g one’s own decisions about objectives); (d) competition (desiring comparison with others; needing to know how one is doing in relation to others); (e) instructor (knowing the instructor personally; having mutual understanding; liking one another); (f) detail (specific information on assignments, requirements, rules, etc.); (g) independence (working alone and independently; determining one’s own study plan; doing things for oneself); (h) authority (desiring classroom discipline and maintenance of order; having informed and knowledgeable instructors); (i) numeric (working with numbers and logic; computing; solving mathematical problems; etc.); (j) qualitative (working with words or language; writing, editing, talking); (k) inanimate (working with things; building, repairing, designing, operating); (l) people (working with people; interviewing, counseling, selling, helping); (m) listening (hearing information; lectures, tapes speeches, etc); (n) reading (examining the written word; reading texts, pamphlets, etc.); (o) iconic (viewing illustrations, movies, slides, pictures, graphs, etc.); (p) direct experience (handling or performing; shop, laboratory, field trips, practice exercises, etc.); (q) expectancy (the student’s predicted level of performance). For this study, items were rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1= most preferred rank to 4= least preferred rank). In order to maintain student privacy, each was assigned a letter for representation (A thru DD). Finally, to investigate the extent to which variations in student expectancy and student academic achievement I chose to conduct a correlational method of research. AnalysesFirst, I selected learning styles that were ranked 50 percent or above on each student’s learning styles inventory. The next step was to compare the expected grade with the actual grade by plotting the actual scores compared to the expected scores on a mixed bar chart. Finally, to see if...
