{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013689253935660506, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027378507871321013, 'mean_word_length': 5.585585585585585, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Learning Style Drift: Correlation between Built Environment Students’ Learning Styles and the Learning Styles of their Teachers

Abstract This paper focuses on the results of a cross-curriculum learning style survey conducted in an Australian School of Architecture and Building as part of an ongoing project aimed at resolving the learning difficulties of students collaborating in multi-disciplinary and multi-cultural team assignments. The research was conducted to determine how learning style differences in heterogeneous design teams might be addressed through pedagogy. We will argue that the likelihood of and reasons for learning style fluidity in student design cohorts needs determining if learning style theory is to provide a workable model for informing the teaching of design. In light of evidence in student cohorts of learning style changes as students progress through their studies (Tucker, 2007), this research discusses one explanation of what appears to be learning style fluidity in architecture student cohorts. If, as prior research has indicated, the learning styles of academics are quite different from practitioners, evidence of a learning style drift in built environment students towards the predominant learning styles of their design teachers might suggest that students are learning how to be academics rather than practitioners. This, of course, might have serious implications for built environment teaching and for practice.