ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 1

I. Abstract

Research Title: Relationship of Learning Styles and L2 Proficiency among

Grade 8 Students in Tagabas National High School
Researcher: Menchie P. Banqueles
Degree: Bachelor in Secondary Education
Major: English
Research Adviser: Melca DG. Cabanggangan

This study is focused on the learning styles and L2 Proficiency among Grade 8

students in Tagabas National High School, Catanauan. Both the different learning styles

and the level of proficiency in English of the respondents were determined.

To achieve the objectives of the study, descriptive design of research was utilized

through the participation of 63 student-respondents. It was found that, in terms of

learning styles, remembering beat by listening to a lecture that includes information,

explanations and discussions, easily understands and follows directions using map,

remembering best by writing things down several times are the most commonly used by

more of the respondents in learning English. In terms of the level of proficiency of the

respondents in English, majority of them have grades ranging from 80-85, followed by

those with grades between 77 – 79 and those whose grades range from 86-89. It was also

found that there is no significant difference (relationship) between the learning styles and

the level of proficiency in English of the respondents. From the findings, it is

recommended that preferred learning styles in learning English should be utilized more

often along with the teaching methods of the English teachers, and there is particular

learning style for a particular topic of skill in English, so in order to develop English

proficiency, be able to discover which learning style is effective to each skill or topic.

Keywords: Learning styles, English, English Proficiency, Level of Proficiency

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 2

II. Background

A. Rationale of the Research

Learning styles can broadly be defined as the learners' consistent ways of employing

certain stimuli in pedagogical contexts. From another view, learning styles are closely

connected with educational conditions under which learners are most likely to learn

(Briggs, 2014). In yet another view, learning styles are viewed as the correspondence

between the learners' fit and comfort and different methods of instruction (Kiefer, 2014).

Although the notion of learning styles is widely accepted, no agreement is reached over

the best way to measure the trend. Some notes of caution must be mentioned in that

learning styles just allocate learners along a continuum with some hints to discover the

various forms of mental representations. The shifting sands in the history of learning

styles encompass a large number of models and theories with an attempt to take

individual differences in pedagogical contexts in to account.

Every student uses his or her own unique learning style. Often they use a

combination of them. However, quite often the student is not aware of specific styles of

learning. In addition, teachers will teach many times using specific style that may not be

most suitable for students (Junar, 2015). Many students are observed to be barely English

proficient (Santiago, 2015), and they struggled in the classroom because the teacher did

not accommodate them. In the worst cases they were assigned a seat at the back of the

classroom and given simply a dictionary to help them (Aurora, 2014). Moreover, Aurora

discussed that too often the minority student is ignored, and as long as there are no

discipline problems, will occupy their desk for the entire school year while learning very

little. According to Ely and Alvarez (2014), the teacher is the most important catalyst in
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 3

bringing about the learners’ self-awareness, and it is the teacher who may be in the best

position to empower students by showing them how to empower themselves.

However, some teachers are ignoring the fact that language learners use different

learning styles and strategies and apply specific actions and behaviors that help them

learn. Teachers do not always consider these styles in writing daily lesson plans (Merci,

2014).

Each student learns in different ways and this affects their performance. The learning

of new words in English proficiency learning is a sure sign of all living languages as

never-lasting and a continuous process. language. However, learning the genius of the

English language is deemed pointless without being proficient in it. Demoting the

significance of English leads to a bookish, stilted language with an unimaginative tone

(Basti, 2014). For some learners, learning English using their own style is like a play

while others find it 'swimming against the tide' and therefore struggle hard to learn and

comprehend these gems of culture, skills and creativity using the English language.

Furthermore, while the application of English by a Filipino learner creates a feel of

innovative understanding, but some others often find them problematic and stressful.

Tagabas National High school is facing a dilemma today due to changing

environment. Today, students tend to be easily distracted by the surroundings. In that

case, students are not able to learn, specifically in the L2. Thus, the researcher came up

with the study regarding to the variety of the learning styles for the learners. In that way,

the teachers are able to identify how the students will learn the L2 in fastest and most

efficient way the students could learn it. Furthermore, conducting this study will also be a
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 4

B. Purpose of the Research

The study aims to find the Relationship of learning styles and L2 proficiency among

Grade 8 students in Tagabas National High School with the end view of preparing an

English Proficiency program.

Specifically, this study seeks answers to the following questions:

1. What are the different learning styles of the respondents in learning English?

2. What is the academic performance of the respondents in language proficiency?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the different styles of the students and their

level of English proficiency?

4. What English proficiency program may be proposed based from the findings of the

study?
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 5

C. Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on the following theories:

Theory of Motivational Interference

The theory of motivational interference has been introduced to study effects of

school–leisure conflict. Motivational interference is defined as the cognitive, affective,

and behavioral impairment of a chosen activity as a result of the motivational properties

of a non-chosen alternative (Curryl, 2014). It displays itself in phenomena such as

reduced persistence, switching activities, superficial learning, and bad mood. If pupils

engage in study behaviour, the expected consequences not only of the action actually

performed but also those of dismissed leisure activities influence their actual motivation.

Thinking about alternative options is expected to impair learning. In a cross-sectional

study, Entwistle and Tait (2015) found that motivational interference increased the more

attractive a non-chosen task was to the learner. Furthermore, there is experimental

evidence for the influence of dismissed options on the quality of current behaviour.

When this alternative option was present during pupils’ studying, experience, and

performance of learning suffered and learning results were impaired. School–leisure

conflict is not only detrimental for learning though – it also can have negative effects on

free time experience. Pupils who highly value achievement tend to enjoy meeting friends

less when a learning commitment is left pending than pupils to whom achievement is not

of high value.

This theory implies that the notion of school–leisure conflict leading to

motivational interference can be reconstructed as a self-control dilemma denoting an

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 6

internal conflict between the pursuit of behavioral plans that differ in their long-term

importance. It takes up the idea of costs as a category of task value in the expectancy-

value theory. It also implies that the choices are influenced by positive and negative task

valences, which both are characterized by immediate as well as long-range consequences.

In school–leisure conflicts, self-control is needed because the pupil weighs an immediate

goal of high present attraction (spending time with friends) against a goal that usually is

less attractive but important for the future.

Expectancy-Value theory

According to Fischbein (2010) behavior is a function of the expectancies one has

and the value of the goal toward which one is working. Such an approach predicts that,

when more than one behavior is possible, the behavior chosen will be the one with the

largest combination of expected success and value. Expectancy-value theories hold that

people are goal-oriented beings. The behaviors they perform in response to their beliefs

and values are undertaken to achieve some end. However, although expectancy-value

theory can be used to explain central concepts in uses and gratifications research, there

are other factors that influence the process. For example, the social and psychological

origins of needs, which give rise to motives for behavior, which may be guided by

beliefs, values, and social circumstances into seeking various gratifications through

media consumption and other non-media behaviors.

Expectancy value theory suggests that “people orient themselves to the world

according to their expectations (beliefs) and evaluations”. Utilizing this approach,

behavior, behavioral intentions, or attitudes are seen as a function of “(1) expectancy (or

belief) – the perceived probability that an object possesses a particular attribute or that a
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 7

behavior will have a particular consequence; and (2) evaluation – the degree of affect,

positive or negative, toward an attribute or behavioral outcome (Grub, 2011).

This theory proposed that persons are differentially susceptible to motivational

interference depending on their value orientations. A more general definition states that

values are generalized beliefs about the desirability of behaviors and events. The value

orientation concept can be linked to motivation theory. It resembles the concept of task

value, valence, or valuing, used in integrative theories of motivation, such as the

Expectancy-Value Theory.

Curry's Onion Model Theory

Using the way in which learning/cognitive style is measured to propose a layer-like

model of learning behavior, Curry (1983, 1987) utilizes an onion metaphor to illustrate

inner and outer layers of the construct. Initially proposing three layers, Curry later

includes ``social interaction'' as a fourth layer. ``Instructional preference'' refers to the

individual's preferred choice of learning environment. It is described as the outermost

layer, the most observable layer and the layer most susceptible to influence, making it the

least stable level of measurement. Instruments cited as measuring instructional preference

include the Learning Preference Inventory (Rezler & Rezmovic, 2011). Social interaction

provides the next layer and relates to the individual's preference for social interaction

during learning.

D. Literature Survey

This research is to review some relevant literature what has been written in the

literature on the issue related to the present study about the relationship between different

learning styles and their English Proficiency.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 8

Learning Styles

One concept in particular which has provided some valuable insights into learning in

both academic and other settings is learning style. There is general acceptance that the

manner in which individuals choose to or are inclined to approach a learning situation has

an impact on performance and achievement of learning outcomes. Whilst and perhaps

because learning style has been the focus of such a vast number of research and

practitioner-based studies in the area, there exist a variety of definitions, theoretical

positions, models, interpretations and measures of the construct.

According to Reid (2018), learning styles are defined as " the particular way in

which a learner tries to learn something. In second or foreign language learning, different

learners may prefer different solutions to learning problems. For example, some may

want explanations for grammatical rules; others may not need explanations. Some may

feel writing down words or sentences helps them to remember them. Others may find

they remember things better if they are associated with pictures.".

Felder & Dietz (2014) tried to make a distinction between styles and strategies. He

defines styles as those related to personality (such as extroversion, self -esteem, anxiety,

or cognition such as left/right- brain orientation, ambiguity, tolerance, field sensitivity).

While strategies are specific methods of approaching a problem or a task, modes of

operation for achieving a particular end. Brown also claims that individuals may have

various strategies while the styles seem to be more constant and predictable.

There is no agreement on the number or variety of learning styles though, and there

are various ways of classifying learning styles under different categories, for example,

Hills (2014) distinguishes between cognitive style (field dependent versus field
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 9

independent, analytic versus global, reflective versus impulsive); sensory style (visual

versus auditory versus tactile versus kinesthetic) and personality styles (tolerance of

ambiguity, right brain versus left brain dominance).

On the other hand, Hansen (2014) identifies four major language learning styles:

communicative, analytical, authority-oriented and concrete. His classification of those

styles was derived from learners' strategy preferences. In the communicative style, the

learners were defined by the following learning strategies: they like to learn by watching,

listening to native speakers, talking to friends in English, watching television in English,

using English out of class, learning new words by hearing them, and learning by

conversation. In the analytical style, learners like studying grammar, English books and

newspapers, they also like to study alone, find their own mistakes, and work on problems

set by the teacher.

According to Li and Xin (2014) in the authority-oriented style the learners prefer the

teacher to explain everything, having their own textbook, writing everything in a

notebook, studying grammar, learning by reading, and learning new words by seeing

them. In the concrete style, learners tend to like games, pictures, film, video, using

cassettes, talking in pairs, and practicing English outside class.

However, Tai (2013) expressed that the level of ambiguity and debate is such that

even the task of selecting an appropriate instrument for investigation is an onerous one,

with the unifying of subsequent findings within an existing framework problematic, at

best. This paper does not seek to achieve an absolute resolve and converge upon the ideal

model and measure of learning style, but rather to inform through description and

comparison. It is intended as a resource for researchers and professionals who desire a

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 10

broad appreciation of the area of learning style and who may, previously, have been

working with an in-depth understanding.

Cheema (2014) have previously noted that researchers in the field of cognitive

style/learning style often present only a very limited (if any) account of the variety of

theories and instruments which exist for the measurement of style. The terms ``learning

style'', ``cognitive style'' and ``learning strategy'' are understandably frequently used

imprecisely in theoretical and empirical accounts of the topic. The terms learning style

and cognitive style are, on some occasions, used interchangeably, whilst at other times

they are afforded separate and distinct definitions.

Cognitive style is described by Bostrom & Lassen (2016) as an individual's typical or

habitual mode of problem solving, thinking, perceiving and remembering, while the term

learning style is adopted to react a concern with the application of cognitive style in a

learning situation. Cheema (2014) went on to describe cognitive style in terms of a

bipolar dimension while learning style is seen as encompassing a number of components

which are not mutually exclusive.

It is also likely that cognitive style at the very least can be regarded as one significant

component of learning style. Park (2014) stated that cognitive styles are the ways in

which different individuals characteristically approach different cognitive tasks; learning

styles are the ways in which individuals characteristically approach different learning

tasks.

Riding and Buckle (2014) further stated that different strategies can be selected by

learners to deal with different tasks. Learning styles might be more automatic than
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 11

learning strategies which are optional.'' This final point, which attempts to distinguish

between style and strategy, rejects a recurring issue in the area.

Perhaps the more workable view is that a style may well exist is some form, that is it

may have structure, but that the structure is, to some degree, responsive to experiences

and the demands of the situation (process) to allow change and to enable adaptive

behavior. The ``motherboard/software'' and ``hard/soft'' wiring analogies have also been

used to describe the interface of style (motherboard/hard wiring) and strategy

(software/soft wiring). Investigating the issue of stability in learning style Loo (2014) did

and evidence to support consistency in learning style over time, but was critical of current

techniques of analysis and recommended caution in drawing any conclusion regarding

stability.

Learning-centered approaches are distinguished on the basis that there is a greater

interest in the impact of style on learning in an educational setting, and the development

of new learning-relevant constructs and concepts, often born out of the utilization of

assessment instruments.

Peck (2011) subsequent discussion of learning-centered approaches is framed around

the distinction between process-based models, preference-based models and cognitive

skills-based models. Process models are defined in terms of perceiving and information

processing, with Kolb's Experiential Learning Model representing one such approach.

Preference models focus on individuals' preferences for the learning situation and include

preferred time of day for study, temperature, light, preference for group/independent

study.
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 12

Cognitive skills-based approaches are characterized by the desire to apply cognitive-

centered models of style to a learning situation. These approaches focus on field-

dependency, perceptual modality and memory. The term “learning style” has been

defined in various ways. This is because, different researchers have their own

understanding of what constitutes learning styles (Zou, 2016).

Murillo (2015) defined learning styles as the general approaches (as opposed to

specific strategies) that students resort to in learning a new subject. Marzano, et al. (2013)

defined it as a biological and developmental set of personal characteristics that make the

same instruction effective for some learners and ineffective for others. Pearson (2014)

defines it as students’ preferred mode of learning. Knowing students’ learning styles is

important and beneficial to teachers as it will allow them to tailor their way of teaching so

as to accommodate the learning style preferences of their students.

Letteri (2015) regarded learning styles and strategies as being among the main

factors that help determine how and how well the students learn a second or foreign

language, and indeed different students will tend to favor different learning styles.

Cox and Kojima (2014) who suggest that further research be carried out to

investigate the relationship between learning style and performance so that the link

between the two is made clearer. Apart from that, studies should also be carried out to

examine whether gender has any influence on students’ preferred learning styles.

According to Taylor (2014), language learning styles are amid the factors that play

significant role in determining how well learners learn a language. Learning styles are the

general plans like global or analytic, auditory or visual, feeling or thinking that learners

employ in getting a language or in learning any other issue. These styles are the overall
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 13

patterns that give general direction to learning behavior. Learning style is also defined as

the biologically and develop mentally imposed set of characteristics that make the same

teaching method wonderful for some and terrible for others.

Richardson (2014) reiterated that learning styles should not be considered as

dichotomous, rather, they generally work on a continuum. As an example, an individual

may be more thinking-oriented than feeling, or more closure-oriented than open, or

equally visual and auditory but with lesser kinesthetic and tactile involvement.

Stebbins (2014) argued that few if any people could be classified as having all or

nothing in any of these categories. Besides, given that no single L2 Instructional

methodology fits all learners, the more the instructors know about their learners' style

preferences, the more effectively they can orient their L2 instruction. In other words,

some learners may need instruction presented more visually, while others might require

more auditory, kinesthetic, or tactile types of instruction. Without having enough

knowledge about their learners' style preferences, instructors cannot effectively prov ide

the needed instructional variety.

In terms of learning English, Pritchard (2013) stated that a number of researchers

propose that a mismatch between students’ preferred learning styles and instructors’

preferred teaching styles have bad effects on students’ learning and attitudes in the class

and to English in general.

A match between students’ preferred learning styles and the instructors’ preferred

teaching styles, on the other hand, would lead to an increase in motivation and learning as

shown in studies by Griggs and Dunn (2014).

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 14

Rossi (2014) defined language learning style as the natural, habitual and preferred

way or ways of absorbing, processing and retaining new information and skills. For the

purpose of this study, Reid’s definition of learning style and her classification of learning

styles into six types, Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic, Tactile, Group, and Individual, will

be used as they are the most widely used and accepted definition and categorization of

learning styles.

In fact, Peacock acknowledges that Reid’s work has aroused a great deal of interest

in the concept of learning style since it was published in 1987. Daley (2014) carried out a

study that aimed to investigate the present state of English vocabulary learning styles and

teaching styles at a primary school in China, and to investigate the strategies of English

vocabulary teaching used by teachers. He also, made suggestions for improvement and an

attempt to put forward several practical vocabulary teaching strategies to meet the needs

of different learning styles, which might reduce teaching and learning style conflicts.

Results obtained from Fu's study indicated that the learning styles of many students and

the teaching styles of many teachers do not match. The majority of students are visual

learners, while most teachers, on the other hand, adopt the auditory teaching style. He

also claimed that, in all academic classrooms, no matter what the subject is, there will be

students with multiple learning styles. Thus there are academically diverse learners and

teachers need to make curriculum choices that complement the interests, the needs and

the strengths of students.

Furthermore, Putintseva's (2016) article reminds the teachers of the need to be aware

of individual learning styles and learner diversity, and asserts that EFL/ESL teachers

should be aware of their students' learning styles, as this can be useful for them. On
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 15

another hand, Tai, (2013) conducts a study to explore the preferred learning styles of

adult EFL students in order to better understand their impact and shape on the language

learning process and to help determine to design the curriculum and the instruction for

classroom practice for higher achievement and increased motivation for learning. He

claimed that adult EFL students vary in their perceptual learning style preferences. These

differences influence adults learning motivation and success. Because of social and

possibly biological influences, a number of differences i.e. gender exist in approaches to

learning a second/foreign language. He concluded that the computer-assisted style was

perceived by respondents as being the most preferred, while individual and visual styles

were perceived as the least preferred.

Moreover, he found that there were significant relationships between auditory,

tactile, kinesthetic, and computer-assisted learning style and motivation in learning

English. Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory Kolb explains that different people naturally

prefer a certain single different learning style.

Geiger, et al (2014) classified learning strategies in to six types of strategies:

Memory strategies help learners’ link one concept with another but do not necessarily

involve a deep level of understanding. Cognitive strategies help learners to manipulate

the language in direct ways, for example through reasoning, analysis, note-taking,

summarizing, synthesizing, and outlining. Compensatory strategies help learners make up

for missing knowledge for instance, by guessing from the context in reading exercises.

Metacognitive strategies enable the learner to control cognition e.g. planning for a task,

gathering and organizing materials and evaluating task success, evaluating the success of

any type of learning strategy and so forth. Affective strategies help learners to regulate
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 16

emotions, motivations and attitudes. Finally, social strategies help the learners work with

others and understand the target culture as well as language. These strategies are

interrelated and at times may overlap with one another.

McCarthy‘s Four Learning Styles

Four learning styles have been identified by McCarthy (2014). Innovative learners

search for personal meaning while they learn, drawing on values, enjoying social

interaction, cooperation with the desire to make the world a better place. Analytic

learners have a desire for intellectual development and learning important things’ to add

to the world’s knowledge, drawing on facts while learning; patient and reflective.

According to Reza (2014), common sense learners have a desire to find solutions

since they value useful things; they are kinesthetic, practical and straightforward and

would like to make things happen. Finally, dynamic learners search for hidden

possibilities, judge by gut feeling, synthesizing information from diverse sources; are

enthusiastic and adventurous.

Based from McCarthy (2014), the students have their own way of independent

learning styles. Each of the students have their own talent that will be cultivated when

guided decorously. Furthermore, McCarthy (2014) is more focused on the analytical

intelligence of the students. However, Reza (2014) is more focused on the kinesthetic and

the emotions of the students. He/she stated that English language is being learned through

emotional and psychomotor movement. On the other, the researcher agrees on both

statement, that English language is acquired through talent and analytical intelligence,

since the brain take a big part in acquiring new language. Hence, knowledge is not
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 17

effective without the use of practice and drill. Therefore, mind, body, and heart are

always needed in learning.

Relationship between Learning Styles and Level of Proficiency in English

Vaseghi, etal., (2013) examines the learning style preferences of 75 Iranian high

school students. Their study was an attempt to identify the students' preferred learning

styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, tactile, group, and individual). Results obtained

showed that students' learning style preferences were kinesthetic and tactile. While

auditory, visual and individual were minor.

Likewise, Shakib (2013) described the learning styles models, in particular Reid’s

Perceptual Learning Style Preference. They concluded that teachers should take in their

consideration the differences in learning styles among students and enhance students'

learning strategies for their successful learning. Moreover, they emphasize the need to

enable students to be self-aware of both style and strategies, as students who know their

learning style preferences are able to build their self-confidence and can reinforce their

willingness to be risk-takers. Their study also revealed that differences do exist in

learning styles among the students from different gender and such differences should be

taken into account when teaching foreign languages.

Wong & Nunan (2011) also carry out a study that aimed at exploring student’s views

as to how they prefer learning English derived from their belief that learners' preferences

are of a crucial importance in the development of learner’s autonomy. Results of their

study revealed significant results suggesting a need for a closer co-operation between

students and teachers as to how learning activities should be arranged and implemented

in the classroom.
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 18

Some studies also have revealed a significant positive relationship between learning

styles and achievement in the English language proficiency as well as in other fields such

as economics, mathematics, and sciences, other studies have not found such a significant

positive relationship. It also presents research findings on style preferences of the

participants from different proficiency levels. Some investigations on the effect of

learning styles on achievement when it was matched to teaching styles have been

presented Investigating style preferences of learners from different levels of proficiency

was the aim of Neely’s (2013) study. Findings show a preference for visual learning by

students with higher language proficiency. It has also been stated that more proficient

ESL learners have probably had more exposure to the written word, and therefore feel

comfortable learning visually.

High achievers also show a preference for visual and kinesthetic styles in the study

carried out by (Cutolo & Rochford, 2017). The researchers designed a study on 2,597

incoming freshmen in a private university located in a large metropolitan area. The study

was conducted economics students and instructors at Saint Mary’s College of California.

It aimed at identifying the relationship between learning style preferences and academic

achievement. The results revealed that specific learning style preferences correlate with

achievement and that learning style preferences are varied according to academic

performance.

Park, (2014) investigated the relationship between learning styles and achievement

between different ethnic groups. The study concerned the basic perceptual learning style

preferences for the group and individual learning of Armenian, African, Hispanic,
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 19

Hmong, and Korean, Mexican, and Anglo secondary school students. The result revealed

significant students’ achievement level differences.

Li & Qin (2013) present an interesting contrast to the findings of the aforementioned

studies. The sample consisted of 187-second year college non-English major students.

The study aimed at investigating the relationship between learning styles of a group of

Chinese EFL college students and their language learning outcomes. The version of the

Myrers-Briggs Type Indicator Form G (MBTI- G) was used. The findings revealed that

learning styles were only weakly or indirectly related to language learning outcomes.

Similarly, Diseth & Martinsen (2013) conducted a study to analyze the relationship

between approaches to learning (deep, strategic, and surface), cognitive style, motives

and academic achievement on 192 undergraduate students. The results similarly revealed

that styles only had indirect effects on achievement.

L2 proficiency comes with variety of learning styles, since there are students’

diversity Hills (2014) distinguished between the cognitive styles wherein the brain

functions in independent learning, while sensory style is responsible for the five senses of

human being, lastly the personality is including, for it has the tolerance of ambiguity. The

researcher identified that brain is not the only reason for effective learning but every

human body should be included for the long life learning. Furthermore, learning styles

are very effective, Lette (2015) regarded that learning styles and strategies as being

among the main factors to determine how well the students learn in second language,

indeed it is strongly evident that students are favored with different learning styles.

According to the information cited by different authors, the learning of the students

L2 proficiency is based on the learning styles used by the teacher inside the classroom.
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 20

E. Significance of the Research

This study is significant to the following persons and institutions:

Grade 8 students. This study enables to help them assess their learning styles in

order to improve their English Proficiency. Through this study, the students are expected

to have their own desire to be proficient in English with their own learning style.

Teachers. The output of this study will be able to help them in assisting their

students in finding their learning styles. The teachers will also be able to guide their

pupils well in becoming English proficient.

Future Researchers. The findings of this study can provide new information that

they may be used as their reference in the same field and as future educators.

Administration. The output of this study shall be able to help their teachers in

providing proper guide for their pupils especially in assessing their learning styles.

F. Statement of Desired Outcomes

After the study, the teachers will understand the individual differences of the learners

in their learning styles as well as their L2 proficiency, and as a result, they shall be

capable of handling the students’ who acquires the problem.

The grade 8 students who do not acquire the mastery in L2 shall be considered as the

subject of the study. Moreover, this study shall diagnose the individual differences of the

learners and their learning styles in order to come up with a language enhancement

program that may proposed in addressing the students’ difficulties.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 21

The researcher will determine the relationship of learning styles and L2 proficiency

among Grade 8 students in Tagabas National High School.

The study aims to assess the learning styles of the students in order to help them find

the best way to be English proficient to improve the English proficiency of students.

G. Major Final Output

The researcher will come up with an English Proficiency Program which will

benefit the Grade 8 students of Tagabas National High School. This output shall be able

to determine the learning style suitable for every activity in the Speech Festival 2019.
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 22

RESEARCH OUTPUT

I. Title Activity

Speech Festival 2019

II. Activity Proponents

Menchie P. Banqueles

III. Rationale:

The Speech Festival 2019 program optimized learning to determine and elevate

the different learning styles and the L2 proficiency among the learners. This program

promotes further development in learners’ second language learning. Various of speech

activities will be conducted that will support the students’ learning development.

Thus, the output in each area will serve as the basis of their improvements.
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 23

English Objectives Strategies of Expected Output Monitoring and

Proficiency Activities Evaluation
Skills
Writing * to be skillful *organize an *establish a *checklist will be
in writing a eloquent speech confidence in used to identify errors
certain content that is good in a writing so that the of the context.
with an debatable topic. quality of the piece
essential topic will not be
and appropriate *write an essential compromised.
placing of speech for the
words and speaker of the *use some
vocabularies. festival. vocabulary words
*be creative in on the speech.
making a piece
enough to win * write a speech
on a with a correct
competition. grammars and
* Express a marks.
strong
emotions in
writing that
will hook up
all the
audience.
Reading *reinforce the *reread the speech * Reread a certain *rubrics will be used
critical and before giving it to topic and identify to check the work of
analytical the speaker and some errors on the the students.
comprehension identify some text.
in reading by errors and correct
making a it. *Read and think
comment and critically to judge a
suggestion *make a comment certain topic or
about the and suggestions issue.
context. about the speech.
*Make a
*analyze the *make a conclusion about
given text in a conclusion about what have read
meaningful the reflection from the context.
way by paper.
creating a
conclusion on
a given text.

Speaking * speak *Communicating *proficiency and *Rubrics will be used

fluently and with each other by expertly utilize the as the criteria for
skillfully using using English English language evaluation and for
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 24

English language. in both public choosing the “speaker

language. speaking and of the day award’.
*implement a social
* use an speech festival communication *a panel of judges
appropriate including the role process. will give them a score
stress, pitch, playing with the according to their
and juncture. use of English performance.
language as a
*express a medium of their
strong emotion instruction.
with full
confidence
while on the
stage with the
audience.
Listening *be an *listen to an * enhance the *checklist will be
attentive and informative speech student to be an utilized identify if the
active listener during the speech active participant set standard was meet
with positive festival and create of the group. on the reflection
feedback. a reflective paper.
feedback *elevate the
*listen to according to what students listening
other’s opinion have understood. skills by listening
critically. to other’s opinion
* have a and become an
collaboration with active listener of
the groupmate to the group.
create a pertinent
ideas and
information.
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 25

H. Target Beneficiaries of Research

This study is focused on enrichment of the learners’ learning styles and L2

proficiency. In that case, the Grade 8 students of Tagabas National High School shall

greatly benefit this study, since the study includes the learning styles of the students they

are able to identify their learning styles in meaningful way. Furthermore, it is also

focused in the L2 proficiency so they are able to have an expertise in the English

language which is very essential in this century.

I. Definition of Terms

The researcher provided the following definition of terms used in the study. The

following may serve as a guide to the readers:

English Proficiency is the state of having the ability to communicate and

comprehend English in all its basic skills. This includes reading, writing, and listening

and speaking.

English language refers to the world’s second language, and may be used in many

varieties around the world.

English Proficiency Program is a program that will highlight activities that will

help in improving the language skills of a person. An English Proficiency Program may

be designed based on the levels of skills of a person. It it’s the output of written

performance used for the enhancement of the target respondents’ L2 proficiency.

Learning Style is a term used to describe a technique or way that a student or a

teacher or anybody is capable of adapting to in order to learn something.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 26

J. Scope and Limitations of Study

The study covers the relationship of learning styles and L2 proficiency. In addition to

that, the researcher also conducted a study with regards to the English proficiency

program that would be facilitative for the English teachers in handling the students’

diversity. Thus, this research shall lead to the English proficiency program in order to

develop the students’ mastery in English language. However, this research will focus

only among the 63 students of Grade 8 in Tagabas National High School.

However, the study does not cover other English language learning such as writing.

Thus, this study covers only the relationship of learning styles and L2 proficiency

learning and some teaching interventions that will help the teachers to handle the learning

diversity of the students.

III. Description of Method or Approach

This part presents the methods and procedures that the researcher used to have

pertinent findings for this study. It contains research design, research instrument, data

gathering procedures, data analysis plan, and research paradigm and the statistical tools

used for the study.

A. Research Design

The researcher utilized a descriptive- survey method in this study in order to

determine the difficulties that the students encounter in the mastery of the second

language. Thus, this method was used since the researcher wants to know the learning

styles of the students in learning the second language, and the solution is also presented

to solve some problems.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 27

According to Maia (20121), descriptive research is a method that can describe the

findings based from the figures or data gathered. It involves the description, recording,

analysis, and interpretation of the present nature and composition. This is the most

appropriate method since it seeks to determine the learning styles of the respondents.

This study will also use the correlation approach in determining the significant

relationship among variables. According to Johns (2013), correlation measures the extent

to which two or more variables fluctuate together, whether positive or negative

correlation.

B. Research Instrument

In this study, the researcher employed a research-made questionnaire to gather the

needed data to answer specific objectives. Hence, the objectives are the learning styles

and L2 language proficiency that are mainly cited prior to the learners’ learning process.

C. Data Gathering Procedures

In gathering the necessary data, the researcher had notified the principal with an

endorsement letter signed by the advisor to conduct a study in the respective schools. The

questionnaires were distributed by the researcher to the school. The respondents were

given sufficient time to answer the instrument, which accompanied through the process

such as gathering of data and interpretation. Therefore, the survey had been conducted on

some specific respondents. The gathered data will be tallied, analyzed, interpreted, using

the appropriate tools.

D. Respondents

The respondents of the study are the Grade 8 students of Tagabas Ibaba National

High School. The Grade 8 is consisting of 63 students. The respondents were chosen for
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 28

the research, since they are expected to acquire the mastery of the four macro skills. A

Grade 8 student is expected to utilize a specific macro skill with proficiency. Hence, the

researcher aims to identify the lack of the students in a certain skill for them to master it

and use it on future purpose.

E. Sampling Procedure

Purposive sampling was utilized in the selection of respondents. Whereas, the

respondents were selected based on the objective of the study.

F. Hypothesis

There is no significant difference between the learning styles and the L2

proficiency of the students.

G. Data Analysis Plan

The purpose of this research is to determine the relationship of the different

learning styles and the English proficiency levels of the respondents. In order to do the

analysis of the data, the data to be gathered were categorized, tabulated and analyzed.

Using percentage and weighted mean, and t-test, these data were analyzed.

To determine the different learning styles and the English proficiency level of the

respondents, the weighted mean formula was used. A weighted mean tool helps in the

interpretation of the results through the weights because this is the measurement of

central tendency that represents the average of a given data.

Wm=∑FW/N wherein Wm= weighted Mean

∑Fw is the sum of the product of the frequency

and the weight

N is the total number of respondents.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 29

In order to determine the significant relationship of the learning styles and the English

proficiency level of the respondents, the pearson-R shall be used. It is used in order to

measure the strength of linear association of variable.

E. Research Paradigm

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Different learning
styles of the Proposed English
respondents in * Survey through Proficiency
learning English questionaire Program
Level of *analysis and SpeechFestival
Proficiency in interpretation of 2019
English data

Figure 1. Conceptual Paradigm

The conceptual paradigm of the study is shown in an input-process-output flow of

the study. The input includes the different learning styles of the respondents in learning

English and the level of proficiency in English of the respondents. The process includes

the survey, the data gathering using questionnaire, data analysis and interpretation, while,

the output will be an English proficiency program which is the Speech Festival 2019.

IV. Results and Discussion

This part presents the gathered data, organized and processed statistically, and

carefully interpreted to obtain information that would answer the problems presented in

chapter one. The tables were sequenced according to the statement of the problem, each
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 30

immediately followed by analysis, presented and discussion based on the concepts,

principles, and theories.

This is divided into two parts. The, first part deals with the different learning

styles of the students. The second part pertains to the second language proficiency of the

students. the third part is the significant difference between the learning styles and the L2

proficiency of the students.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 31

Part 1. Different Learning Styles in Learning English

Table 1. Respondents’ Assessment of the Different Learning Styles in Learning

English

Statements WM QD R
I can remember beat by listening to a lecture that 2.44 1
includes information, explanations and discussions.
Sometimes
I can easily understand and follow directions on my map. 2.38 Sometimes 2
I can remember best by writing things down several 2.37 Sometimes 3
times.
I require explanations of diagrams, graphs or visual 2.35 Sometimes 4
directions.
I like to write things down or take notes for visual review. 2.33 Sometimes 5
I prefer to use posters, models, or actual practice and 2.32 Sometimes 6
other activities in class.
I prefer obtaining informations about an interesting 2.25 Sometimes 7.5
subject by reading about it.
I prefer to see information written on her board and 2.25 Sometimes 7.5
supplemented by visual aids and assigned readings.
I chew gum, smoke or snack while studying. 2.24 Sometimes 9
I enjoy working with my hands or making things. 2.22 Sometimes 10
I am skillful with my hands or making things. 2.19 Sometimes 11
I can understand a news article better by reading about it 2.13 Sometimes 12
in the newspaper or online rather than by listening in a
report about it on the radio or internet.
I would rather listen to a good lecture or speech than 2.10 Sometimes 13
read about the same material.
I think the spelling of words by finger spelling them 2.08 Sometimes 14
I am good at working and solving jigsaw puzzles and 2.05 Sometimes 15
mazes
I do best in academic subjects by listening to lectures and 2.00 Sometimes 16
tapes.
I am skillfull with and enjoy developing making graphs 1.98 Sometimes 17
and charts.
I prefer listening to the news on the radio or online rather 1.95 Sometimes 18
than reading about it in a newspaper or on the internet.
I learn to spell better by repeating words out loud than 1.90 Sometimes 19
by writing the words on papers.
I can tell if sounds match when presented with pairs of 1.78 Sometimes 20
sounds.
Grand Mean 2.17 Sometimes
Legend:
Often 2.50-3.00 Wm- Weighted Mean
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 32

Sometimes 1.50-2.49 QD – Qualitative Description

Seldom 1.00-1.49 R - Rank

Table 1 shows the assessment of the respondents on the different learning styles

in learning English with a grand mean of 2.17, this indicates that the students sometimes

apply the different learning styles in English language learning.

The learning styles that got the highest weighted means include remembering beat

by listening to a lecture that includes information, explanations and discussions with the

highest weighted mean obtained of 2.44. It is followed by easily understands and follows

directions using map with the second highest weighted mean of 2.38. Remembering best

by writing things down several times follows with a weighted mean of 2.37.

However, the learning styles that got the lowest weighted means include being

skillful with and enjoys in developing graphs and charts with a weighted mean of 1.98. It

is followed by listening to news on the radio or online rather than reading about it in a

newspaper or on the internet with a weighted mean of 1.95. Learning to spell better by

repeating words out loud than by writing words in papers got the second to the last

weighted mean of 1.90. And the last one is telling sounds when presented with pairs of

sounds with the least weighted mean of 1.78.

According to Hansen (2014) in the communicative style, the learners were defined

by learning strategies like learning by watching, listening to native speakers, talking to

friends in English, watching television in English, using English out of class, learning

new words by hearing them, and learning by conversation. In the analytical style, learners

like studying grammar, English books and newspapers, they also like to study alone, find

their own mistakes, and work on problems set by the teacher. While Li and Xin (2014)

there are learners who prefer that the teachers explain everything, having their own
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 33

textbook, writing everything in a notebook, studying grammar, learning by reading, and

learning new words by seeing them. In the concrete style, learners tend to like games,

pictures, film, video, using cassettes, talking in pairs, and practicing English outside

class. However, Tai (2013) expressed that the level of ambiguity and debate is such that

even the task of selecting an appropriate instrument for investigation is an onerous one,

with the unifying of subsequent findings within an existing framework problematic, at

best.

Part II. Respondents’ Level of Proficiency in English

Table 2. Grades of the Respondents to Indicate their Level of Proficiency in English

Student Grades in Student Grades in Students Grades in

English English English

Student 1 83 Student 22 86 Student 43 83
Student 2 83 Student 23 83 Student 44 82
Student 3 82 Student 24 78 Student 45 85
Student 4 81 Student 25 83 Student 46 80
Student 5 80 Student 26 80 Student 47 85
Student 6 80 Student 27 79 Student 48 82
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 34

Student 7 78 Student 28 88 Student 49 94

Student 8 80 Student 29 85 Student 50 88
Student 9 78 Student 30 82 Student 51 83
Student 10 81 Student 31 81 Student 52 85
Student 11 79 Student 32 80 Student 53 91
Student 12 77 Student 33 93 Student 54 88
Student 13 78 Student 34 83 Student 55 86
Student 14 79 Student 35 88 Student 56 88
Student 15 83 Student 36 86 Student 57 85
Student 16 84 Student 37 89 Student 58 84
Student 17 79 Student 38 83 Student 59 83
Student 18 77 Student 39 83 Student 60 87
Student 19 78 Student 40 82 Student 61 83
Student 20 77 Student 41 92 Student 62 91
Student 21 83 Student 42 82 Student 63 91

Table 2 shows the grades of the respondents in English. These grades are the basis

of their level of proficiency in learning English. It shows that from a total of 63 pupils as

respondents of this study, majority of them or 33 got a grade in English that ranges from

80-85. This number is followed by 12 pupils with grades ranging from 77-79. There are

also 12 pupils who got a grade that ranges from 85-89. Lastly, six pupils got high grades

that range from 91-94.

According to Pritchard (2013), in terms of learning English, there is a mismatch

between students’ preferred learning styles and instructors’ preferred teaching styles have

bad effects on students’ learning and attitudes in the class and to English in general.

While Griggs and Dunn (2014) stated that a match between students’ preferred learning

styles and the instructors’ preferred teaching styles would lead to an increase in

motivation and learning. However, Rossi (2014) believes that language learning style is

a natural, habitual and preferred way or ways of absorbing, processing and retaining new

information and skills.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 35

Part III. Determining the Significant Relationship Between Different Learning

Styles and their Level of English Proficiency

83.3015873
Mean 21.05
4.148979356
Standard Dev 8.551786413
Std Error 0.522722265 1.104030879

Mean Difference 62.2515873

Sum (Std Error) 1.626753144

T Value 38.26738404
DFn 2.226430293

DFd 0.026385176

84.38186093
DOF 121 DF

P Value < 0.0001

Since there is unequal number of observations and the grades are not even paired

with the respective results of the survey, it would be impossible to correlate this result.

But then, a t-test can be used technically to determine the difference or relationship of

two variables that are not of the same move. That is why, this result is interpreted to be of

having extreme significant difference, or if to be interpreted with ‘relationship’, there is

no significant relationship.

V. Conclusions
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 36

Based from the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. In terms of learning styles, remembering beat by listening to a lecture

that includes information, explanations and discussions, easily understands and

follows directions using map, remembering best by writing things down several

times are the most commonly used by more of the respondents in learning English.

However, being skillful in developing graphs and charts, listening to news on the

radio or online rather than reading about it in a newspaper or on the internet, learning

to spell better by repeating words out loud than by writing words in papers and

telling sounds when presented with pairs of sounds are the learning styles that are

not commonly used by most of the respondents in learning English.

2. In terms of the level of proficiency of the respondents in English,

majority of them have grades ranging from 80-85, followed by those with grades

between 77 – 79 and those whose grades range from 86-89. The least number got the

highest grades of 90-94.

3. The result of the study shows that hypothetical stand is accepted which

indicates that there is no significant difference between the respondents of learning

styles and L2 proficiency among the Grade 8 students. Since, the computed T-value

is greater than critical value. In that case, it rejects the null hypothesis “there is no

significant difference between the respondents of learning and L2 proficiency”.

VI. Recommendations

Based from the findings and conclusions, the following is recommended:

1. According to the result of the study, among all the learning styles of the

students, listening is the most effective method of the students in learning

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 37

in order to cope up with the subject. In this case, the listening skills of the

students must often be utilized in delivering a topic. So that the students

are able to use their knowledge in maximum content.

2. The study shows that the academic performance of the students was high.

Whereas, the different learning styles were applied to the enhancement of

students’ English language proficiency. In that case, the four macro skills

must be utilized effectively along with its corresponding activities to

create a meaningful knowledge.

3. The four macro skills must merge in a specific learning area in favor of

the life-long learning of the students.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 38

VII. References

Aurora, S. (2014). The nature of learning styles and their relationship to performance in

children. Educational Studies, 2, 21±27.

Basti, A. (2014)."Behaviorally at-risk African-American students: The importance of

student- teacher relationships for student outcomes", Journal of School

Psychology. 45(1), 83-109.

Bostrom, L., & Lassen, L. M. (2016). Unraveling learning, learning styles, learning

strategies and meta-cognition. Education + training, 84.’

Briggs, A. (2014). The cognitive style index: A measure of intuition±analysis for

organisational research. Journal of Management Studies, 33, 119±135.

Cheema, I. (2014). Cognitive styles: An overview and integration. Educational

Psychology, 11, 193±215.

Cox and Kojima (2014) Comparison of eleven major learning styles models: Variables,

appropriate populations, validity of instrumentation and the research behind

them. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 6, 203±222.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 39

Curry, L. (2014). Integrating concepts of cognitive or learning style: A review with

attention to psychometric standards. Ottawa, ON: Canadian College of Health Service

Executives.

Curry, E. D. (1983, 1987). Patterns of learning styles across selected medical specialities.

Educational psychology, 11, 247±278.

Cutolo, A., & Rochfor, R. A. (2017). An analysis of freshman learning styles and their

relationship to academic achievement. College Quarterly, 10(2).

Daley, C. E. (2014). Using learning styles to predict foreign language achievement at the

college level. System, 28.

Different Learning Styles in Learning

English.https://learning.ucmerced.edu/sites/learning.ucmerced.edu/files/page/documents/

learningstylequestionnaire.pdf

Diseth, A., & Martinsen, O. (2013). Approaches to learning, cognitive style, and motives

as predictors of academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 23(2).

Ely and Alvarez (2014). Learning style theory: Less than meets the eye. Academy of

Management Review, 5, 445±447.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 40

Entwistle, N. J., & Tait, H. (2015). The Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory.

Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction, Edinburgh: University of

Edinburgh.

Felder, R.M., & Dietz, E.J. (2014), "The Effects of Personality Type on Engineering

Student Performance and Attitudes", Journal of Engineering Education, 91(1),

3–17.

Fishbein (2010). A factor analysis of expectancy Value theory. Educational and

Psychological Measurement, 52, 753±759.

Freedman, R. D., & Stumpf, S. A. (2014). 'A Study of Learning Styles, Teaching Styles

and Vocabulary Teaching Strategies in Chinese Primary School- How Do They

Differ and How Can They Be Integrated?".

Geiger, et al (2014). Cognitive system principles of levelling and sharpening: Individual

differences in visual time-error assimilation effects. Journal of Psychology, 37,

105± 122.

Giggs, J. & Dunm, P. (2014). Learning C with Adam. International Journal on E-

Learning, 4 (3), 337-350.

Grub, S. (2011). Learning and studying: A research perspective. London: Routledge.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 41

Hanssen, C. S. (2014). Learning style in ̄uences students' examination performance. The

American Journal of Surgery, 176, 62±66.Learning Styles 443

Hills, J. S. (2014). Cognitive Style Interest Inventory. Bloom®eld Hills, MI: Oakland

Community College Press.

Junar, D. (2015)."Building Relationships with Challenging Children", Educational

Leadership, 61(1), 60-63.

Kiefer, A. (2014). "One size doesn't fit all: Achieving accountability through application

of learning patterns". In R.R. Sims & S.J. Sims (Eds), "Learning styles and

learning a key to meeting the accountability demands in education", (pp.211-

226). New York: Nova Science.

Letteri, C. A. (2015). Cognitive pro®leÐbasic determinants of academic achievement.

Journal of Educational Research, 73, 195±199.

Li and Xin (2014) A comparison of learning styles between gifted and non-gifted high

school students. Childhood Education, 83.

Li, J., & Qin, X. (2013). The relation of learning styles to language learning outcomes:

An empirical study. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1).

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 42

Loo, R. (2014). Evaluating change and stability in learning stylesÐa methodological

concern. Educational Psychology, 17, 95±100.

Marzano, R.J., & Marzano, J.,S & Pickering, D.J.(2013), "Classroom Management that

Works", Alexandaria, VA: Association for supervision and curriculum

development and Vocational Education Students" , Education, 125(4), 527.

McCarthy (2014) The development of an inventory to assess the learning styles of adults

with learning difficulties.Journal of Intellectual Disabilities

Merci, G. (2014). The development of an inventory to assess the learning styles of adults

with learning difficulties.Journal of Intellectual Disabilities.

Murillo (2015). On qualitative differences in learningÐoutcomes and processes. British

Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4±11.

Neely, R. O., & Alm, D. (2013). Meeting individuals needs: A learning style success

story. Clearing House, 66(2). International Journal of English Linguistics Vol. 7,

No. 5.
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 43

Park, C. C. (2014). Learning style preferences of Armenian, African, Hispanic, Hmong,

Korean, Mexican, and Anglo students in American secondary schools. Learning

Environment Research, 4(2)

Pearson, J. T. E. (2014). Researching students' learning: Approaches to studying in

campus±based and distance learning. Buckingham: Society for Research into

Higher Education and Open University Press

Peck,S. (2011). Learning styles and strategies in adult immigrant ESL students. In M. J.

Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 118-125). Boston,

Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Pritchard, A. (2014). Ways of Learning: Learning Theories and Learning styles in the

Classroom (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Putintseva, R. J. (2016). Cognitive styles analysis. Birmingham: Learning and Training

Technology. On the nature of cognitive style. Educational Psychology, 17,

29±49.

Reid, M. J. (2018). The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly,

21(1).

Rezler, R. J., & Rezmovic, S. (2014). The relationship between cognitive style and

personality in further education students. Personality and Individual Differences,

23, 379±389
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 44

Reza,P. (2014), " Language Learning Style Preferences: A Theoretical and Empirical

Study, Advances in Asian Social Science (AASS). Vol. 2, No.2.

Richardson, M. D. (2007). A matter of style: Looking at L2 teachers’ teaching styles

from the perspective of learning style. Linguagem& Ensino, 10(1)

Riding, R. J., & Buckle, C. F. (2014). Learning styles and training performance.

Shef®eld: Training Agency.

Rossi (2014). The relationship between cognitive style and intelligence. Educational

Psychology, 14, 413±425.

Stebbins, C. (2014). Cultural- specific perceptual- learning- styles preferences of

postsecondary students of English as a second language. In M. J. Reid (Ed.),

Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 108-117). Boston,

Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Santiago, F. (2015), Learning style preferences of southeast Asian students. Urban

Education, 35(3).

Shakib,S.(2013), "Learning Styles Preferences of Iranian EFL High School Students",

International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature.Vol.2, No.4.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 45

Tai, F.. (2013), "Adult EFL Students’ Preferred Learning Styles and Motivation", The

Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 9, No. 2.

Taylor, E. M. (2014). Imagery performance and prose comprehension in 7 year old

children. Educational Studies, 2, 21±27.

Vaseghi, etal., (2013) Learning styles and elementary school ESL. In Learning styles in

the ESL/EFL classroom, edited by J. Reid. Boston, MA: Heinle & Henle.

Wong, L.L.C & Nunan, D. (2011), "The learning styles and strategies of effective

language learners". System, Volume 39, Issue 2, 144–163.

Zou, D. (2016). "Learning Strategies in Adult Migrant Education", National Centre for

English Language Teaching and Research, Sydney.

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 46

Appendices
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 47

MENCHIE P. BANQUELES
Brgy. Pagsangahan Sa Francisco Quezon
Contact No.09504183462

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Age : 33 years old

Date of Birth : November 6, 1986
Place of Birth : San Francisco, Quezon
Gender :Female
Citizenship : Filipino
Religion : Roman Catholic
Father’s Name : Romolo Banquiles
Mother’s Name : Rosario Banqiles

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT:

Tertiary : Manuel S. Enverga University Foundation Catanauan, Inc.

Bachelor of Secondary Education (2019-up to present)
Secondary: Pagsangahan National High School (2000-2005)
Primary: Pagsangahan Elementary School (1995-2000)

TRAINING/SEMINAR ATTENDED:

March 22 – April 18, 2018 Practice Teaching In-Campus

MSEUF Catanauan
Brgy. 09 Catanauan, Quezon
January 27, 2018 Seminar on “Current Trends in Research
Writing in Education”
Education Department
EU Gymnasium
Catanauan, Quezon
February 21, 2018 Career Fair 2018
Guidance Office
MSEUF Gymnasium
Catanauan, INC.
October 17, 2017 GOAL SETTING: “Shoot for the Moon and
Land with the Series”
College Department
MSEUF Third Floor
Catanauan, INC.
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 48

October 18, 2017 8th Regional Students’ Congress with the theme
“Communicating Across Generations”
cum Wellness and Physical Literacy.
College of Education
Lucena, City
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 49

Manuel S. Enverga University Inc.

Catanauan, Quezon
September 18, 2019

ISABEL P. ROGEL
Head Teacher I
Tagabas National High School

Dear Madam:

Greetings of Peace!

I, Menchie P. Banqueles, undergraduate student of MSEUF Catanauan is currently

conducting a study entitled “RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLES AND
ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY AMONG GRADE 8 STUDENTS IN
TAGABAS NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL”. This is a partial requirement for the course
Bachelor in Secondary Education.

In line with this, I would like to request permission to conduct a survey in your school.
Your accommodation will certainly help realize the objectives of the study.

Rest assured that all the information gathered will be treated with strict confidentiality
and shall only be used to serve the purpose of the study.

Thank you very much for your accommodation.

Respectfully yours,

MENCHIE P. BANQUELES
Researcher

Endorsed by

MELCA D. CABANGGANGAN
Department Head/Research Adviser
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 50

Relationship of Learning Styles and English Language Proficiency

Among Grade 8 students in Tagabas National High School

Respondent’s Questionnaire

Dear Respondents,

The undersigned is currently working on her undergraduate thesis which aims to identify the

“RELATIONSHIP OF LEARNING STYLES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE

PROFICIENCY AMONG GRADE 8 STUDENTS IN TAGABAS NATIONAL HIGH

SCHOOL”in this regard, may I request you to answer the questionnaire below?

Rest assured that whatever information that you will provide will be treated with utmost

confidentiality and shall only be used for the purpose of this study.

MENCHIE BANQUELES
Researcher

PART I: Different Learning Styles in Learning English

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 51

Directions: Please rate the statements to identify the different learning styles in learning English
by checking the space that corresponds to your answers. Be guided by the scales below.

Scale Verbal Interpretation

Often O
Sometimes S
Seldom S

Learning styles Often Sometimes Seldom

3 2 1
1. I can remember best by listening to a lecture that
includes information, explanations and discussions.
2. I prefer to see information written on the board and
supplemented by visual aids and assigned readings.
3. I like to write things down or take notes for visual
review.
4. I prefer to use posters, models, or actual practice
and
other activities in class.
5. I require explanations of diagrams, graphs, or visual
Directions
6. I enjoy working with my hands or making things.
7. I am skillful with and enjoy developing making
graphs and charts
8. I can tell if sounds match when presented with pairs
of
sounds.
9. I can remember best by writing things down several
times.
10. I can easily understand and follow directions on a
map.
11. I do best in academic subjects by listening to
lectures and tapes.
12. I learn to spell better by repeating words out loud
than by writing the words on paper.
13. I can understand a news article better by reading
about it in the newspaper or online rather than by
listening to a report about it on the radio or internet.
14. I chew gum, smoke or snack while studying.
15. I think the best way to remember something is to
picture it in my mind.
16. I learn the spelling of words by “finger spelling”
them.
17. I would rather listen to a good lecture or speech
than
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 52

read about the same material.

18. I am good at working and solving jigsaw puzzles
and
mazes.
19. I prefer listening to the news on the radio or online
rather than reading about it in a newspaper or on the
internet.
20. I prefer obtaining information about an interesting
subject by reading about it.

Part II. Respondents’ Level of Proficiency in English

 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 53

Table 2. Grades of the Respondents to Indicate their Level of Proficiency in English

Student Grades in Student Grades in Students Grades in

English English English

Student 1 83 Student 22 86 Student 43 83
Student 2 83 Student 23 83 Student 44 82
Student 3 82 Student 24 78 Student 45 85
Student 4 81 Student 25 83 Student 46 80
Student 5 80 Student 26 80 Student 47 85
Student 6 80 Student 27 79 Student 48 82
Student 7 78 Student 28 88 Student 49 94
Student 8 80 Student 29 85 Student 50 88
Student 9 78 Student 30 82 Student 51 83
Student 10 81 Student 31 81 Student 52 85
Student 11 79 Student 32 80 Student 53 91
Student 12 77 Student 33 93 Student 54 88
Student 13 78 Student 34 83 Student 55 86
Student 14 79 Student 35 88 Student 56 88
Student 15 83 Student 36 86 Student 57 85
Student 16 84 Student 37 89 Student 58 84
Student 17 79 Student 38 83 Student 59 83
Student 18 77 Student 39 83 Student 60 87
Student 19 78 Student 40 82 Student 61 83
Student 20 77 Student 41 92 Student 62 91
Student 21 83 Student 42 82 Student 63 91
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 54

Statements 3 2 1 WM ∑fw R
F Wf F Wf f wf

I can remember beat by 31 93 29 58 3 3

listening to a lecture that
includes information,
explanations and discussions. 154 2.44 1
I can easily understand and
follow directions on my map. 31 93 25 50 7 7 150 2.38 2
I can remember best by writing
things down several times. 28 84 30 60 5 5 149 2.37 3
I require explanations of
diagrams, graphs or visual
directions. 29 87 27 54 7 7 148 2.35 4
I like to write things down or
take notes for visual review.
29 87 26 52 8 8 147 2.33 5
I prefer to use posters, models,
or actual practice and other
activities in class. 27 81 29 58 7 7 146 2.32 6
I prefer obtaining informations
about an interesting subject by
reading about it. 23 69 28 56 12 17 142 2.25 7.5
I prefer to see information
22 66 35 70 6 6 142 2.25 7.5
 ENVERGA UNIVERSITY 55

written on her board and

supplemented by visual aids
and assigned readings.
I chew gum, smoke or snack
while studying. 23 69 29 58 14 14 141 2.24 9
I enjoy working with my hands
or making things.
23 69 31 62 9 9 140 2.22 10
I am skillful with my hands or
making things. 20 60 35 70 8 8 138 2.19 11
I can understand a news article
better by reading about it in the
newspaper or online rather
than by listening in a report
about it on the radio or
internet. 23 69 25 50 15 15 134 2.13 12
I would rather listen toa good
lecture or speech than read
about the same material. 20 60 29 58 14 14 132 2.10 13
I think the spelling of words by
finger spelling them
19 57 30 60 14 14 131 2.08 14
I am good at working and
solving jigsaw puzzles and
mazes 20 60 26 52 17 17 129 2.05 15
I do best in academic subjects
by listening to lectures and
tapes. 17 51 29 58 17 17 126 2.00 16
I am skillfull with and enjoy
developing making graphs and
charts. 19 57 24 48 20 20 125 1.98 17
I prefer listening to the news
on the radio or online rather
than reading about it in a
newspaper or on the internet. 14 42 32 64 17 17 123 1.95 18
I learn to spell better by
repeating words out loud than
by writing the words on
papers. 15 45 27 54 21 21 120 1.90 19
I can tell if sounds match when
presented with pairs of sounds. 24 72 31 32 8 8 112 1.78 20