This study was descriptive, correlative and explanatory. It summarized the problem solving and learning styles of students enrolled in the spring 2008 Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Agricultural Technology program, identified relationships between problem solving and learning styles, and used problem solving and learning styles to explain students' end of course grades. Ninety-three students and six faculty members elected to participate in the study. There were differences between degree options in terms of orientation to change. Second year students were likely to be internal processors. There were not significant differences among the population in ways of deciding. However, Agricultural Technology teachers were more task oriented problem solvers, while their students were people oriented. Teachers were more field independent than the students. There were no relationships between problem solving and learning style. There was a high degree of association between student ways of deciding and manner of processing. Student and teacher problem solving and learning styles were used to explain 11% of the variance in students' end of course grades for the six teachers in the study. Student orientation to change, student manner of processing, teacher manner of processing and teacher ways of deciding scores produced a model that significantly explained end of course grades. Suggestions for further research included identifying other career areas with stylistic trends and further identifying the impact cognitive effect has on student behavior. / Master of Science

The main aims of the thesis are: to explore the development of Swedish university students’ vocabulary knowledge, size and depth and vocabulary use (i.e. lexical richness) in their written output, to examine the relationship between these, their relationship to examination grades, and to investigate how these relationships develop over time. The results showed that over one year of university studies stronger links between the two dimensions of vocabulary knowledge, size and depth are established. No relationship was found between informants’ vocabulary size and lexical richness. However, a modest relationship was found between depth and the lexical richness of student essays. Furthermore, there was a modest relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic performance. A weaker significant, relationship was found between lexical richness of student essays and academic performance as reflected in the course grade. However, the study did not show evidence of a relationship between lexical richness and essay grade, which seems to indicate that lexical richness, is not an essential criterion in teachers’ assessment of essays. In regard to the development of the informant’s vocabulary knowledge, there was a significant growth in their productive size and depth of vocabulary knowledge after both one and two terms. The informants’ receptive size was found to only develop over two terms of study. Moreover, they produced lexically richer essays in their second term than in their first term of study. The results of the study are discussed in light of the effect of similar learning experience at university and the onset vocabulary ability of the informants. Moreover, the findings are discussed from the perspective of pedagogical implications and vocabulary assessment.