Matching/mismatching revisited: an empirical study of learning and teaching styles

By N. Ford, Sherry Y. Chen. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2001

358 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review (2004, neutral): “For instance, Ford conducted three relatively small but rigorous empirical studies of matching and mismatching (1985, 1995; Ford and Chen 2001) and concluded on each occasion that matching was linked with improved performance.”
Demographic differences in how students navigate through MOOCs (2014, background): “Researchers have found that some learners prefer either more linear or non-linear navigation [5, 17, 21], and some perform best under highly structured guidance [9, 15].”
The Enduring Appeal of ‘Learning Styles’ (2010, background): “As an example, Ford and Chen (2001) claimed to have found support for matching learning style to teaching method but the construct they used—field dependence/independence—is commonly regarded Australian Journal of Education6 at University of Bath -”
Student Learning Styles Adaptation Method Based on Teaching Strategies and Electronic Media (2008, background): “However, most educational systems have ignored individual differences that exist between learners, such as the learning ability, the background knowledge, the learning goals and the learning style ( Ford & Chen, 2001 ).”