Validity and feasibility of a learning style instrument for brain injury rehabilitation

Abstract

Purpose: Identifying learning styles of acquired brain injury (ABI) patients may aid the learning process by tailoring to the patient’s learning needs and preferences. Currently, there is no learning style instrument for ABI patients. We therefore determined the validity and feasibility of the Adapted Learning Style Inventory (A-LSI) for patients with ABI. Method: We included 99 patients with ABI and 42 healthy controls. Learning styles were determined and subgroups were used to evaluate the validity of the A-LSI. Furthermore, rehabilitation professionals’ perceptions on learning style and the A-LSI were evaluated. Results: In the patient group, the A-LSI yielded the following learning styles: 4 doers, 54 observers, 2 deciders and 39 thinkers. A similar distribution was found for the control group (3, 28, 0 and 11, respectively). Spearman correlations revealed moderate internal validity. Content validity of the A-LSI was also moderate; 11 out of 19 patients recognized themselves in their A-LSI learning style. Furthermore, 12 rehabilitation professionals reported positive and negative aspects of the A-LSI and suggestions for using learning style in rehabilitation. Conclusions: Rehabilitation professionals were generally positive about using learning style in ABI rehabilitation. This study, however, raises doubts about the validity and feasibility of the A-LSI for this population.

Implications for Rehabilitation

• Rehabilitation professionals are generally positive about the assessment and implementation of learning style in rehabilitation.

• The A-LSI seems to be an inappropriate learning style instrument for individuals with ABI.

• There is a need for a more practical instrument to assess learning style directly at start of rehabilitation.

• Adapted learning style inventory
• brain injury
• learning style

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Lisette Meijer, Klaartje Verhoeven, Corine Werkhoven, Joke Heins, Bianca van Oossanen and Roos Sevat for providing the files and the interviewees for expressing their critical opinion.