA DUNN ABOUT
LEARNING STYLES. Clearing House , 71(3), 141-145.
Tendy, S., & Geiser, W. (1997). The search for Style: It All Depends on Where You
Look. Retrieved from ERIC database
Terregrossa, R., Englander, F., & Englander, V. (2009). The Impact of Learning Styles on Achievement in Principles of Microeconomics: A Natural Experiment.
Student Journal, 43(2), 400-410.
College
Wilson, V. (1998). Learning How They Learn: A Review of the Literature on Learning
Styles. Retrieved from ERIC database
Appendix A

Appendix B- Consent Form

Peta-Gaye T. Grey
Brooklyn Friends School
375 Pearl Street
Dear Class X Parents,
Brooklyn, NY 11201
718-852-1029
In addition to being a teacher at Brooklyn Friends
School, I am also a student in the Brooklyn College Masters of Education Program. As part of the program, I will be conducting a research study to learn more about the effect of identifying a students learning style and the effect in has on their academic achievement. The audience of this study is teachers, researchers and education practitioners.
I would appreciate your permission to have your child be a part of this study.
The study would require me to identify your child preferred learning style by doing a questionnaire and observation.
Identifying your child’s learning style will help me to teach he/she the way they learn best which will increase academic achievement.
Your child’s name will not appear in the study. Two copies of this request are enclosed. Please sign both copies and return on to me, keeping the other one for your files.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Peta-Gaye T. Grey
I give permission for my child __________________________ to participate in your Action Research. I understand that he/she name will not appear in the study.

Date _______________________
Parent
Signature _______________________
Appendix C - Student Survey: Analytical or Global Learner
Student ____________________________ Date _______________________________
1 2
1.
I like the light to be low when I am learning new things
 
2.
I like bright light when
I am learning new thing
 
3.
I like the room to be quiet when I am learning new things
 
4.
I like to listen to music when I am learning new things
 
5.
I like to feel cool when
I am learning new things
 
6.
I like to feel warm when I am learning new things
7.
I like to lie on the floor when I am
 
 

learning new things
8.
I like to sit at a desk when I am learning new things
9.
I DO NOT like to snack when I am learning new things
10.
I like to snack when
I’m learning new thing
11.
I like to move around when I am learning new things
12.
I DO NOT like the learn new things early in morning
13.
I like to learn new things early in the morning
14.
I DO NOT like to make things with my hands when I am learning new things














15.
I like to make things with my hands when I am learning new things
 
16.
I like to go on field trips when I am learning new things
 
17.
I DO NOT like to go field trips when I am learning new things
 
18.
I like to hear the teacher talk when I am learning new things
 

19.
I DO NOT like to go on field trips when I am learning new things
20.
I like to take short breaks when I am learning new things
21.
I like to have help when I am learning new things
22.
I like the teacher a story first when I am learning new things
23.
I like to take my time when I answer a questions
24.
I like to answer questions quickly
 
 






 

Appendix D- Pre-test
Name _____________________________________
Lets Practice Counting Up!
6 + 4 = _________
8 + 5 = _________
9 + 9 = _________
10 + 6 = ________
11 + 5 = ________
14 + 5 = ________
17 + 3 = ________
15 + 3 = ________
17 + 3 = ________
15 + 3 = ________
12 + 7 = ________
13 + 8 = ________

Appendix E- Posttest
Name ____________________________________
Lets Practice Counting Up!
20 + 4 = _________
21 + 5 = _________
23 + 4 = _________
22 + 6 = _________
25 + 5 = _________
19 + 5 = _________
26 + 3 =_________
20 + 9 = ________
18 + 7 = ________
16 + 8 = ________