practitioner (Curry, 1990; Hargreaves, 2005; Price, 2004; Smith 2002,). It is evident that

future research must use psychometrically solid measures of learning style with strong

theoretical ties in order to provide recommendations to education practitioners.

 Introduction to Kirton's Theory of Adaption-Innovation

 In Kirton's (2003) A-I theory, a person's cognitive style can be determined as

more adaptive versus more innovative along a continuum. Cognitive style is ultimately a

measure of how individuals solve problems with indication of preferences for learning

(de Ciantis & Kirton, 1996). Kirton (2003) describes cognitive style in context as

individuals interacting and reacting to the environment in consistent and stable

approaches when solving problems, which is consistent with definitions of learning style

and cognitive style used in this study (Claxton & Ralston, 1978; Messick, 1984). A

person may find their preferred style of problem solving along the adaptive-innovative

continuum by completing the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory (KAI).

 Kirton's (2003) measure of cognitive style along a continuum allows for interval

scale distinction between dissimilar cognitive styles of two individuals. Additionally,

dissimilarity of cognitive style can be determined between two innovative individuals or

two adaptive individuals. The calculated difference between two individuals' cognitive

style scores yields a cognitive style gap (Kirton) which determines the dissimilarity of

two approaches to problem solving. Cognitive style gap was calculated in this study by

subtracting faculty members' cognitive style score from each student's cognitive style

score.

 A cognitive style gap larger than 20 points may contribute to inefficiencies in

communication (Kirton, 2003). Stress is a result of cognitive gap (Kirton) which may

present important implications to learning. The literature suggests that stress in the form