Psychometric Properties of the Revised Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Style Scales

Abstract

The 60-item version of Grasha and Riechmann's Student Learning Style Scales (six scales, 10 items per scale) was administered to a large sample of college freshmen on each of three campuses (total N = 870) in the northeast. The Participative, Avoidant, and Collaborative scales showed acceptable internal consistency, but the Dependent, Independent, and Competitive scales did not. Factor analyses of items and scales produced no solution approximating simple structure in any sample. Neither items nor scales yielded a factor pattern resembling the theoretical structure postulated by Grasha and Riechmann in any sample, although scale scores in two samples yielded a Participative-Avoidant factor that is one of the theoretical dimensions. Properties of the 60-item version are thus very similar to those reported for an earlier 90-item version.

Grasha–Riechmann student learning style scales: an Argentinian version

“…The four-factor model was compared to two alternative models: a three-factor model (Ferrari et al , 1996; Ferrell, 1983; Snyder, 1997) and a six-factor model (Baneshi et al , 2013; Fathaigh, 2000; Saritaş and Süral, 2010). The four-factor model showed a better fit and therefore, more adequacy to explain learning styles in local students.…”

“…On the one hand, evidences supporting the six-factor model (dependent, independent, participative, avoidant, competitive and collaborative) were reported (Baneshi et al ., 2013; Fathaigh, 2000; Saritaş and Süral, 2010). On the other, a three-factor model conceiving styles as bipolarities was obtained (dependent/independent, participative/avoidant and competitive/collaborative) (Ferrari et al , 1996; Ferrell, 1983; Snyder, 1997).…”

Prevalence of Learning Styles in Educational Psychology and Introduction to Education Textbooks: A Content Analysis

“…Leite et al cautioned against the use of the VARK for research purposes and pointed out potential difficulties in the interpretation of the scale items. Other learning styles instruments, such as the Revised Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Style Scales, also demonstrate poor internal consistency (Ferrari et al, 1996). Ferrell's (1983) comparison of four learning styles instruments (the Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Style Scales, Kolb Learning Styles Inventory, Dunn Learning Styles Inventory, and Johnson Decision Making Inventory) revealed substantial validity problems, as there was little overlap between the four scales.…”

“…cautioned against the use of the VARK for research purposes and pointed out potential difficulties in the interpretation of the scale items. Other learning styles instruments, such as the Revised Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Style Scales, also demonstrate poor internal consistency (Ferrari et al., 1996).…”

Scores on a Japanese-Language Version of the Learning Channel Preference Checklist

“…Unfortunately, the psychometrics of learning styles have fallen short of the enthusiasm and intuitive appeal for the overall project. The following authors represent a sample of those who have argued that learning style instrumentation in general is problematic or who have found the psychometrics of a specific instrument questionable (Curry, 1990;Ferrari, 1996;Furnham, 1992;Goldstein & Bokoros, 1992;Henson & Hwang, 2002;Isemonger & Sheppard, 2007;Moran, 1991).…”