No more "learning styles"
The lack of empirical evidence reflects that learning styles aren’t actually an effective way of instructing...😬.
May 31, 2024
Learning styles are a concept used in educational settings to describe how someone prefers to learn. You may have heard of, or associate yourself with, one of the styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, etc.) While we’re taught to believe that learning is best achieved when instruction is tailored to our preferred style, “there is no consistent evidence that matching instruction to students’ learning styles improves concentration, memory, self-confidence, grades, or reduces anxiety.” (Dembo, Howard, 2007). The lack of empirical evidence reflects that learning styles aren’t an effective way of instructing. Yikes/lol/welp.
How did we get here?
Learning styles started as a way to create individualized content, and address the diverse ways students learn (good). However, despite extensive research debunking this framework, it remains prevalent in teacher training material, educational marketing, and publications (not so good). I get it though — from a psychological perspective, humans crave classification. With personality tests like love languages and enneagram, or even zodiac signs, there’s “an appeal for industries and the general public to find out what ‘type of person’ someone is by slotting them into predetermined categories.”(Cuevas, 2015). Because of this, there is a mass desire for learning styles to be rooted in truth. If you understand what “style” of learner you are, you’re confident in knowing what you need to succeed while learning.
Why they don’t work
The majority of research points to three primary reasons for the ineffectiveness of learning styles. 1) There is a significant lack of consistent and comprehensive evidence that ties increased outcomes to learning styles. Studies in this area are inconclusive at best, and fail to establish a clear link between learning styles and enhanced learning. As Kirschner puts it “There is quite a difference between the way that someone prefers to learn and that which actually leads to effective and efficient learning.” (Kirschner, 2016). Relying on frameworks that aren’t validated only takes time away from evidence-based research that is actually proven to help students. 2) Learning styles are an oversimplification of how the brain absorbs information. Many scholars consider learning styles a neuromyth, which is a misuse or misunderstanding of neuroscience findings, especially as it relates to education. The brain is a complex organ, and the processes involved in learning and retention can’t/shouldn’t be neatly categorized into a particular learning style. 3) Teaching in a single instructional style, whether it is one that is most effective for the educator or for a subset of students, limits the range of instructional methods available, which can ultimately impact overall learning. If instruction happens to exclusively use auditory programming, a lot of students could be missing out on a learning opportunity.
What to use instead
Instruction should always focus on making the lesson as effective as possible by focusing on learning needs and student readiness, rather than catering to learning styles. It’s important to meet the student where they are, but “students do not need to be taught each subject by using…strategies catered to their individual needs. Rather, learners require diverse instruction that is efficient, engaging and dynamic, and uses techniques that are best suited to each subject/concept being taught.” (Hattie & Donoghue, 2016; Jordan et al., 2009; Pashler et al., 2009). Differentiation is “is the deliberate act of modifying instruction or an assignment in order to customize the effect to match the particular developmental level and skills of a student or group of students.” (Johnson, 2009). This is not catering to a specific learning style, rather, intentionally adjusting content in order for the student to learn and retain, based on needs. If students are struggling to understand, provide simplified visual aids and diagrams, use concrete examples to understand abstract concepts, offer additional support through guided practice, or encourage collaboration with other students. If students are quickly understanding, assign more in-depth research projects, provide opportunities for independent exploration, encourage them to create a visual representation of a concept.
To wrap this up, placing an emphasis on learning styles is restrictive and fails to account for the complex nature of learning. Practices such as differentiation and scaffolding are more effective strategies that can provide a stronger foundation for understanding and retention.
Work cited
Bransford, John D., et al. "Learning Theories and Education: Toward a Decade of Synergy." Handbook of Educational Psychology, 2006, pp. 209-244. ERIC, files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ767768.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2024.
