This is a reflection from one of the orientation sessions conducted by me for teacher educators on learning diversity where I prompted the participants to reflect on a class they recently attended, considering the various ways to classify their fellow attendees—through gender, cultural background, nationality, economic standing, or religious affiliation. They pointed out the countless mathematical approaches to such categorization, before questioning how these differences might affect learning outcomes and what this means for educational practices.
Research in education has extensively investigated individual learning variations as theoretical underpinnings indicate. To begin with, we decided to rationalize our understanding by encouraging them to create videos and conduct a reflective analysis of it. This simplified their analysis their video aimed to encourage reflection on these concepts as against providing an exhaustive review of literature, Focusing specifically on learning diversity, they planned to present three examples, discuss their teaching implications, and introduce a comprehensive model covering various learning differences.
When discussing learning preferences, I invited the participants to identify which descriptive statements best matched their own learning style, permitting multiple selections. They recognized that many might struggle to choose, since the provided descriptions represented typical preferences while real individuals usually fall somewhere along a spectrum rather than at extremes. I then revealed these descriptions represented Grasha and Riechmann’s (1974) six learning styles, arranged in three opposing pairs: dependent/independent, competitive/collaborative, and avoidant participant. The distinctive aspect of this theoretical framework is the focus on how students respond to classroom dynamics. This model stood out as it was developed by observing actual classroom behaviors rather than through abstract theorizing and the theorists were particularly interested in:

• Student attitudes toward learning
• Views on instructors and peers
• Reactions to classroom procedures
• Classroom participation patterns

I then switched on to another theoretical framework for examining learning preferences, asking the teacher-educators to prioritize different learning approaches according to personal importance. This activity illustrated Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory with its four fundamental learning abilities, which form the basis for identifying diverging, assimilating, converging, and accommodating learning styles. Further, we discussed about how each style fell into different ranking patterns and corresponded to specific learning approaches.
For their final exploration of learning preferences, I asked the participants to identify which additional statements best described them, again allowing multiple choices. These statements, as later explained, represented two of the four preference pairs from the Myers-Briggs (Type Indicator: extraversion (outward energy direction) versus introversion (inward energy direction), and judging (control-seeking) versus perceiving (openness to new possibilities). This dialogic engagement enlivened the learning space and created scope for celebrating diversity in the classrooms by creating inclusive pathways for learning.