« Paschler McDaniel et al 2010 » : différence entre les versions

De wikicap
(Contenu remplacé par « Catégorie:Page à supprimer »)
 
(Une version intermédiaire par le même utilisateur non affichée)
Ligne 1 : Ligne 1 :
[[Catégorie:article]]
[[Catégorie:Page à supprimer]]
 
<!-- La catégorie article est une sous-catégorie de référence. Elle inclut les articles publiés dans des revues ou des journaux.-->
 
= Learning styles: Concepts and evidence =
<!-- Mettre le titre supra pour qu'il apparaisse en grand au sommet de la page -->
 
 
== 1. Références ==
 
* '''Référence complète APA''' :  Paschler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D. and Bjork, R. (2010) Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 9, pp. 105-119.
<!-- Rappel de la syntaxe :
    * Auteur, A. A., Auteur, B. B., & Auteur, C. C. (Année). Titre de l'article. Titre du périodique, volume(numéro), page de début - page de fin.
    * Rousseau, F. L., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). Le rôle de la passion dans le bien-être subjectif des ainés. Revue québécoise de psychologie, 24(3), 197-211.
-->
 
* '''Auteur(s)''' : [[Harold Pashler]], [[Mark McDaniel]], [[Doug Rohrer]], & [[Robert Bjork]]
<!-- Remettre ici le ou les auteurs au format Prénom Nom, entre doubles crochets, afin de pouvoir retrouver les publications par auteur.-->
 
* '''Revue''' : [[Psychological Science in the Public Interest]]
<!-- Remettre ici le nom de la revue, entre doubles crochets, afin de pouvoir retrouver les publications par revue.-->
 
<br>
 
== 2. Copies ==
 
* '''Copie en ligne''' : http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf
<!-- Si l'article est disponible sur Internet, mettre l'URL -->
 
* '''Copie locale''' : [[Fichier:Paschler McDaniel et al 2010.pdf]]
<!-- Idéalement, stocker une copie locale du fichier dans le wiki (en respectant les conventions de nommage du fichier) et faire ici le lien -->
 
* '''Copie physique''' :
<!-- Si une copie physique existe (ex tirage papier), indiquer ici sa localisation et sa référence -->
 
<br>
== 3. Mots-clés ==
 
<!-- Mettre ici la liste de sujets sur lesquels porte l'article, entre doubles crochets, afin de pouvoir retrouver les publications par sujet.-->
* [[style d'apprentissage]]
 
 
<br>
 
== 4. Abstract ==
 
<!-- Copier / coller ici l'abstract -->
SUMMARY—The term ‘‘learning styles’’ refers to the concept
that individuals differ in regard to what mode of instruction
or study is most effective for them. Proponents of
learning-style assessment contend that optimal instruction
requires diagnosing individuals’ learning style and tailoring
instruction accordingly. Assessments of learning
style typically ask people to evaluate what sort of information
presentation they prefer (e.g., words versus pictures
versus speech) and/or what kind of mental activity
they find most engaging or congenial (e.g., analysis versus
listening), although assessment instruments are extremely
diverse. The most common—but not the only—hypothesis
about the instructional relevance of learning styles is the
meshing hypothesis, according to which instruction is best
provided in a format that matches the preferences of the
learner (e.g., for a ‘‘visual learner,’’ emphasizing visual
presentation of information).
The learning-styles view has acquired great influence
within the education field, and is frequently encountered
at levels ranging from kindergarten to graduate school.
There is a thriving industry devoted to publishing learning-
styles tests and guidebooks for teachers, and many
organizations offer professional development workshops
for teachers and educators built around the concept of
learning styles.
The authors of the present review were charged with
determining whether these practices are supported by
scientific evidence. We concluded that any credible validation
of learning-styles-based instruction requires robust
documentation of a very particular type of experimental
finding with several necessary criteria. First, students
must be divided into groups on the basis of their learning
styles, and then students from each group must be randomly
assigned to receive one of multiple instructional
methods. Next, students must then sit for a final test that is
the same for all students. Finally, in order to demonstrate
that optimal learning requires that students receive instruction
tailored to their putative learning style, the
experiment must reveal a specific type of interaction between
learning style and instructional method: Students
with one learning style achieve the best educational
outcome when given an instructional method that differs
from the instructional method producing the best outcome
for students with a different learning style. In
other words, the instructional method that proves most
effective for students with one learning style is not the most
effective method for students with a different learning
style.
Our review of the literature disclosed ample evidence
that children and adults will, if asked, express preferences
about howthey prefer information to be presented to them.
There is also plentiful evidence arguing that people differ
in the degree to which they have some fairly specific aptitudes
for different kinds of thinking and for processing
different types of information. However, we found virtually
no evidence for the interaction pattern mentioned
above, which was judged to be a precondition for validating
the educational applications of learning styles. Although
the literature on learning styles is enormous, very
few studies have even used an experimental methodology
capable of testing the validity of learning styles applied to
education. Moreover, of those that did use an appropriate
method, several found results that flatly contradict the
popular meshing hypothesis.
We conclude therefore, that at present, there is no adequate
evidence base to justify incorporating learningstyles
assessments into general educational practice. Thus,
limited education resources would better be devoted to
adopting other educational practices that have a strong
evidence base, of which there are an increasing number.
However, given the lack of methodologically sound studies
of learning styles, it would be an error to conclude that all
possible versions of learning styles have been tested and
found wanting; many have simply not been tested at all.
 
 
<br>
== 5. Résumé (facultatif) ==
 
<!-- Entrer ici un résumé personnel de l'article (facultatif) -->
 
Un article qui remet en cause la théorie selon laquelle l'enseignement devrait s'adapter aux styles d'apprentissage des étudiants, montrant qu'il n'y a pas de base empirique solide pour défendre cette assertion.

Dernière version du 7 octobre 2016 à 15:31