Learning Styles of University Students in Bangkok: The Characteristics and the Relevant Instructional Context
The purposes of this study are 1) to identify
learning styles of university students in Bangkok, and 2) to study
the frequency of the relevant instructional context of the identified
learning styles. Learning Styles employed in this study are those of
Honey and Mumford, which include 1) Reflectors, 2) Theorists, 3)
Pragmatists, and 4) Activists. The population comprises 1383
students and 5 lecturers. Research tools are 2 questionnaires – one
used for identifying students- learning styles, and the other used for
identifying the frequency of the relevant instructional context of
the identified learning styles.
The research findings reveal that 32.30 percent - are Activists,
while 28.10 percent are Theorists, 20.10 are Reflectors, and 19.50
are Pragmatists. In terms of the relevant instructional context of the
identified 4 learning styles, it is found that the frequency level of
the instructional context is totally in high level. Moreover, 2 lists of
the context being conducted most frequently are 'Lead'in activity
to review background knowledge,- and 'Information retrieval
report.' And these two activities serve the learning styles of
theorists and activists. It is, therefore, suggested that more
instructional context supporting the activists, the majority of the
population, learning best by doing, as well as emotional learning
situation should be added.
 Bell, D. & Kahrhoff, J. (2006). Active Learning Handbook. Missouri;
 Brown, Doglus, H. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive
Approach to Language Pedagogy. 3rd-ed. New York; Longman.
 Cheese, P. (2008). Netting the Net Generation. Businessweek.com.
BloombergBusinessweek Companies &Industries. Retrieved August
1st,2012 from http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2008-03- 13/
 Doff, A. (1999). Teach English; A training course for teachers.
Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.
 Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G.E. (1984). Learning Style Inventory.
Lawrence, KS, USA, Price Systems.
 Felder, R.M. & Henriques, E.R. (1995). Learning and Teaching Styles
in Foreign and Second Language Education. Foreign Language
Annual, 28 (1), 21-31.
 Hall, J.S.B. (2002). The Learning Pyramid. Retrieved December 25,
2011 from http://leanlearning. org/ pyramid.htm
 Knickelbine, S. (2001). Honey & Mumford Learning Styles
Inventory. Retrieved February 12th, 2012 from
 Knight, P. (2001). Learning and Teaching English. Oxford; Oxford
 Komin, S. (2009) Psychology of the Thai People: Values and
Behavioral Patterns. Bangkok; Research Center, National Institute of
 Max, W.M. (2007). The Use of Learning styles questionnaire in Hong
Kong. Development in Business Simulation and Experiential
Learning. Volume 34, 2007.
 McCrindle, M. (2008). The ABC of XYZ: Generation Diversity at
Work. McCrindle Research. Retrieved March 4th , 2012 from
 Moss & Ross, F. (2003). Activities to Promote Interaction and
Communication. Retrieved June 15, 2012 from
 Honey, P. & Mumford, A. (2000). The Learning Style Helper-s
Guide. Maidenhead, UK; Peter Honey Publications.
 Sabatova, J. (2008). Learning Styles in ELT. Diploma Thesis.
Masaryk University, Brno.
 Sadler-Smith, E. (2002). Learning Styles and Effective Learning
Habits or University Students. A Case of Turkey. Dissertation
 Scrivener, J. (1998). Learning Teaching. Oxford; MacMillan
 Sprenger, M. (2003). Differentiation through Learning Styles and
Memory. Thousand Oaks, CA; Corwin Press.
 Swinton, L. (2002). Honey & Mumford - Learning Style
Questionnaire. Retrieved March 1st, 2012 from
 Walker, D. (2011). 10 Best Teaching Practices. California; Corwin.
 Zull, J.E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: Enriching teaching by
exploring the biology of learning. Sterling, VA; Stylus.