Intellectual styles are individuals' preferred ways of using their abilities. This book provides the first comprehensive and systematic review of existing research on the value and desirability of different intellectual styles. By critically analyzing findings from hundreds of international studies undertaken over eight decades, Li-fang Zhang demonstrates that the creativity-generating Type I styles are generally superior to the norm-conforming Type II styles in relation to a wide range of learning processes and developmental outcomes, work performance, physical and mental health, and many other domains of people's lives. She further demonstrates that people explicitly and implicitly express their preference for Type I styles over Type II styles. Professor Zhang elucidates the practical value of cultivating diverse intellectual styles, especially Type I styles, in both academic and nonacademic settings, and lays the groundwork for future research to advance the field of intellectual styles and to inform scholarly work in other academic disciplines.

The nature of intellectual styles

Measures of field dependence: Cognitive style or cognitive ability?

Six learning style dimensions of the Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Style Scales (GRSLSS) were examined in this study with 100 deaf college students. In addition, six corresponding scales of teaching emphases were administered to the 16 instructors of these students. Student mean scores were higher for the dependent, participative, collaborative, and independent dimensions than for the competitive and avoidant styles. The participative learning style correlated significantly with course achievement and course interest, which suggests that an emphasis on active learning may be desirable. For instructors, as with students, the mean scores for teaching emphases were found to be higher for the collaborative, dependent, participative, and independent dimensions. the similar patterns of results for students and teachers suggest a correspondence between the learning styles and the teaching emphases.

Learning styles of deaf college students and instructors' teaching emphases.

It is frequently assumed that deaf individuals have superior visual-spatial abilities relative to hearing peers and thus, in educational settings, they are often considered visual learners. There is some empirical evidence to support the former assumption, although it is inconsistent, and apparently none to support the latter. Three experiments examined visual-spatial and related cognitive abilities among deaf individuals who varied in their preferred language modality and use of cochlear implants (CIs) and hearing individuals who varied in their sign language skills. Sign language and spoken language assessments accompanied tasks involving visual-spatial processing, working memory, nonverbal logical reasoning, and executive function. Results were consistent with other recent studies indicating no generalized visual-spatial advantage for deaf individuals and suggested that their performance in that domain may be linked to the strength of their preferred language skills regardless of modality. Hearing individuals performed more strongly than deaf individuals on several visual-spatial and self-reported executive functioning measures, regardless of sign language skills or use of CIs. Findings are inconsistent with assumptions that deaf individuals are visual learners or are superior to hearing individuals across a broad range of visual-spatial tasks. Further, performance of deaf and hearing individuals on the same visual-spatial tasks was associated with differing cognitive abilities, suggesting that different cognitive processes may be involved in visual-spatial processing in these groups.

Understanding Language, Hearing Status, and Visual-Spatial Skills

The influence of gender, handedness, and performance level on specialized cognitive functioning.

The hypotheses that deaf students would be more field-dependent than hearing students and that their competence in communication skills would be positively related to field-independence were supported for a group of 77 male and 67 female deaf students. Step-wise multiple regression analyses of the data showed that for females spatial skills followed by communication skills were significant predictors of field-independence; for males spatial skills followed by the extent of hearing loss were significant predictors of field-independence. Sex differences found on tests of field-independence and spatial relations were consistent with those obtained from the hearing population. It was suggested that socialization experiences and competence in communication skills may influence development of field-independence in deaf students.

/pdf/relationships-among-spatial-skills-communication-skills-and-voeracoo1b.pdf

Gary L. Long

Papers

Relationships among Spatial Skills, Communication Skills, and Field Independence in Deaf Students: