Cognitive and Teaching Style Preferences of Officers Attending the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Instruction Course

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the cognitive style and teaching style preferences of instructors enrolled in the Reserve Officer Training Corps instructor course at the Academic Instructor School at Maxwell Air Force base. Sixty-five cases were examined for two research questions: (1) To what extent is there a relationship between cognitive style and teaching style preferences and (2) Is there a combination from the variables (a) gender, (b) age group, (c) ethnicity, (d) marital status, and (e) education level that will predict the KAI score for cognitive styles and the PALS score for teaching style preferences of the instructors in the Academic Instructor School? Correlation analysis indicated no significant relationship between cognitive style and teaching style preferences. Multiple regression analysis revealed no predictor variables for either cognitive style or teaching style. Multiple regression procedures indicated that both instruments performed according to the theory with Pearson r coefficients at the . 05 and . 01 levels of significance. Recommendations addressing sameness and lack of change in educational institutions include investigating additional variables, including other ranks and personnel from other Air University system schools, and examining cognitive style and teaching style preferences of non-military educational personnel. ____________________ Marie Kraska is Professor, Department of Educational Foundations, Leadership, and Technology; Stephen Harris is Chief, Program Evaluation for Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base. 6 JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL TEACHER EDUCATION Faculty members generally espouse the common belief that students learn and develop through exposure to content. A typical, didactic approach to teaching is one in which the teacher presents content to the student. The traditional lecture system focuses on covering subject matter through teaching by telling. However, learning may not be effective when the learner does not fully understand the teacher and, as a result, associations between learned information and new information may not occur. “If we believe that what we are teaching has real value, then we can benefit from understanding the effect of how we are presenting it and to whom” (Schroeder, 1993). There is more information about learning available now than ever before, and the amount of research on learning is escalating at a substantial rate. Birkey & Rodman (1995) suggest that culture plays an important part in determining how students learn. As the population becomes more diverse, it is important to develop and fine tune training and learning strategies that are sensitive to individual differences. Information related to learning styles is pertinent as advancing technology affects areas of instruction where the real life model of the magic wand, the microchip and associated software, challenge individual learning preferences in new and unique ways (Birkey & Rodman). Perhaps disparity between students’ cognitive styles and teaching style preferences could be minimized if these variables were better understood. Cognitive style refers to an individual’s creativity and style of problem solving. Style, in this case, refers to whether a person attempts to solve problems within the existing context (adapter) or whether a person seeks to find new ways to approach problems (innovator) (Kirton, 1987). Teaching style preferences refers to the “congruency between adult education practitioners’ actual observable classroom behavior and their expressed belief in the collaborative teaching-learning mode” (Conti, 1979). An analysis of teaching style preferences and cognitive style preferences could be useful in assessing inconsistencies that may occur in the classroom due to “style conflicts” or “style gaps. ” Decisions to use or not use structure becomes part of the decisions which teachers and instructional designers must make to design, develop, and implement Cognitive and Teaching Style Preferences 7 effective instruction (O’Boyle, 1986). Matching teaching styles to cognitive style might be one way that will enhance effective decision making about the teaching and learning process (Schmeck, 1988). “The teacher’s role, stated simply, is to facilitate learning,” (Miller, 1999, p.1). Comprehension of individual differences and cognitive styles can provide teachers with the theory and knowledge to improve the teaching and learning process. Statement of the Problem People perceive the world in different ways, and they learn about the world in different ways and under different conditions. Instructors’ understanding of cognitive styles and teaching style preferences may assist them in student advisement and instructional design and delivery. The focus of this study was the absence of information related to cognitive styles and teaching style preferences of ROTC instructors. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to investigate cognitive styles and teaching style preferences of future instructors for the Air Force who were enrolled in the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) instructor course at the Academic Instructor School at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama. The following research questions guided this study: 1. To what extent is there a relationship between cognitive style as measured by scores on the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory (KAI) and teaching style preferences as measured by scores on the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) instrument for instructors enrolled in the Academic Instructor School Reserve Officer Training Corps? 2. Is there a combination from the variables (a) gender, (b) age group, (c) ethnicity, (d) marital status, and (e) education level that will predict the KAI score for cognitive styles and the PALS score for teaching style preferences of the instructors in the Academic Instructor School? 8 JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL TEACHER EDUCATION Significance of the Problem The diversity of cognitive style is not usually considered in student recruitment, the delivery of instruction, or program assessment. Researchers suggest that the school culture is often alien and frequently in conflict with the home culture (Birkey & Rodman, 1995). Increased diversity of students may frustrate instructors. Unfamiliar with many of the new student characteristics, instructors see contemporary students as hopelessly under prepared or less bright or less motivated than previous generations (Schroeder, 1993).