A student’s cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical development can influence their readiness to learn and contribute to individual learning preferences (Murawski, 2019). The learning preferences of students can provide insights into how each student learns best, and their development (or lack thereof) in each area can affect overall learning outcomes. For example, Brian is a multimodal learner who prefers reading, writing, and auditory instructional activities and strategies. If Brian is behind in his linguistic development, he may struggle to keep up with the manner that he prefers to learn. Alice and Carl, on the other hand, are both visual learners who benefit from hands-on experiences and activities. However, if they lack physical development, they will struggle to engage in hands-on activities that require coordination and skill.  

I will use the learning styles inventory to inform the planning of my instructional and assessment activities. The learning types that I focus on are based on the VARK model, so: visual, auditory, reading / writing, and kinesthetic learning styles (Broadbent, 2021). Out of the three students surveyed, auditory, reading/writing, and kinesthetic were most common and shared by at least two of the three students (see Venn Diagram). Visual was still present in one student, Carl, but Alice and Brian did not share this learning preference. Knowing the learning styles of these students can help me plan activities and assessments that have these student’s best interests in mind. For my visual learner, Carl, I would plan to utilize an activity that features graphics, diagrams, charts, images, and videos. This might be a matching activity or an Ed puzzle video. For auditory learners, I would incorporate a traditional lecture-based approach in which I give verbal instruction to the class. This would allow them to follow along with auditory input that caters to their preference. For a reading/writing learning preference, I would provide students with a note-taking activity in which they annotate a problem and begin solving it based on the examples and descriptions they read. This could be like a riddle or puzzle in which students must follow the rules described. Finally, for kinesthetic learners, I would incorporate movement into lessons and instruction. This could be through Kagan strategies such as round robin, think-pair-share, or stand up-hand up-pair up. Other options for kinesthetic learners include Total Physical Response (TPR) movements associated with vocabulary words or Brain Breaks to split prolonged periods of sitting. 

I would evaluate the interests of students by building real connections with them. This allows me to get to know them on a personal level, where I understand their strengths, interests, and needs for growth (Sparks, 2018). I would use the interests of my students to integrate relevancy and meaning to their learning. For example, if my selected group of students were all avid members of the track team, I would incorporate a story problem that references the perimeter and area of the long jump pit. This would help create real-world connections between their interests and their learning. My student’s strengths and weaknesses influence how I plan my instruction as well. If most of the class (or even just a select group) is struggling with one idea or concept, I would take additional time out of the next lesson to reteach or reiterate misconceptions in learning before moving on to the next concept. Similarly, if students demonstrate mastery of a concept earlier than I had anticipated, this tells me that they do not need additional reinforcements and are ready to move on to more advanced tasks. 

When developing assessments for the identified students, I would integrate strategies that address all learning styles, especially the major 3 that these students have in common. To implement assessments that address all learning styles, I will use a combination of formative and summative assessments to monitor student understanding and readiness to learn. Teachers should consider a student’s level of readiness to determine their entry point to a lesson’s concepts and whether further differentiation will be necessary (Loeser, 2024). For example, I can cater to diverse learning needs of students by implementing pre-assessments and continuous progress monitoring. This can be done formatively through fist-to-five, strategic questioning, Think-Pair-Share, Round Robin partners, and mini-whiteboard checks. For my specific group of students, I would utilize a group project assessment that allows students to take on various roles. While all students would work to collect ideas and format the presentation, they would divide the presentation into areas suited to their learning preferences: auditory takes notes on other presentations, kinesthetic stands and gives presentation and walks room to look at other ideas, reading and writing check research.