A test of the teaching-learning style mesh hypothesis in a Chinese MBA

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to determine if “fit” and “non-fit” between authoritarian versus demonstrator teaching and visual versus verbal learning preferences differ in impact on Chinese MBA student academic performance in a large local urban Chinese university setting. In addition, the role of Chinese cultural behavioral tendencies in dictating specific teaching and learning style preferences among Chinese MBA students is also examined. Design/methodology/approach – Subjects were 135 Chinese MBA students that indicated their learning style preference (verbal or visual) and predominant teaching style encountered (authoritarian or demonstrator). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) main effects were used to identify the best teaching style and best learning style. ANOVA interaction effects were used to test the meshing hypothesis (i.e. teaching-learning style “fit” versus “non-fit” conditions). Findings – The results provided support for the mesh hypothesis – teaching style – learning style fit does matter. In general, authoritarian teaching was superior to demonstrator, and verbal learning was superior to visual. Findings also suggest that the demonstrator teaching style may better handle different learning styles (e.g. both verbal and visual) simultaneously as compared to the classic authoritarian teaching style. Research limitations/implications – The findings support and contribute to the body of knowledge about the mesh hypothesis and provide the foundations for further longitudinal studies evaluating teaching and learning styles learning styles in a multicultural and cross-cultural context. A limitation of the study is that self-report responses were used and the data were collected at one Chinese university. Practical implications – The results suggest that instructors are likely to reach only a selected few students if it is assumed that all students learn in the same way or based on cultural orientation alone. University administrators should be aware of the role of cultural tendencies related to teaching and learning and how cross-cultural communication and multicultural awareness can provide insights into strategies for social and academic integration of foreign students. Originality/value – To date, the meshing hypothesis has received far less theoretical or empirical attention than the general learning style and teaching style hypotheses. This study addresses that gap.

Changing facets of higher education in management: a students’ perspective

“…Teachers should be trained is such a way that their teaching can sync well with different learning styles. Nielsen (2008) advocated this point of view, and it is shared by other researchers as well (Gopalan et al , 2010; Andres and Akan, 2015; Grasha and Yangarber-Hicks, 2000).…”

“…Andres and Akan (2015) developed a matrix of TSs (teaching styles) and LSs (learning styles) to facilitate ETL in MBA education institutions. Thomas (2007) posited, against the current study, that attributes of teachers in MBA education are the primary determinants of ETL.…”

Identifying Learning Preferences and Strategies in Health Data Science Courses: Systematic Review

“…Given the above, gaining knowledge about learners' preferences and strategies in HDS can help course designers create optimised courses or redesign existing courses [12,33,34], having a positive impact on student interest, engagement and performance [17,34]. Additionally, informing teachers about students' learning preferences and strategies in HDS can assist them not only in selecting appropriate teaching methods but also in providing personalised feedback to students [12,31,35,36].…”

Learning Styles of Talented Pre-Service Teachers

“…There are studies in the literature on the learning styles of pre-service teachers who are accepted to higher education only through exams that measure theoretical skills in different fields and with sample groups (Andres & Akan, 2015;Alsobhi & Alyouni, 2019;Balfaqeeh, 2017;Baykan & Naçar, 2007;Berkova et al, 2020;Chan & Mak, 2010;Choi & Sardar, 2011;Drago & Richard, 2004;Espinoza-Poves et al, 2019;Freiberg-Hoffmann et al, 2017;Galperin & Punnett, 2021;Goulding & Syed-Khuzzan, 2014;James-Gordon & Bal, 2001;Jepsen et al, 2015;Katsioloudis & Fantz, 2012;Marantika, 2022;Mozaffari et al, 2020;Nwajiuba & Onyeneke, 2022;Poon Teng Fatt, 2000;Tam, 2022;Tongal & Dağyar, 2022;Yousef, 2016;Yousef, 2018;Wilson et al, 2018;Zapalska & Brozik, 2006). According to these studies, students' dominant learning styles can be visual, aural, reading/writing, or kinesthetic.…”