An internet-delivered vak learning style assessment: development, validation, and implications for educational practice in Indonesia

  • Rahma Widyana 
    Universitas Mercu Buana Yogyakarta
    Indonesia
    http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3807-3470
  • Nikmah Sofia Afiati
    Universitas Mercu Buana Yogyakarta
    Indonesia
  • Sumiharso
    Net Assessment System Bandung
    Indonesia
  • Ranni Merli Safitri
    Indonesia

Abstract

Learning Style VAK Inventory for Junior High School students in Indonesia, addressing the need for culturally relevant, technology-driven assessments. Existing learning style inventories often lack adaptation to specific educational contexts, and there is a growing demand for accessible, internet-based evaluation tools. This study seeks to fill this gap by examining the inventory’s construct validity, reliability, and effectiveness in classifying students’ learning preferences. The inventory, consisting of 15 items measuring visual, auditory, and tactile learning styles, was tested on a sample of 1,400 students using online data collection. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the factor structure, yielding good model fit indices (CFI = 0.946, RMSEA = 0.024, SRMR = 0.027), supporting the inventory’s validity. However, internal consistency was moderate (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.580), highlighting the need for further refinement. Item discrimination indices ranged from 0.132 to 0.328, suggesting revisions for clarity and relevance. Descriptive findings indicated that tactile learners scored slightly higher (Mean = 21.187) than visual (Mean = 20.872) and auditory learners (Mean = 19.119), reflecting individual differences in learning preferences. While the study confirms the instrument’s structural validity, limitations include moderate reliability and potential biases due to online administration. Future research should focus on improving reliability, refining weak items, and ensuring broader population representation. The findings suggest that this inventory could assist educators in tailoring instructional strategies to students' learning preferences, supporting adaptive curriculum planning and personalized learning approaches in digital education settings.

Lisensing Information
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References
  1. Akçayır, M., Dündar, H., & Akçayır, G. (2023). The role of learning styles in educational technology integration: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 2035–2057. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11029-5
  2. Arbuckle, J. L. (2013). IBM SPSS Amos 22 User's Guide. Amos Development Corporation.
  3. Awla, H. A. (2014). Learning styles and their relation to teaching styles. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(3), 241–245. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20140203.23
  4. Azwar, S. (2021). Penyusunan skala psikologi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
  5. Cabual, R. A. (2021). Learning styles and preferred learning modalities in the new normal. Open Access Library Journal, 8(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1107305
  6. Cohen, D. R., & Richardson, M. (2020). Online assessment and personalization in education: Opportunities and challenges. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 39(2), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12348
  7. DePorter, B., Reardon, M., & Nourie, S. (2002). Quantum teaching: Mempraktekan quantum learning di ruang-ruang kelas. Bandung: Kaifa.
  8. Dunn, R. S., Dunn K. J., & Price G. E. (1981). Learning Style Inventory. Price Systems.
  9. El-Sabagh, H. A. (2021). Adaptive e-learning environment based on learning styles and its impact on development students' engagement. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(53), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00289-4
  10. Felder, R. M., & Spurlin, J. (2005). Applications, reliability and validity of the index of learning styles. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 103–112.
  11. Feng, Y., Iriarte, F., & Valencia, J. (2020). Relationship between learning styles, learning strategies and academic performance of Chinese students who learn Spanish as a foreign language. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29, 431–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00496-8
  12. Fleming, N. D., & Mills, C. (1992). Not Another Inventory, Rather a Catalyst for Reflection. To Improve the Academy, 11(1), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-4822.1992.tb00213.x
  13. Gaskin, J., & Lim, J. (2016). Master validity tool. AMOS Plugin In: Gaskination’s StatWiki, 1-55.
  14. Gholami, S., & Bagheri, M. S. (2013). Relationship between VAK learning styles and problem solving styles regarding gender and students’ fields of study. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(4), 700–706. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.4.700-706
  15. Gierl, M. J., & Lai, H. (2020). The role of technology in modern educational measurement. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 18(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2020.1783975
  16. Gong, Y. F., Gao, X. A., & Lyu, B. (2020). Teaching Chinese as a second or foreign language to non-Chinese learners in Mainland China (2014–2018). Language Teaching, 53(1), 44–62. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000387
  17. Herlina, N., Putri, Y. P., & Hasan, M. (2021). Pengembangan instrumen gaya belajar berbasis VAK untuk siswa SMP. Jurnal Evaluasi Pendidikan, 12(2), 95–106.
  18. Hu, J., Peng, Y., Chen, X., & Yu, H. (2021). Differentiating the learning styles of college students in different disciplines in a college English blended learning setting. PloS one, 16(5), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251545
  19. Kolb, D. A. (1976). Management and the learning process. SPRING, 18(3), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/41164649
  20. Kolb, D. A. (2007). The Kolb Learning Style Inventory. Boston, MA: Hay Resources Direct.
  21. Lee, H., Kim, J., & Song, H. (2021). The development of a web-based learning style diagnostic tool and its effects on learners' academic engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(3), 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1612442
  22. Lethaby, C., & Mayne, R. (2020). A critical examination of perceptual learning styles in English language teaching. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 58(2), 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0067
  23. Li, H. H., Zhang, L. J., & Parr, J. M. (2020). Small-group student talk before individual writing in tertiary English writing classrooms in China: Nature and insights. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 570565. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.570565
  24. Myers, I. B. (1962). Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychologist Press.
  25. Nge, R. N., & Eamoraphan, S. (2020). A comparative study of students’ perceptual learning style preferences and their academic achievement in learning English as a foreign language at Nelson English Language Centre, Myanmar. Scholar: Human Sciences, 12(1), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.12n.5.p.1
  26. Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.
  27. Ph’ng, L. M. (2018). Teaching styles, learning styles and the ESP classroom. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 150, p. 05082). EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201815005082
  28. Price, G. E., Dunn, R. S., & Dunn, K. J. (1981). Productivity Environment Preference Survey: An Inventory for The Identification of Individual Adult Preferences of Conditions in A Working and/or Learning Environment: PEPS Manual. Price Systems.
  29. Rahmawati, A., Fitriana, D., & Suparno, S. (2022). Implementasi strategi pembelajaran berbasis gaya belajar siswa SMP. Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia, 3(1), 45–52.
  30. Ramadhani, R., Umamah, N., & Sudrajat, A. (2020). The analysis of Kolb’s learning style for middle school students. International Journal of Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 15–21.
  31. Reid, J. M. (1987). The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 21(1), 87–111. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586356
  32. Sánchez, M. D., & Luján-Mora, S. (2021). A review of web-based learning style assessment tools. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 5115–5144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10585-1
  33. Sengsouliya, S., Soukhavong, S., Phonekeo, S., Sengsouliya, S., & Xaixanith, T. (2021). Mismatches in teachers’ teaching and students’ learning styles in English classes at a secondary school level: A case study of Laotian secondary schools. International Journal of Research in English Education, 6(1), 16–33. https://doi.org/10.52547/ijree.6.1.16
  34. Siddiquei, N. L., & Khalid, R. (2021). Development and validation of learning style scale for e-learners. SAGE Open, 11(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211022324
  35. Sreenidhi, S. K., & Tay Chinyi, H. (2017). Styles of learning based on the research of Fernald, Keller, Orton, Gillingham, Stillman, Montessori and Neil D Fleming. International Journal for Innovative Research in Multidisciplinary Field, 3(4), 17–25.
  36. Stoet, G. (2010). PsyToolkit: A software package for programming psychological experiments using Linux. Behavior Research Methods, 42(4), 1096–1104. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.4.1096
  37. Sun, P. P., & Zhang, L. J. (2020). A multidimensional perspective on individual differences in multilingual learners’ L2 Chinese speech production. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 59. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00059
  38. Suyata, M. T. A. N., & Pujiati, H. P. (2015). The effectiveness of VAK (Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic) model in learning of summary writing. International Journal of Research and Review, 2(6), 343–347. http://www.gkpublication.in/IJRR_Vol.2_Issue6_June2015/IJRR0066.pdf
  39. Yao, L., Abas. N., & Roslim, N. (2025). ESP in vocational instituted: A mixed-method study of students’ ESP learning style preferences. World Journal of English Language, 15(1), 70–80. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v15n1p70
  40. Yusuf, I., & Firdiansyah, R. (2022). Digital implementation of VAK-based learning for junior high school students. Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan, 24(1), 55–63.
  41. Zhou, Y., Liang, X., & Wong, K. (2022). Benefits and challenges of internet-based assessments in Asia-Pacific schools. Asia Pacific Education Review, 23, 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-021-09690-3

Downloads

PDF

Statistic

Abstract Views
: 147 times
PDF
: 50 times