The concept of learning styles in education is highly questionable when used to categorize students in particular ways and attempt to match them to corresponding forms of instruction. This paper argues that the various learning modalities called Learning Styles are only cognitive tools that all learners have access to and must use to process…

This paper investigates forest school practitioners perceptions of learning at forest school to identify the topics covered, the learning styles, and the philosophies underpinning its delivery, based on interviews with experienced forest school practitioners. Practitioners identified the focus of learning at forest school as social development:…

Courses in anatomy have traditionally relied on lectures and cadaver dissection laboratories. In speech and hearing sciences, there tends to be less access to cadavers than in medical schools and other allied health professions. It is more typical to use anatomical models, diagrams and lecture slides. Regardless of the resources available, anatomy…

Study tours can help internationalize curricula and prepare students for global workplaces. We examine benefits of tours providing deep-level learning experiences rather than industrial tourism using five main theoretical frameworks to highlight the diverse learning benefits associated with intensive study tours in particular. Relevant theoretical…

A survey of the learning preferences of 197 Generation X workers found that they value incidental and action learning. They recognized the need for formal training, but suggested improvements. They preferred learning by doing, visual stimuli, and self-directed learning. (Contains 26 references.) (SK)

Much research has focused on cognitive skills in isolation from daily life and from action. However, memory and thinking in daily life are not separate from, but are part of, doing. This study is based on a theoretical framework that encompasses an integrated account of mind in action. This "activity theory" holds that neither mind as such nor…

Reviews the current literature concerning prior knowledge in an attempt to clarify problems with the terminology. Identifies the three main problems: lack of definition or vagueness, nominal versus real definitions, and different names/same constructs or same name/different constructs. Includes a conceptual map of prior knowledge terminology. (MJP)