The document compares and contrasts the direct instruction model to Bernice McCarthy's 4MAT system for addressing individual differences among students. The 4MAT system categorizes students into four different learning styles and proposes eight instructional events to engage students' preferred styles at different steps of a lesson, targeting both left-brain and right-brain learners. It aims to provide opportunities for higher-order thinking by engaging students through their preferred learning tasks during every lesson.

1. Considering Individual Differences
One way to account for individual
differences is to modify the events of
instruction. Compare and contrast the
instructional events of a model of
direct instruction (be sure to identify
the source of the model) and the
4MAT system developed by Bernice
McCarthy.
Developed by W. Huitt, 1999

2. Considering Individual Differences
In general, there are three different
approaches for dealing with individual
differences among students:
• Develop events of instruction that
take into account individual differences
• Provide some sort of grouping in order to
reduce or accommodate the variability with
respect to student background, achievement,
ability or some other characteristic.

3. Considering Individual Differences
In general, there are three different
approaches for dealing with individual
differences among students:
• Modify the conditions within which
instruction is taking place.

4. The 4MAT System
The 4MAT system is a strategy for dealing
with individual differences is to develop or
modify the events of instruction so that they
specifically address individual differences.
It is a direct instruction approach to teaching
that utilizes research on brain lateralization
dominance and learning style to identify
specific instructional events that will be
attractive to a specific type of student.

5. The 4MAT System
According to Bernice McCarthy, developer of the
4MAT system, there are 4 major learning styles,
each of which asks different questions and displays
different strengths during the learning process.
These styles are based on the work of Gregorc &
Butler (1984) and are similar to the temperaments
as defined by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
(MBTI) and the Kiersy Temperament Sorter.
Gregorc, A., & Butler, K. (1984, April). Learning is a matter of style.
VocEd, 27-29.

6. The 4MAT System
Concrete-Random
SP (Sensing/Perceiving) WHY?
Sanquine

7. The 4MAT System
Abstract-Sequential
NJ (Intuitive/Judging) WHAT?
Choleric

8. The 4MAT System
Concrete-Sequential
SJ (Sensing/Judging) HOW?
Melancholy

9. The 4MAT System
Abstract-Random
NP (Intuitive/Perceiving) IF?
Phlegmatic

10. The 4MAT System

11. The 4MAT System
Each learning style is associated with both
left- and right-brain learners.
Left Right
Logical, rational, Intuitive,
sequential, serial, emotional, holistic,
verbal parallel, and
tactile-kinesthetic

12. The 4MAT System
The 4MAT system is designed to provide every
student with a preferred task during every
lesson. There are the 8 instructional events
proposed by this system.

13. The 4MAT System
STEP LEFT MODE RIGHT MODE
WHY?
1 Create an
experience
Reflect/Analyze
2
about experience

14. The 4MAT System
STEP LEFT MODE RIGHT MODE
WHAT?
3 Integrate into
concepts
Develop concepts
4
and skills

15. The 4MAT System
STEP LEFT MODE RIGHT MODE
HOW?
5 Practice defined
givens
Add something
6 of oneself

16. The 4MAT System
STEP LEFT MODE RIGHT MODE
IF?
7 Analyze application
for relevance
Add something
8 of oneself

17. The 4MAT System
The 4MAT system seems to have considerable
face validity, although there is not a widespread
research base to support it.
However, following the 4MAT system forces
the teacher to provide her students with
opportunities to engage in higher-order
thinking.