Learning Styles of Elementary School Students in EFL Contexts: A VAK-Based Analysis
Abstract
Understanding students’ learning preferences is essential for designing developmentally appropriate and meaningful English instruction at the elementary level, particularly in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context. However, empirical evidence on learning style tendencies of elementary EFL learners within the Visual–Auditory–Kinesthetic (VAK) framework remains limited, especially in the Indonesian context. This study aimed to identify dominant learning styles among upper-grade elementary school students and to compare these tendencies across grade levels. A descriptive cross-sectional survey design with comparative descriptive analysis was employed. The participants were 56 fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-grade students from a public elementary school in Indonesia during the 2025/2026 academic year. Data were collected using a 30-item VAK-based learning styles questionnaire and analyzed using descriptive statistics, including frequencies and percentages. The findings revealed that visual learning style was the most dominant preference, accounting for 70% of the participants. Visual tendencies were consistently observed across grade levels, with 75.0% in fourth grade, 68.2% in fifth grade, and 66.7% in sixth grade. These results indicate that visual input plays a significant role in supporting English learning among upper-grade elementary students. This study provides empirical support for learner-responsive and visually supported instructional practices to promote meaningful EFL instruction in elementary school contexts, while acknowledging limitations related to sample size and self-reported data.
Downloads
References
Abdollahi, F., Paknazar, F., & Behrad, S. (2025). Identification of preferred learning styles of Semnan dental students by using the visual–aural–read/write–kinaesthetic questionnaire. Koomesh, 27(3), e153454. https://doi.org/10.69107/koomesh-153454
Achmad, W. K. S., Rachman, S. A., Aras, L., & Amran, M. (2024). Differentiated instruction in reading in elementary schools: A systematic review. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 13(3), 1997–2005. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v13i3.27134
Alsulami, N. D. (2023). Trends in educational research in the British Journal of Comparative and International Education. Information Sciences Letters, 12(1), 361–371. https://doi.org/10.18576/isl/120131
Andrade, C. (2021). The inconvenient truth about convenience and purposive samples. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 43(1), 86–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620977000
Ben Hassen, M. F., Bougherira, M. R., Alrayes, N. S., Alqahtani, A. M., Frih, N., & Kefi, K. (2025). Enhancing student performance and retention through synergistic teacher and peer-recorded videos in college algebra: An empirical study. SAGE Open, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251400560
Bich, N. T., Thuy, K. P., Huong, V. T. M., & Binh, P. T. (2025). Investigation of the factors affecting students’ self-directed learning readiness in the blended learning model. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 14(2), 1340–1350. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v14i2.31398
Cerovac, M., & Keane, T. (2025). Early insights into Piaget’s cognitive development model through the lens of the technologies curriculum. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 35(1), 61–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-024-09906-5
Çilogullari, S., Kutlu, M. O., Akman, P., & Yilmaz, C. (2021). The learning styles used by state and private elementary school students in English course: Adana province example in Turkey. Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, 15(2), 659–664.
Clinton-Lisell, V., & Litzinger, C. (2024). Is it really a neuromyth? A meta-analysis of the learning styles matching hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1428732. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1428732
Cohen, A. D., Oxford, R. L., & Chi, J. C. (2001). Learning style survey: Assessing your own learning styles. Regents of the University of Minnesota.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
Cvetkovic-Vega, A., Maguiña, J. L., Soto, A., Lama-Valdivia, J., & Correa López, L. E. (2021). Cross-sectional studies. Revista de la Facultad de Medicina Humana, 21(1), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.25176/RFMH.V21I1.3069
De Simone, C., & Ruggeri, A. (2022). Searching for information, from infancy to adolescence. In The drive for knowledge: The science of human information seeking (pp. 77–98). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009026949.005
Dinsmore, D. L., Fryer, L. K., & Parkinson, M. M. (2022). The learning styles hypothesis is false, but there are patterns of student characteristics that are useful. Theory Into Practice, 61(4), 418–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2022.2107333
Fallace, T. (2023). The long origins of the visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning style typology, 1921–2001. History of Psychology, 26(4), 334–354. https://doi.org/10.1037/hop0000240
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Gao, J., Borras, D. D., & Caiga, B. T. (2024). The practice of SPSS-based correlation analysis in English teaching research: An exploration of the relationship between classroom teaching and student achievement. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2024-1445
Guo, Y., & Li, Y. (2025). Exploration of personalized teaching paths in English education based on big data analysis. Journal of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering, 25(1), 821–836. https://doi.org/10.1177/14727978251322283
Herliana, F., Serevina, V., Maula, I., Farhan, A., Halim, A., Mukhlis, Susilawati, Susanna, & Tari, S. R. (2025). Developing project-based learning tools with VAK multi-modality differentiation to enhance students’ conceptual understanding. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 3139(1), 012082. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/3139/1/012082
Hu, L. (2024). Utilization of differentiated instruction in K–12 classrooms: A systematic literature review (2000–2022). Asia Pacific Education Review, 25(2), 507–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-024-09931-y
Huda, M. S., Bhuiyan, M. N. F., Kabir, M. M. N., & Rahman, I. (2022). Implementation of ELT training in Bangladeshi secondary classrooms: Challenges and recommendations. MEXTESOL Journal, 46(6). https://doi.org/10.61871/mj.v46n4-15
Istiqomah, R., & Suryadarma, I. G. P. (2023). The effectiveness of the VAK (visualization, auditory, and kinesthetic) learning model on motivation and learning outcomes of biology on the reproductive system. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2556, 030014. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0111110
Kamrani, Z., Tajeddin, Z., & Alemi, M. (2024). Scaffolding principles of content-based science instruction in an international elementary school. Pedagogies, 19(2), 257–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2023.2222716
Kemdikbudristek. (2022). Kurikulum Merdeka: Panduan implementasi untuk satuan pendidikan. Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi.
Kurnia, A. (2022). Pengaruh gaya belajar (visual, auditori, dan kinestetik) terhadap kemandirian belajar pada siswa kelas tinggi SDN Pekayon 10 Pagi [Undergraduate thesis, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta]. UIN Jakarta Repository. https://repository.uinjkt.ac.id/dspace/bitstream/123456789/60929/1/SKRIPSI%20ANISA%20KURNIA.pdf
Kwon, K., Jeon, M., Zhou, C., Kim, K., & Brush, T. A. (2024). Embodied learning for computational thinking in early primary education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 56(4), 410–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2158146
Lena, M. S., & Nikolov, M. (2025). A systematic review of empirical studies on young EFL learners’ motivation and task engagement. SAGE Open, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251386566
Li, X., Kang, X., Chi, C., Wang, X., Shang, M., Zhou, G., Gao, C., & Pan, Z. (2025). Basics of designing and steps of implementing cross-sectional studies in general practice and primary care. Chinese General Practice Journal, 2(2), 100064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgpj.2025.100064
Mayer, R. E. (2024). The past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09842-1
Menggo, S., Jama, K. B., Adnyani, N. L. P. S., & Krismayani, N. W. (2025). Indonesian English as a foreign language learners’ interpersonal communication: Profiles and challenges. LLT Journal: Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 28(1), 242–256. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v28i1.8670
Papadatou-Pastou, M., Touloumakos, A. K., Koutouveli, C., & Barrable, A. (2021). The learning styles neuromyth: When the same term means different things to different teachers. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 36(2), 511–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00485-2
Permana, P. G. A. M., & Rohmah, Z. (2024). Contemporary translingual English language policy and practice in Indonesia. Cogent Education, 11(1), Article 2404059. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2404059
Perrem, J.-G. (2024). Fostering student well-being and learning through kinesthetic activities in the Japanese university classroom. In Nurturing student well-being in the modern world (pp. 379–406). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-1455-5.ch015
Qian, Y., & Saidin, K. (2025). Exploring factors influencing student engagement: A concept paper. Indian Journal of Information Sources and Services, 15(1), 320–326. https://doi.org/10.51983/ijiss-2025.IJISS.15.1.41
Spyropoulou, E., Wallace, M., & Poulopoulos, V. (2025). Differentiated education using technology in junior and high school classrooms. Encyclopedia, 5(2), Article 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia5020071
Tabib, F. M. (2022). Exploring the effect of instructional scaffolding on foundation level students’ writing at the City University College of Ajman: A case study. Arab World English Journal, 13(3), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/col13no3.12
Tárraga-Mínguez, R., Suárez-Guerrero, C., & Sanz-Cervera, P. (2021). Digital teaching competence evaluation of pre-service teachers in Spain: A review study. Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologías del Aprendizaje, 16(1), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2021.3052848
Tozlu Kılıç, E., & Balaman, U. (2023). Facilitating students’ learning of a target construction through teacher interactional resources in EFL kindergarten classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 57(2), 656–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3209
You, C., Lu, H., Li, P., Zhao, X., & Yao, Y. (2025). AI-driven intelligent learning companions: A multimodal fusion framework for personalized education. In Proceedings of the 2025 IEEE 34th Wireless and Optical Communications Conference (WOCC 2025) (pp. 424–428). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1109/WOCC63563.2025.11082172
Ziauddin, L., Krivicich, L. M., & Nho, S. J. (2023). Cross-section study. In Translational sports medicine (pp. 191–193). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-91259-4.00081-3
Copyright (c) 2026 Nunik Herani Wulandari, Akbar Fauzan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
By submitting the article/manuscript of the article, the author(s) agree with this policy. No specific document sign-off is required.
License
The use of the article will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution license as currently displayed on Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Author(s)' Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by the stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author(s).
User/Public Rights
Under the Creative Commons license, users are allowed to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work. Users will also need to attribute authors on distributing works in the journal and other media of publications. Unless otherwise stated, the authors are public entities as soon as their articles got published.
Rights of Authors
Authors retain all their rights to the published works, such as (but not limited to) the following rights;
- Copyright and other proprietary rights relating to the article, such as patent rights,
- The right to use the substance of the article in own future works, including lectures and books,
- The right to reproduce the article for own purposes,
- The right to self-archive the article,
- The right to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the article's published version (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
Co-Authorship
If the article was jointly prepared by more than one author, any authors submitting the manuscript warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to be agreed on this copyright and license notice (agreement) on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this policy. The journal will not be held liable for anything that may arise due to the author(s) internal dispute. The journal will only communicate with the corresponding author.
Royalties
Being an open accessed journal and disseminating articles for free under the Creative Commons license term mentioned, author(s) aware that the journal entitles the author(s) to no royalties or other fees.
Miscellaneous
The article will be published in the journal if the article’s editorial process is successfully completed. The editors may modify the article to a style of punctuation, spelling, capitalization, referencing, and usage that deems appropriate. The author acknowledges that the article may be published so that it will be publicly accessible and such access will be free of charge for the readers.
