The Grasha-Reichmann Learning Style Scales

In 1974, Anthony Grasha and Sheryl Reichmann formulated the Grasha-Reichmann Learning Style Scales (GRLSS). This model was developed with the aim of analysing how students approach learning. As such, it focused on their attitudes towards learning, behaviour in the classroom, and relationships with peers and teachers, rather than methodology or achievement levels.

Grasha, an influential educator who eventually held the distinguished post of professor of psychology at the University of Cincinatti, first became interested in learning styles whilst working as a teaching assistant at the university. Unusually – because most cognitive studies proceed down a non-judgemental route – his attention was initially focused on those styles he felt to be detrimental to a student’s progress (later entitled avoidant, competitive, and dependent).

To develop his theory, Grasha interviewed approximately 75 students, gaging their reactions to traditional classroom systems. These early studies formed the basis of the first three ‘negative’ styles, which Grasha and Reichmann built upon to design a more complex model of six primary learning styles. It was Grasha and Reichmann’s belief that several of these styles are present in every learner – to varying degrees – but that students must be encouraged to focus on the ‘adaptive’ rather than ‘maladaptive’ styles. To aid educators, they developed the GRLSS teaching styles survey, a sophisticated questionnaire designed for instructors, which aims to provide insight into how their teaching complements or conflicts with the needs of their students.

Grasha and Reichmann’s six styles are classified as follows:

• avoidant
• participative
• competitive
• collaborative
• dependent
• independent

Avoidant
Avoidant students tend to perform poorly, achieving grades at the lower end of the spectrum. They are unenthusiastic about learning, do not engage with other students or teachers, and generally display a lack of interest in classroom activities. Absenteeism is often a problem with avoidant learners. To help spark their interest, avoid ‘rote’ learning and structured, ‘tick the box’ exercises – exams and tests do not suit avoidant learners. A more relaxed teaching style – avoiding pushiness or an overly peppy attitude – will appeal.

Participative
Participative students engage with their teachers and relate well to their peers. They are good at accepting responsibility for their own work and like to make the most of all learning situations. Teamwork and stimulating discussion are key: participative learners enjoy getting involved, meaning that the opportunity to debate a matter in a classroom – rather than being asked to listen to a lecture in silence – will be met with an energetic response.

Competitive
Competitive students are mistrustful of their peers and prioritise learning as a way to outperform other students in their class. They feel their only reward is to outstrip the competition, and attention must be given to showing them the other benefits that can be gained from absorbing and analysing information. Like participative learners, competitive students enjoy class discussion, but teachers must ensure that they do not dominate. Structured activities – a business game like Crowdfund Campus’ Sandpit simulation, for instance – would suit a competitive learner, as their natural instinct to lead would be a positive asset in this environment.

Collaborative
In direct contrast to competitive learners, collaborative students work in harmony with their peers and blossom as part of a team. They don’t tend to respond well to assignments that focus on extended periods of solo study, however; for this type of learner to flourish, teachers should prioritise elements of curriculum co-design, team projects, and lectures followed by discussion in small groups.

Dependent
Dependent students dislike change. Lacking in intellectual curiosity, they tend to learn only what is required to get by, and become frustrated if they are asked to explore ideas that are not fully explained in the classroom. In order to stimulate their interest, teachers must be prepared to take a more didactic approach, providing clear outlines, notes and instructions, leading all classroom activities, and avoiding ambiguity.

Independent
Independent learners relish the opportunity to think for themselves. They are confident in their own ability to deduce which course content is most important, and will often work outside of the curriculum if they feel a topic deserves further exploration. Whilst they prefer to work alone, they are also good as part of a team, and will listen to the ideas of their peers. To help them reach their full potential, teachers should provide a good mix of independent study and student-centred course design, allowing these learners the space to explore particular topics or assignments that interest them (but providing a guiding hand to ensure they don’t stray too far from the prescribed path).

There is no ‘right’ way to learn, but one thing is clear: students learn most efficiently if they are familiarised with a range of different learning styles and then guided on when, and how, to apply the style that is most suitable for each particular task.

Peter Honey and Alan Mumford expanded on Kolb’s experiential model to develop four categories of learning, suggesting that most students will only use one or two of them. They designed a questionnaire to help learners identify their preferred styles, which are grouped as follows: activists; reflectors; theorists; and pragmatists. Keep reading to find out a little more about the four styles and the types of learning preferred by each.

Activists

Perhaps unsurprisingly, activists learn by doing. They are daring and will ‘try anything once’, preferring new experiences to tried-and-tested routines.

Activists learn best when they are:

• Thrown into a challenge without preparation.
• Involved in a new activity or presented with an unfamiliar problem.
• Working as a team.
• Leading a team.
• Problem-solving via activities, such as games or role-playing.

Activists don’t respond well to:

• Activities that demand lengthy periods of intense concentration. Being asked to listen to long lectures, read lengthy materials, or analyse reams of data, will not inspire an activist.
• Being asked to follow precise instructions.

Reflectors

The opposite of activists in certain ways, reflectors learn through quiet observation and intensive reflection. Reflectors like to think about a problem from every angle before making a decision.

Reflectors learn best when they are:

• Given time to reflect and consider before taking any action.
• Allowed to observe or investigate.
• Provided the opportunity to review all historical data.

Reflectors don’t respond well to:

• Leadership roles.
• Being forced to make snap decisions.
• Feeling rushed.

Theorists

Theorists learn in a thorough, yet slightly abstract way. They respond well to models and concepts, as well as facts. Highly logical, they like to analyse and ‘work through’ problems in a clear, concise manner, and balk at anything they deem to be subjective.

Theorists learn best when they are:

• Participating in an activity that is structured, backed up by a system/theory, and has a clear purpose.
• Given the opportunity to ask questions and flesh out a concept.
• Challenged to understand complex models or situations.

Theorists do not respond well to:

• Activities that are deemed to be too fluid and without a clearly defined end goal.
• Being asked to make snap decisions without being thoroughly acquainted with supporting information and background theory.
• Being asked to approach scenarios from an emotional viewpoint.

Pragmatists

Keen on the practical application of knowledge, pragmatists like to learn through experience. They are innovative yet impatient (particularly if they feel conversations are too theoretical and open-ended).

Pragmatists learn best when:

• There is a real-life problem that is clearly served by the learning topic.
• They can learn from a practical example.
• They are encouraged to try things out and gain first-hand experience of a technique.

Pragmatists do not respond well to:

• Being asked to perform a task without clear guidelines.
• Being asked to perform a task that serves no apparent, practical purpose.
• Any task that appears purely ‘theoretical’ and without boundaries.

If you work in education and are trying to find new ways to engage your classroom, look no further. Crowdfund Campus’ unique offering – comprising a live crowdfunding marketplace and Sandpit simulation tool – encourages creative problem-solving and nurtures different types of learning. Contact us today to learn how our innovative platform can help your students.

David A.Kolb’s groundbreaking work, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, was published in 1984 – but its effects are still felt today.

The concept of learning through discovery and experience is still employed in education on a broad scale, particularly in terms of business studies: the popular 70/20/10 model, for instance, is founded on the principle that 70% of what we know comes from experience; and ‘trial-and-error’ based exercises – such as Crowdfund Campus’s own Sandpit platform – provide effective tools through which young entrepreneurs can test and refine their enterprise ideas.

What is Experiential Learning?

Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) is named as such to emphasise the important role that experience plays in the learning process. Indeed, Professor Kolb argues that ‘knowledge results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience’ (Kolb, 1984, p.41). In Experiential Learning, Kolb sets out four different learning styles, all of which are connected: a continuous learning cycle of experience, reflection, conceptualisation and experimentation.

The cycle, broadly, is as follows:

1. Concrete Experience (CE)
2. Reflective Observation (RO)
3. Abstract Conceptualization (AC)
4. Active Experimentation (AE)

This cycle is connected to four different learning styles, each of which represents a combination of different stages of the learning process:

Diverging (CE/RO)

Those with a Diverging learning preference tend to be open-minded, sensitive, emotional, and artistic. They prefer to observe and reflect, taking all perspectives into account, and use their imagination to create solutions to problems.

Engagement tactics: Diverging learners are excellent at ideas-generation and enjoy teamwork and brainstorming. As such, a combination of one-on-one feedback sessions and group discussion should be promoted within the classroom. Diverging learners prefer to receive personal feedback that they can then digest and reflect on in solitude, but – in terms of everyday learning – they perform best when working as part of a group.

Assimilating (AC/RO)

For Assimilating learners, ideas and logic take precedence over person-to-person interactions. Good, clear explanations – rather than hands-on opportunities – are preferred; as are abstract concepts and complex, established theories. These learners excel at organising ideas and information, work in a logical, highly-focused manner, and often show an interest in science or mathematics.

Engagement tactics: Readings and lectures are preferable to class discussion. In terms of learning aids, Assimilating learners find analytical models helpful and stimulating, though they will respond best when given time to think things through – rather than being asked to make quick or instinctive decisions.

Converging (AC/AE)

Similar to Assimilating learners, students who prefer a Converging learning style are less concerned with interpersonal relationships in the classroom: instead, they prefer technical tasks and tend to draw on practical knowledge throughout the learning process. As such, they are problem solvers rather than idea generators, and enjoy making decisions by applying technical or real-life knowledge to abstract issues.

Engagement tactics: Create room for experimentation within the working environment by making use of business games and simulations (like Crowdfund Campus’ Sandpit tool). This approach will allow Converging learners to build on real-life experiences and make the most of their technical abilities.

Accommodating (CE/AE)

Often referred to as a ‘hands-on’ approach, Accommodating learners rely on their intuition and interactions with other people in order to develop their thinking. They thrive on challenges and love to experiment, but prefer for there to be a plan in place first; they are doers, rather than planners, and without a strategy will rely on instinct.

Engagement tactics: Teamwork and targets are a must for the Accommodating learner, so teachers should be prepared to cater for this. A crowdfunding exercise may prove to be the perfect solution, particularly within an enterprise education setting: by using a live platform like that provided by Crowdfund Campus, students are given the opportunity to create cohesive, comprehensive campaigns, working as a team to meet their goals and raise awareness of their product/service. An Accommodating learner would fit perfectly into this environment, which would stimulate their desire to rise to challenges, experiment with different approaches in order to meet an objective, and work within a group.

We are proud to offer support to students and universities who wish to ‘think outside the box’ and embrace different ways of learning. If you’d like to find out more about our offering, please send an email to support@crowdfundcampus.com – or take a look at our innovative Sandpit tool for further insight. We hope to hear from you!

In basic terms, ‘learning style’ denotes the way a student collates, interprets, sifts through, and organises information in order to draw conclusions from it. Scientists and psychologists have developed over 70 recognised learning style schemes. One of the most popular, the VARK model, was pioneered by innovative educator Neil Fleming in 1987 – and it is still used widely today.

What is the VARK Model?

VARK stands for Visual, Aural, Reading/Writing, Kinaesthetic – four styles of learning Neil Fleming felt most learners could be categorised into (though Fleming notes that many learners respond to more than one style).

Whilst – as mentioned above – there are many different theories concerning learning styles, an understanding of the VARK model, among others, will prove valuable when communicating with a diverse audience – whether that is in an enterprise education classroom or via your crowdfunding campaign. With this in mind, our overview of the four styles describes not only how these types of learners understand and interpret data, but also how you might engage them:

Visual

A familiar but widely misunderstood learning style. Often perceived as a tendency to respond best to pictures or videos, visual learners in fact process information most effectively through the use of graphical tools – such as flow diagrams or graphs – that allow them to interpret data in a rational fashion. Students with this learning style view data as pieces of a puzzle, and tend to organise their notes in a highly-cogent manner – thus allowing them to visualise connections between strands of information.

Engagement tactics: Make sure that information is presented in a highly visual – but logical – way, utilising charts and graphics and clearly signposting the relationships between the various points you are making.

Aural

Students with this style prefer an emphasised use of speech and hearing throughout the learning process. They would prefer the use of auditory material, lectures, and class discussion; when alone, they may read aloud to themselves or seek out online communications that provide auditory stimuli. These kinds of learners respond best when messages are delivered in an audio format, and when they are encouraged to take notes of what they’ve learned, rewording in an individual way that makes it easy for them to recite aloud and absorb.

Engagement tactics: Make it easy for auditory learners to repeat the information you’ve presented out loud; this will help them to remember it. Including question-and-answer sessions wherever possible and encourage structured debate around key topics. Such tactics can be incorporated into marketing campaigns, too; Jon Loomer (a prolific blogger and marketing expert) provides audio versions of his written blogs.

Reading/Writing

The modern educational system was founded on the reading/writing style, and as such it tends not to be discussed within a critical setting. It is simply assumed that students must master this style in order to succeed at school or university. However, reading/writing is not only a crucial component of education, but also represents a specific learning style. Individuals that respond to this style of learning prefer to write out materials, and to read, read again, and re-read once more. Materials are absorbed most readily when organised in a structured form (such as in a list).

Engagement tactics: Make it easy for reading/writing learners to read along with you; if you’re giving a speech or presentation in a classroom, provide annotated handouts so that these learners will engage. Regular written quizzes are also recommended.

Kinaesthetic

Kinaesthetic translates to tactile forms of learning – the ‘practice makes perfect’ approach to education. Kinaesthetic learners respond best to activities that require them to perform tasks in an active way. This doesn’t necessarily mean that physical activity is required; students with a kinaesthetic bent learn effectively when working through practice problems (as opposed to reading a textbook) or when applying academic concepts to real-life problems (such as algebra in a business scenario).

Engagement tactics: The introduction of role-playing scenarios, exercises that require students to get up and move around, or mental problems that involve real-life environments are a great way to stimulate kinaesthetic learners.

If you are an enterprise educator looking for innovative ways of engaging your students, we would be delighted to help. Our live crowdfunding marketplace and Sandpit simulation are interactive, multifaceted platforms that encourage creative problem-solving whilst catering to – and stimulating – different types of learning. Contact us today to book a free demonstration.

But how can you tell whether that ‘lightbulb’ is operating at megawatt capacity, or whether it’s merely producing a dull flicker? What separates a true entrepreneur from the rest isn’t just a fantastic idea or an enormous amount of confidence in said idea; it’s the knowledge that this product or service will work. And though some ventures succeed based on the instincts of the creator alone, most will require intensive testing and tweaking before they’re ready for the general public – and, perhaps more importantly, financial backers.

Feedback needn’t cost a fortune, though. Here are some simple, cost-effective ways to test your product:

Get feedback from your own networks

This doesn’t mean simply asking your friends and family (!) but – thanks to the power of the internet and social media – a wide range of extended networks is available to you. Collate a variety of questions and ask your friends to ask their acquaintances. Keep the source of the questions – and the product these are based around – anonymous. This way, you’re likely to receive honest and varied feedback, which is the aim of the exercise. You don’t want to run the risk of people submitting answers that are distorted by emotional bias.

Pull some focus groups together

The first thing to do is to try and identify your ideal customer(s). What demographic are you targeting? What are their interests, buying habits, etc.? Once you’ve created a customer profile or two, you should then try and tap into the right networks. Find someone who fits the profile and ask if they can pull together a group of like-minded friends (around five to eight people would be ideal). You don’t need to offer payment for this, but some kind of incentive would be a nice gesture (a few bottles of wine, for instance).

The thing to remember is that the aim of the exercise is not to receive unanimous praise; what you’re trying to do is fine tune your offering. Ask as many specific questions as you can – from packaging to price point – and gage reaction from there. And don’t be disheartened if strong views are expressed; indeed, a strongly negative viewpoint is more useful than a mild or neutral response. It would be far more valuable, for example, to come across a focus group containing four people who adored your product and four people who hated it. Honest feedback from those with strong opinions will help you improve your offering: you can find out what people love about your product, and focus on this in your marketing; conversely, you can discern what people dislike, and then refine your product or service accordingly. If there are some people who absolutely love your idea, they are more likely to buy it than a room full of people who express mild interest in it – so that’s a good sign!

Consider quantitative research

Focus groups qualify as qualitative research, which is most helpful for product or service development. Quantitative research, by contrast, can be useful later on in the process, when your product has been developed and informed by feedback but you need to identify your target market more definitively. If a quarter of your test groups included people who loved the product, and you’ve honed it based on their recommendations, now’s the time to focus in on them: what consumer niche does this 25% represent in the real world? Conducting a simple survey via telephone, email, or online can help you to build on these early numbers and identify how to target them (where they are, how you might reach them, etc.)

Test in a simulated environment

A crowdfunding campaign can offer one of the most effective and efficient methods of market testing: it gives you the opportunity to put your product in front of a huge audience, costs very little, and is likely to give you a real picture of your product’s efficacy very quickly.

That said, jumping straight into a crowdfunding campaign has its risks: consumers have fairly long memories, as do investors, and associating your brand with an unvarnished product could have a negative impact.

The Sandpit tool provided by Crowdfund Campus offers the perfect halfway house: a simulated marketplace, designed for students, that allows budding entrepreneurs the chance to gage consumer response, put sales and investment strategies into practice, and learn more about their potential consumer base – but all without actually making the campaign ‘live’. Mapped to the QAA guidance on Enterprise and Entrepreneurship, Sandpit gives students a safe medium by which to take risks, and can be applied easy to any course.

At Crowdfund Campus, we provide full support to students and universities who wish to embrace entrepreneurship and crowdfunding. If you think that our Sandpit tool might be of benefit to your university, or if you’d like to learn more about our offering, please email support@crowdfundcampus.com – we’ll be delighted to help.