首页> 外文OA文献 >Influences on Professional Practice: The HRD practitioner and their choice of learning style questionnaire
【2h】

Influences on Professional Practice: The HRD practitioner and their choice of learning style questionnaire

机译:对专业实践的影响:人力资源开发从业者及其学习方式问卷的选择

摘要

In an influential report, Coffield et al (2004) argued that the field of learning styles was dogged by increasing ‘theoretical incoherence and conceptual confusion’. Sadler-Smith (1996, 2001), Curry (1999) and Rayner (2007) echoed these criticisms and Curry (1999) commented that the learning styles literature was plagued with a plethora of published papers, many of which contained methodological and experimental design flaws. With these criticisms in mind, the question as to how HRD practitioners identified and selected a learning style questionnaire (lsq) to use in their professional practice was considered relevant. This study used a triangulated research strategy to identify and explain factors that influenced these choices and had Bhaskars’ Bases of Action model (1998) as an organising framework. The research demonstrated that from a wide range of lsqs available, that nearly 80% of HRD practitioners preferred to use one of only three of the most popular lsqs available. None of these fully met the quality criteria in Coffield et al (2004), namely demonstrating acceptable internal consistency, testretest reliability, construct validity and predictive validity. Factors driving practitioner choice were identified through the research as including: lsq brand strength, experience based habits gained through using an lsq, economic and cognitive ‘lock-in’ associated with an lsq, practitioner’s view of their own state of professional ‘mastery’ and their beliefs about how results are best delivered. Further insights included that the Myers Briggs Type Indicator was the most popular lsq and that there was only a limited knowledge of learning theories held by many practitioners. This research adds further to the debate about applied practitioners and their engagement with theory, research and evidence based practices. It offers a more dynamic model about practitioner decision making about, and engagement with, theory and research in support of their professional practice, than currently exists.
机译:在一份有影响力的报告中,Coffield等人(2004年)认为,学习风格的领域因“理论上的不连贯性和概念上的混乱”而增加。 Sadler-Smith(1996,2001),Curry(1999)和Rayner(2007)回应了这些批评,Curry(1999)评论说,学习风格文献受到大量已发表论文的困扰,其中许多论文包含方法论和实验设计缺陷。考虑到这些批评,有关人力资源开发从业者如何确定和选择学习风格调查表(lsq)用于其专业实践的问题被认为是相关的。这项研究使用了三角研究策略来识别和解释影响这些选择的因素,并将Bhaskars的行动基础模型(1998)作为组织框架。研究表明,从各种各样的lsqs中,将近80%的HRD从业者更喜欢使用仅三种最受欢迎​​的lsqs中的一种。这些都没有完全符合Coffield等人(2004)的质量标准,即证明可接受的内部一致性,testretest可靠性,结构效度和预测效度。通过研究确定了影响从业者选择的因素,包括:lsq品牌实力,通过使用lsq获得的基于经验的习惯,与lsq相关的经济和认知“锁定”,从业者对自己的专业“掌握”状态的看法以及他们对如何最好地交付结果的信念。进一步的见解包括Myers Briggs类型指示器是最流行的lsq,并且许多从业者所掌握的学习理论知识很少。这项研究进一步加剧了有关应用从业者及其与理论,研究和基于证据的实践的接触的辩论。它为从业者决策和参与理论和研究以支持其专业实践提供了比目前更动态的模型。

著录项

  • 作者

    Waters, Richard James;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2010
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 {"code":"en","name":"English","id":9}
  • 中图分类
  • 入库时间 2022-08-20 20:46:17

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号