The document reports on a study that investigated the perceptual learning styles of vocational education students at Trat Technical College in Thailand. 170 students across 6 programs completed the Perceptual Learning Styles Preference Questionnaire. The results showed that the students' major learning style preferences were group, kinesthetic, and auditory styles, while their minor preferences were visual, tactile, and individual styles. There were statistically significant differences in learning styles between students in the Electrical Power Technology, Electronics Technology, and Accounting programs.

1. PERCEPTUAL LLEEAARRNNIINNGG SSTTYYLLEESS
OOFF VVOOCCAATTIIOONNAALL EEDDUUCCAATTIIOONN SSTTUUDDEENNTTSS
AATT TTRRAATT TTEECCHHNNIICCAALL CCOOLLLLEEGGEE
Presented by
Mr. Nattawut Matluang,
Student Number: 53631521, Email: eric.nattawut@gmail.com
Department of Applied Arts, Faculty of Industrial Education,
King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang (KMITL)

2.  INTRODUCTION
 LITERATURE REVIEW
 METHODOLOGY
 RESULTS
 CONCLUSION
 DISSCUSSION
 SUGGESTION

3. IINNTTRROODDUUCCTTIIOONN
One of the significant languages in the world is
definitely English language (Hou, 2009).
English is official language in more than 50 countries (CIA,
2012)
Educational Improvement in the 2nd Decade of Education
Reform (2011-2018) on English ability (OEC, 2011)
Student should be aware of their learning styles which
teachers need to guarantee this (Pask, 1977)

4. Teachers need to assess the learning styles of their students
Knowing students' learning styles is significant in learning.
Only Nimmanpisood (1992) and Buranarek (2002)
studied the learning styles in English language on
certificate vocational students.
No research emphasized on diploma vocational students'
perceptual learning styles in Thailand

5. RReesseeaarrcchh QQuueessttiioonnss
What are the perceptual learning styles of vocational
education students in six programs at Trat Technical
College?
Are there any differences between the perceptual learning
styles of vocational education students from different
programs?

6. OObbjjeeccttiivveess ooff tthhee SSttuuddyy
To investigate the perceptual learning styles of the
vocational education students in six programs at Trat
Technical College.
To compare the perceptual learning styles of vocational
education students from different programs at Trat
Technical College.

7. LLiitteerraattuurree RReevviieeww
CCuurrrriiccuulluumm for the Diploma of Vocational Education
 Principles
skilled workers
occupational competencies
an opportunity for the business sector
 Objectives
to produce and develop skilled workers with
knowledge, vocational skills, morals, ethics, disciplines,
attitude, personality, and intelligence.

8. DDeeffiinniittiioonn ooff LLeeaarrnniinngg SSttyylleess
 Learning styles qualified as cognitive, affective, and
psychological behavior which show how learner perceive,
interact with, and respond to the learning environment
(NASSP 1979).
 Learning styles refer to “stable, pervasive characteristics of
individual, expressed through the interaction of one's
behaviors and personality as one approaches a learning
task” (Reid 1987)

9. RReellaatteedd RReesseeaarrcchheess
 International Related Researches
Willing (1988) conducted a research with respect to the
learning styles in adult migrant education
- Impossible for statistically valid cross-comparisons
- There were cultural differences with respect to the
learning style preferences of the learners.

10. Reid (1987) conducted a research with respect to the
learning style preferences of ESL learners.
ESL learners strongly preferred kinesthetic and tactile
learning styles
Most groups showed a negative preference for group
learning
Stebbins (1995) replicated Reid’s (1987) study to obtain
more information about the similarities and differences in
learning styles between ESL learners and Native English
Speakers (NESs).
Results paralleled with Reid’s results
Kinesthetic and tactile learning styles were strongly
preferred by ESL students when compared to NESs

11.  Domestic Related Researches
- Banbang (2010) surveyed 232 undergraduate students.
Engineering preferred visual learning styles the most while
Applied Science preferred kinesthetic the most
- Boonsuk (2008) surveyed 433 Pondok schools students. Most
students preferred the group learning styles.
- Simsek (2005) explored 134 secondary school students.
Most students preferred kinesthetic style.
- Nimmanpisut (1992) surveyed 1,181 certificate students.
They used visual, auditory, group and individual learning styles
at the moderate level

12. MMEETTHHOODDOOLLOODDYY
PPooppuullaattiioonn aanndd ssaammpplleess
The population was 477 diploma students who were
learning English as a foreign language at Trat Technical
College, Thailand.
The samples were 170 second-year diploma students
enrolled in Developing Skills for English Communication
2 in the first semester of academic year 2012.
The samples were six programs; Building Construction
Technology, Mechanical Technology, Electrical Power
Technology, Electronics Technology, Accounting, and
Marketing.

13. MMEETTHHOODDOOLLOOGGYY
Questionnaires
PLSPQ
IInnssttrruummeenntt
Individual
demographic
information
To determine students' learning styles using Perceptual
Learning Styles Preference Questionnaire (PLSPQ)
To measure six learning styles; visual, auditory, kinesthetic,
tactile, group and individual learning styles

14. Perceptual Learning Styles
1) Visual Style: Tendency to learn more effectively through
visual perception.
2) Auditory Style: Tendency to learn more effectively
through auditory perception.
3) Kinesthetic Style: Tendency to learn more effectively
through whole-body movement.

15. 4) Tactile Style: Tendency to learn more effectively through
touch and hand-on activity.
5) Group Style: Tendency to learn more effectively through
working with others.
6) Individual Style: Tendency to learn more effectively through
working alone.

16. Levels of Learning Styles Preferences
Level of Learning Styles Preference Score
Major 38 to 50
Minor 25 to 37
Negligible 0 to 24
The Meaning of
Learning Styles Preferences' Average Mean Scores
Frequency Average
The Highest 4.50 to 5.00
High 3.50 to 4.49
Medium 2.50 to 3.49
Low 1.50 to 2.49
The Lowest 1.00 to 1.49

17. Data Analysis and Statistical Procedures
AAnnaallyyssiiss ooff RReesseeaarrcchh ttoooollss
Validity and reliability of the research tools
- The instrument validation value calculated by IOC was
91.1%.
- A pilot questionnaire with 65 diploma students in three
programs calculated by Cronbach Alpha was 0.898.
AAnnaallyyssiiss ooff rreesseeaarrcchh qquueessttiioonnss
Descriptive statistics
- Research question one : statistical procedures, arithmetic
mean, and standard deviation
- Research question two : One-Way ANOVA at a
significance level of p<0.05

18. RESULTS
Students' Demographic Background
Table 4.1: Summary for Demographic Background of
Samples by Genders and Programs

19. Result of Question One
Research Question One: What are the perceptual learning styles of
vocational education students in six programs at Trat Technical College?
Table 4.2: Mean and Level of Perceptual Learning Styles

20. Figure 4.1 Overall of Mean in Students’ Perceptual Learning
Styles
The result showed the two levels of perceptual learning styles: Major and
Minor levels.
Major:
Group, Kinesthetic, and Auditory.
Minor:
Visual, Tactile, and Individual.

21. RReesesaurlcth oQfu Qesutioens tTiowno :T Awreo there any differences between the
perceptual learning styles of vocational education students from different
programs?
Table 4.3: The Comparison of Students' Perceptual Learning Styles in 6 Programs
Statistical significant differences : Electrical Power Technology (p=.001*),
ENloe csttraotinsitcics aTl escighnniofliocagnyt (dpi=ff.e0r0e2n*c)e,s a :n Bd uAilcdcionugn Ctionngs (tpru=c.0ti0o1n* )
Technology (p=.019), Mechanical Technology (p=.113), and Marketing
(p=.011)

22. Figure 4.2: The Comparison of Students' Perceptual Learning
Styles in 6 Programs
Based on the result of Table 4.3, it can be seen in Figure 4.2

23. Table 4.4: Mean ( ), Standard Derivation (SD) and Frequency of Learning
Styles in each Program
The statistical significant differences at the level of 0.05 found
according to learning styles in three programs: Electrical
Power Technology (F = 2.871, p = .001*), Electronics
Technology
(F = 2.496, p = .002*), and Accounting (F = 2.462, p = .001*).

24. Electrical Power Technology students
"High" level in Group, Kinesthetic, and Auditory learning
styles
"Medium" level in Tactile, and Visual learning styles
"Low" level in Individual learning style
Electronics Technology students
"High" level in Group, Kinesthetic, Auditory, and Tactile
learning styles
"Medium" level in Visual and Individual learning styles
Accounting students
"High" level in Group, Kinesthetic, Auditory, Visual, and
Tactile learning styles
"Medium" level in Individual learning style

25. CCOONNCCLLUUSSIIOONN
Research Question One: What are the perceptual learning styles of
vocational education students in six programs at Trat Technical College?
Research Question Two: Are there any differences between the perceptual
learning styles of vocational education students from different programs?
The statistical significant differences at the
level of 0.05 were found according to learning styles
in three programs: Electrical Power Technology,
EThleecrtero wnaicss nnTooe cshtnaotilostgiyc,a al nsdi gAncicfoicuanntitn gd.ifference
of students' learning styles in Building Construction
Technology, Mechanical Technology, and
Marketing.

26. DDiissccuussssiioonn
This section discusses perceptual learning styles of 170
students in six programs; Building Construction Technology,
Mechanical Technology, Electrical Power Technology,
Electronics Technology, Accounting, and Marketing at Trat
Technical College.
It showed two levels of learning styles preferences: Major
learning style preference and Minor learning style
preference. The Major learning style preference included
Group, Kinesthetic and Auditory styles, while the Minor
learning style preference included Visual, Tactile and
Individual styles.

27. Matched ffiinnddiinnggss iinn pprreevviioouuss ssttuuddiieess
Boonsuk (2008) surveyed 433 Pondok schools students.
Most students preferred the Group learning styles as their Major learning styles.
Singhasiri et al. (2004) studied learning styles 63 first year Architecture
student at King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi.
Most students liked learning in groups through games and pictures.
Watanasin (2004) studied 20 students at Chulalongkorn University.
Students preferred Group learning style and nearly preferred Visual, Auditory
and Tactile and Kinesthetic learning styles.

28. Matched ffiinnddiinnggss iinn pprreevviioouuss ssttuuddiieess
Stebbins (1995) replicated Reid’s (1987) study ESL learners and Native
English Speakers.
Kinesthetic and Tactile learning styles were strongly preferred by ESL
students when compared to NESs.
Banbang (2010) investigated 114 Applied Science students at King Mongkut's
University of Technology North Bangkok.
Students preferred Kinesthetic learning styles as the most preference style.
Simsek (2005) explored 134 Thai secondary school students.
Most students preferred Kinesthetic style while Individual style was the
Negligible learning style preference.

29. IInn VVooccaattiioonnaall EEdduuccaattiioonn
Lin et al. (2006) investigated 400 vocational Taiwanese students in
vocational college and junior college
Most students preferred Visual styles, while Individual style and Group style
were the least preferred styles.
Nimmanpisut (1992) surveyed 1,181 certificate students in the Department of
Vocational Education.
Students used Group and Auditory at the moderate level.
The results in vocational education
were different from Reid (1997)
ESL learners strongly preferred Kinesthetic and Tactile learning styles.
Group learning styles was chosen as the Negligible learning style.
Thai students preferred Kinesthetic and Tactile as Major learning styles preferences,
Visual, Auditory and Individual learning styles as the Minor learning styles,
Group learning styles as the Negligible learning style.

30. This study was different from Simsek's (2005) and Boonsuk's (2008)
findings, they indicated that Individual style was the lowest rank in students’
perceptual learning styles.
Boonsuk's (2008) indicated that the students from the three Pondok schools
chose Individual learning styles as the lowest preference.
Simsek's (2005) showed that Individual was the Negligible learning style of
secondary school students.
In this research, the findings showed that, the statistical significant
differences were found in three programs: Electrical Power Technology,
Electronics Technology, and Accounting.
There was no statistical significant difference of students' learning styles in
Building Construction Technology, Mechanical Technology, and Marketing
This supported Simsek (2005), she found the significant difference between
males and females in group learning style and there was the significant
difference between males and females in Kinesthetic learning style.

31. This study showed that students used both Major learning style and Minor
learning style levels.
Major: Group, Kinesthetic and Auditory styles.
Minor: Visual, Tactile and Individual styles.
They didn't use Negligible learning style level at all.
They need to integrate every learning style to succeed the task in classrooms.
Sometimes, they feel comfortably in some learning styles (Major) and they
also learn well in particular way (Minor).
They are able to use their Major learning style (Group, Kinesthetic and Auditory
styles) and Minor learning style (Visual, Tactile and Individual styles) in learning.
Students in vocational education should be provided the opportunity to learn
through their strengths and improve their weaknesses.
Students can get over obstructions for their learning achievement and in
lifelong learning in the future.

32. SUGGESTIONS
Suggestions for Pedagogical Instruction
1) Teachers should design the curricula by integrating all learning styles into
the course with various activities.
2) Teachers should provide the classrooms with the teaching methods which
meets the way of students' learning styles preferences.
3) Teachers should use learning style instrument to determine students'
learning styles preferences, thus they are able to prepare the lesson properly
according to students’ learning styles preferences, but also they should
modify learning styles preferences of students to be covered all six learning
styles.
4) Teachers should try to enhance every learning style preferences. This can
develop their students' learning styles and build more skills for their learning
and communication.

33. Suggestions for Further Studies
1) Further research should be focused on both teaching styles and learning
styles as it can significantly enhance academic achievements.
2) Further investigation should be considered both on learning styles and
learning strategies as they both have the effect in students' learning.
3) Further research should determine students' learning styles in different
disciplines and various colleges over Thailand.
4) Further study can be investigated by using interview and class
observation.

34. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION