Conceptual and Measurement Properties of the Productivity Environmental Preference Survey as a Measure of Learning Style

Abstract

The Productivity Environmental Preference Survey (PEPS) is one of a large number of learning style instruments used by researchers and practitioners to identify differences in the way adult students learn and study. The findings of this study using the PEPS suggest that the Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles Model is not conceptually well-defined. Factor analysis failed to produce the four hypothesized factors identified in the model as (a) Environmental, (b) Emotional, (c) Sociological, and (d) Physical. In the short term (8 weeks), the PEPS has fair test-retest reliability. However, over a longer interval of a year, the test-retest reliability of the PEPS is poor. For an instrument claimed to be measuring stable, inherent characteristics of an individual, this outcome is unsatisfactory. In terms of its utility, the PEPS is easy to administer and interpret. The PEPS variables are easily understood by both students and practitioners and, because an individualized profile is produced, it is less likely that students will be stereotyped on the basis of style using the PEPS than they will using the more simplistic bipolar conceptualizations of students' learning styles.