PRUEBAS DE RECEPCIÓN DE OBRAS DE ARTE 1. GENERALIDADES

The relationship between thinking style and learning has long been studied, and it has been tested in diverse cultural contexts and educational settings. To examine the influence of thinking style on learning outcome, Sternberg and Zhang have conducted or led a number of studies in mainland China, Hong Kong, America, and some other countries. Both academic achievement and cognitive ability have been tested against thinking styles, providing a comprehensive account of learning outcomes. It is notable that most of the studies were published between 2000 and 2007, about ten years prior to the present. The social and school contexts differ between then and now, and the relationship between thinking style and learning outcomes may vary accordingly. Nevertheless, previous findings lay foundation and reviewing them can help with making assumptions with regard to this research.

2.6.1.1 Relationship between thinking style and academic achievement

Most studies employ academic achievement as a representative indicator of learning outcome. It is generally agreed that thinking style is associated with students’ academic achievement; nevertheless, the predictive power of each specific thinking style proposed by Sternberg (1997) in relation to learning varies according across socio-cultural contexts, educational settings and assessment modes (Fan, Zhang, & Watkins, 2010; Zhang & Sternberg, 2001).

Studies have been conducted in the United States, Hong Kong, mainland China, the Philippines and Spain, and typically show thinking style can be used to predict students’ academic achievement (Fan et al., 2010). As regards the United States, the judicial and hierarchical styles are consistently associated with high scores across a number of studies. Based on a sample of 67 American university students, Zhang and Sternberg (2001) were not able to identify any positive relationships between learning and the legislative or liberal styles. Instead, styles showing a tendency to self-organization and orderliness (i.e. the hierarchical style) contributed to higher learning outcomes. Similarly, Zhang (2002d) conducted a study with 212 American university students, and collected their GPAs (grade point averages) as evidence of their academic achievement. She found that students who achieved higher scores were those characterized with norm-conforming styles (i.e. executive style), a preference for systematic arrangement of multiple tasks (i.e. hierarchical style), or analytical styles (i.e. judicial style). By contrast, the legislative style was negatively related to academic scores.

As regards the situation in mainland China, higher academic achievement seems to be positively associated with a preference for working on details and following existing rules. Zhang (2007) conducted a study with 452 students from a senior secondary (sixth-form) school in rural China. Achievements in Chinese, mathematics and English were selected for study, as these three subjects are amongst the most important in the Chinese curriculum. Zhang found that the local style consistently facilitated achievement in all three subjects, which arguably reflected the fact that it was essential for these Chinese students to pay attention to concrete knowledge in order to achieve high scores. In addition, the legislative and executive styles were positively related to scores in Chinese, while the conservative style showed a negative correlation with scores in Chinese.

In Hong Kong, thinking styles characterized by an orientation towards conformity, orderliness and thinking internally have emerged as more likely to have positive relationships with academic achievement, while styles that feature creativity and uniqueness are seemingly not effective in attaining good test scores (Zhang & Sternberg, 2001). For instance, Zhang and Sternberg (1998) conducted a study based on 622 freshmen from the University of Hong Kong. The TSI was used to measure thinking styles and the scores attained in the university entrance examination served as a reflection of academic achievement. Zhang and Sternberg found that the executive, conservative, hierarchical and internal styles were positively associated with academic achievement, while the legislative, liberal and external styles were negatively associated with test scores. A study conducted by Zhang (2004) obtained similar results. Students from two Hong Kong secondary schools were involved in Zhang’s study, with the 82 participants being from Grade 9 (16 years old). Zhang collected scores for 16 subjects covering social sciences (e.g. economics and public affairs, geography), humanities (e.g. Chinese history, music, Chinese language) and natural sciences (mathematics, physics, chemistry). Zhang indicates that the hierarchical style was the strongest predictor of academic achievement, as it was identified as being positively related to the scores in 10 subjects, most of which belonged to the social sciences and humanities; the judicial style was most strongly predictive of learning in the natural sciences. Apart from the above two styles, the monarchic style was identified as being positively correlated with scores in design and technology.

The situations in Spain and the Philippines are generally similar to that of Hong Kong. Cano-Garcia and Hughes (2000) tested the relationship with 210 Spanish college students and found that thinking style could be used to predict academic achievement. Cano-Garcia and Hughes used the TSI to measure thinking styles, and grade point averages (GPA) from tests in high school served as evidence for academic performance. They found that students whose

achievements were higher were more likely to adhere to existing rules (i.e. executive style) and work individually (i.e. internal style), while they were unlikely to be those who preferred creative ways of studying (i.e. legislative style). A similar situation was also observed by Bernardo, Zhang and Callueng (2002) in the Philippines. The participants in the study were 429 Filipino students, among whom students characterized with executive, conservative, judicial, hierarchical and internal styles had a greater chance of achieving higher GPAs.

As summarized in Table 2.2, in most studies published before 2010 thinking style has found to be related to, and to have predictive power for, academic achievement (Fan et al., 2010; Jehng, 1997). Yet, the effects of the specific styles on achievement scores vary across socio-cultural contexts and educational settings. Moreover, most studies focus on university students, while how the relationship with school students is less well-known.

Table 2.2. A summary of the relationship between thinking style and academic achievement

Specific style US Mainland China Hong Kong Spain Philippines

Average Maths Chinese English Average Social

science Humanity Science Average Average

Legislative - + - - - Judicial + + - + + Global + Liberal - - - Hierarchical + + + + + + Executive + + + - + + Conservative - + + + + + Local + + + - - - Monarchic + Oligarchic Anarchic + + Internal + + + + External - -

2.6.1.2 Relationship between thinking style and cognitive ability

There are a small number of studies investigating the effect of thinking style on cognitive ability. Results concerning the relationship between thinking style and cognitive ability are generally consistent across different studies, reporting little or no significant results (e.g. Sternberg, 1997; Zhang, 2002c). One example is a study conducted by Grigorenko and Sternberg (1997), with 199 students enrolled in a Yale Summer School serving as the sample. These participants were high school students, like the sample in my study. Students’ abilities were assessed using the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test (STAT), Level H, designed for students aged 16 years and above (Sternberg, 1993). Thinking styles were evaluated on the

basis of a set of thinking-style tasks and a Thinking Style Inventory (Sternberg & Grigorenko, 1995). It was found there was no significant relationship between any of the thinking styles and cognitive ability.

Zhang (2004), tested the relationship in Hong Kong, with 250 secondary school students involved. All the participants responded to the STAT, Level H, which was used to measure cognitive abilities. Thinking style was evaluated using the TSI. Partial correlation analyses indicated that there was a lack of significant relationship between thinking style and cognitive ability after controlling students’ age, gender and school class level.