Literature DB >> 16558485

An assessment of learning styles among undergraduate athletic training students.

G L Harrelson1, D Leaver-Dunn, K E Wright.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Increased attention has been directed toward assessing and improving academic quality in athletic training education. The educational process has been assessed from a global level, but little is known about how athletic training students learn. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the learning styles of undergraduate athletic training students. DESIGN AND
SETTING: Undergraduate students enrolled in a Committee on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP)-accredited athletic training education program completed a learning styles inventory during a regularly scheduled athletic training class at the start of the spring semester.
SUBJECTS: Twenty-seven student athletic trainers (age range, 19-30 yrs, mean age = 20.5 yrs) served as subjects. Sixteen subjects (7 male, 9 female) were in the first year of this 3-year program. Eleven subjects (7 male, 4 female) were second-year students. MEASUREMENTS: Learning style was assessed using the Productivity Environmental Preference Survey.
RESULTS: Parametric and nonparametric one-way analyses of variance for each learning subscale by sex and by year in program revealed significant differences (P < .05) in light preferences for male and female students. There were also significant differences (P < .05) between first-and second-year students in preferences for afternoon learning activities.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that undergraduate athletic training students function best as leamers in a well-lit leaming environment. The significance of aftemoon as the preferred time for learning reinforces the importance of the clinical setting in the introduction and mastery of skills. Athletic training educators and clinical instructors can use these results as they examine their teaching strategies and educational environments.

Year:  1998        PMID: 16558485      PMCID: PMC1320376     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Athl Train        ISSN: 1062-6050            Impact factor:   2.860


  7 in total

1.  A study of two "quick-and-easy" methods of assessing individual differences in student learning.

Authors:  S E Newstead
Journal:  Br J Educ Psychol       Date:  1992-11

2.  Assessing learning styles using a computerized learning style inventory.

Authors:  D M Billings
Journal:  Comput Nurs       Date:  1991 May-Jun

3.  A four-year longitudinal study of dental student learning styles.

Authors:  W D Hendricson; W C Berlocher; R J Herbert
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 2.264

4.  Relationship between occupational therapy student learning styles and clinic performance.

Authors:  E M Stafford
Journal:  Am J Occup Ther       Date:  1986-01

5.  Cognitive styles and learning styles as predictors of academic success in a graduate allied health education program.

Authors:  J D Blagg
Journal:  J Allied Health       Date:  1985-02

6.  Accommodating nursing students' diverse learning styles.

Authors:  D Griggs; S A Griggs; R Dunn; J Ingham
Journal:  Nurse Educ       Date:  1994 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.082

7.  Reliability and construct validity of alternate forms of the CLS Inventory.

Authors:  S L Merritt; J C Marshall
Journal:  ANS Adv Nurs Sci       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 1.824

  7 in total
  8 in total

1.  Clinical-Education-Setting Standards Are Helpful in the Professional Preparation of Employed, Entry-Level Certified Athletic Trainers.

Authors:  Tim Laurent; Thomas G Weidner
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.860

2.  Pedagogic Strategies Perceived to Enhance Student Learning in Athletic Training Education.

Authors:  James M Mensch; Catherine D Ennis
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Overview of Athletic Training Education Research Publications.

Authors:  Paula Sammarone Turocy
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Effects of Clinical Field-Experience Setting on Athletic Training Students' Perceived Percentage of Time Spent on Active Learning.

Authors:  David C. Berry; Michael G. Miller; Leisha M. Berry
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.860

5.  Current knowledge, attitudes, and practices of certified athletic trainers regarding recognition and treatment of exertional heat stroke.

Authors:  Stephanie M Mazerolle; Ian C Scruggs; Douglas J Casa; Laura J Burton; Brendon P McDermott; Lawrence E Armstrong; Carl M Maresh
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.860

6.  Stylistic learning differences between undergraduate athletic training students and educators: Gregorc mind styles.

Authors:  Trenton E Gould; Shane V Caswell
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2006 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.860

7.  An Investigation of Undergraduate Athletic Training Students' Learning Styles and Program Admission Success.

Authors:  Kelly A. Brower; Catherine L. Stemmans; Christopher D. Ingersoll; David J. Langley
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.860

8.  A Nationwide Learning-Style Assessment of Undergraduate Athletic Training Students in CAAHEP-Accredited Athletic Training Programs.

Authors:  Stephanie L Stradley; Bernadette D Buckley; Thomas W Kaminski; MaryBeth Horodyski; David Fleming; Christopher M Janelle
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.860

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.