Abstract
In a June 1998 Asian Review of Accounting: Special Education Issue article ‘Learning Styles Preferences of Accounting Students in Multicultural Cohorts’, R. Desai and D. Taylor discussed Kolb's Learning Style Inventory. This paper comments on that article. It cites Freedman and Stumpf's 1980 discussion of the Learning Style Inventory (LSI) in ‘Learning Style Inventory: Less than meets the eye.’ This article was one of the first of many criticisms, not only of the LSI‐1, but of the LSI‐11, the revised instrument issued by Kolb in 1984. Freedman and Stumpf's discussion started a debate that continues to this day. My response to research using the LSI should also involve an interactive response between reader and writer. This particular response comments on R. Desai's and D. Taylor's interpretations and cautions that some of them may be unintentionally misleading.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
