2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2016.04.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thinking styles of university deaf or hard of hearing students and hearing students

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

4
12
0
4

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
(62 reference statements)
4
12
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The study used the Thinking Styles Inventory-Revised II and the University Self-Efficiency Scale on 366 deaf and hard-of-hearing and 467 hearing university students in mainland China and found that participants with Type 1 styles (i.e., more creativity-generating, less structured, and cognitively more complex) had higher levels of university self-efficiency. The study also showed that deaf and hard-of hearing students with Type 2 styles (i.e., more norm favouring, more structured, and cognitively more simplistic) had lower levels of university self-efficiency [38]. However, the study had some limitations, since the deaf students enrolled in this study were university students who had attended secondary schools for the deaf and the results cannot be generalized to deaf students attending school along with hearing students; further, the selected participants belonged to the same academic discipline (art and design majors).…”
Section: Students (Understand Cognitive Perception Of Students With Smentioning
confidence: 76%
“…The study used the Thinking Styles Inventory-Revised II and the University Self-Efficiency Scale on 366 deaf and hard-of-hearing and 467 hearing university students in mainland China and found that participants with Type 1 styles (i.e., more creativity-generating, less structured, and cognitively more complex) had higher levels of university self-efficiency. The study also showed that deaf and hard-of hearing students with Type 2 styles (i.e., more norm favouring, more structured, and cognitively more simplistic) had lower levels of university self-efficiency [38]. However, the study had some limitations, since the deaf students enrolled in this study were university students who had attended secondary schools for the deaf and the results cannot be generalized to deaf students attending school along with hearing students; further, the selected participants belonged to the same academic discipline (art and design majors).…”
Section: Students (Understand Cognitive Perception Of Students With Smentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Physical development has a very big influence on the child's ability to do something if the child's physical development is not good, it will be difficult for the him to do various things and he can be limited in some actions. (Cheng et al 2016). In following physical education children who are disabled can not do the same sport as normal children and they are limited in some sports.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, those researches that aim at understanding cognitive skills to elucidate how the learning process is efficient in the school context has gained prominence in the last decades (Cheng, Hu & Sin, 2016;Oliveira, Santos & Scacchetti, 2016;Oliveira, Inácio & Buriola, 2016;Curry, 1983;Riding & Cheema, 1991;Zhang & Sternberg, 2005). Zhang and Sternberg (2005) observe that learning, being a multifaceted process, presents aspects that permit the organization, storage, and reorganization of knowledge, which therefore goes beyond the notion of action.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%