Hi Kirstie,

I admit that I have no experience in that domain, but apparently the available empirical evidence suggests that the whole learning-styles approach lacks scientific validity. Even if you don't agree, you can find this critical review very helpful: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf There is also a very brief summary here: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/learning-styles-debunked-there-is-no-evidence-supporting-auditory-and-visual-learning-psychologists-say.html

Best wishes,

MAV

I believe learning styles is a misnomer. From Kolb's point of view, a learning style is simply a description of the skills that a learner tends to use that go far beyond passive a-v learning. It is like being dealt a hand of cards and we all would like to have a full house. Learning is all about opportunity and effort to apply and rehearse skills. The highest level of learning seems to be creation of new skills and knowledge from what was acquired.

As far as I know, in Portugal and in France, learning styles are not taken into consideration at all; but as Miguel Vadillo mentioned, there is a lot of controversy surrounding the learning-styles approach.

Maybe you could refer to this article for more information on the subject: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04273.x/abstract

Greetings,

Raquel

Hi Kirstie,

I agree with Miguel in-regard to the existing evidence did not support one learning style than others, and this is may be due to different students have different styles of learning. Therefore, each student match their teaching with that preferred learning style….

The following publication might be helpful....

http://www.cogtech.usc.edu/recent_publications.php

Best Regard

SSkinner

Several research studies have been on learning styles of students. The learning styles refer to how students prefer to learn at his or her best. The concept relates to how the learner use their learning styles to demonstrate the ways they tend to engage with learning tasks. The theory examines the ways students sees it, and how they process the information or perceive the information, and some learning styles attempts to explain why some students do better in school than others.One perspective view toward learning styles is whenever teachers match teaching strategies with students' learning preferences and providing a balance of instructional approaches to meet the needs of diverse learners are likely to foster greater opportunity for more students to learn. One important thing to note, is, there is a need to identify students learning styles and find out significant relationships between styles of learning and the instructional strategy being used.

Kirstie

There are a range of theories in regard to learning styles and many learning style instruments have been developed , however there is a criticism that many lack validity. I find an interesting discussion in the literature in regard to students metacognitive strategies and approaches to learning.

I found this interesting: Adult Learning Emerging New Perspectives by Julie Conlan, Sarah Grabowski, Katie Smith

Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology, University of Georgia

There's not a lot of high quality evidence that 'matching' teaching to learning styles has any impact but there is some warrant for encouraging students to reflect on their instinctive approaches and to become curious about how they could expand their repertoires. Learning styles inventories (and there are hundreds!) don't offer a diagnosis - I tend to offer students several to try as a stimulus for discussion. There's a full discussion of this (theory and practice) here:

Hall, E. and Moseley, D. (2005) Is there a role for learning styles in personalised education and training? International Journal of Lifelong Education, 24, 3, 243-255

In Academic world it is important to use different style of learning. According to the theory of Howard Gardner’s 1980 “learning styles and multiple intelligences”. Teaching organization should considered the nine different style of learning as it is explained by Gardner. The advantages of using this theory involve both the teachers as well as the learners. It brings students of different strengths and preferences to gather so they can learn from each other, giving them the chance by learning alongside following student who has strengths in certain areas. It is a strategy that offers possibilities to make learning more effective. It give more opportunities for teachers specifically who struggle to engage students with more traditional verbal/ linguistic approaches.

Shawqi

Gardner's views may have been widely adopted but a criticism is that they have not been based on empirical research.While I find his work interesting I would urge caution in using it without an evidence base.

As mentioned above, I shared Laurence's concern for the learning styles approach and the multiple intelligences framework. I would be really interested if any of you could suggest a good empirical review (maybe a meta-analysis) assessing its validity and usefulness.

It is interesting, so far there is no valid research support any model of teaching, this itself raise a question of how someone might approach a learning experience in his institution?

Rich Felder has an excellent series of articles describing the student's style. "Meet your students" can be downloaded from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Student_handouts.html

Hand these out to your students to help them appreciate their particular style and implications.

Don Woods, McMaster University, Canada

In the early 1970s, David Kolb, then a PhD student at Harvard University conducting research on the psychology of learning, theorized that differences in the way people learned had to do with the way they perceive and then process an experience. Kolb’s emphasis on experience as the central role in the learning process differentiated the experiential approach from those of other learning theories. He summarized the characteristics of the experiential learning process with a working definition of learning: “Learning is a process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience.” According to Kolb, two dimensions are necessary for learning to occur. The first dimension is described as a grasping, or perceiving, medium, and the second one as a transformation, or processing, medium. Learning results from the way people perceive and then process that information, making it their knowledge.

The two mediums can be conceptualized as axes with continuum dimensions. The vertical axis represents perception and may have an event or interaction (“concrete experience”) on one extreme or an idea or theory (“abstract conceptualization”) on the other. The horizontal axis transforms an experience by reflecting on it (“reflective observation”) to the one extreme or processes it by acting upon it (“active experimentation”) to the other extreme.

Hence, either a concrete experience or a theory is “grasped,” to use Kolb’s terminology. For the learner who, encountering an experience, opts for active experimentation, the act of “doing” transforms the experience into something new—that is, personal knowledge that did not exist before. The learner who chooses to reflect upon the experience similarly adds something new to it, thus transforming the experience into new personal knowledge.

The two axes with continuum dimensions describe four quadrants with four different learning styles. If a concrete experience leads the learner to reflect upon it, then the learner has what Kolb defined as a “diverging” learning style. If an abstract concept leads one to actively experiment with it, then the learner has a “converging” learning style. Similarly a concrete experience transformed through active experimentation suggests an “accommodating” learning style, and a theory processed through reflection will result in an “assimilating” learning style.

Ideally, a learner should be able to use each of the four different kinds of abilities in order to gain the most effective learning results for every particular situation.

I use a multiple learning styles based on students learning style. If you teach by uses of several teaching methods, your teching adabted with some students' learning styles.for example, teaching by lecture or face to face and take a assignment could be adabted with both social personality and self directed learning students. So my sujested is teaching in variaty maner.

Further to Rosa Freire Kolb Learning Styles have undergone further revision, there was found to be some overlap into different styles for learners and so this has been now expanded in 9 different styles of learning. The Kolb Learning Style Inventory has been widely validated and proven to have high statistical reliability.

Although Kolbs learning style inventory has had further revison it is open to criticism in terms of internal reliablity and that it doesnt take acccount of the learning process. A useful summary of these and other criticisms can be found at the following link

http://www.prlog.org/10814357-critique-of-experiential-learning.html

I am not a fan of 'matching' teaching to learning styles. If you actually inquire the learning styles in my experience there is always a mixture and in some cases the program study requieres to specifically promote one of them. So I use multiple teaching styles, using lectures as a base and selecting aditional methods according to the subject's learning outcomes and study program. For example bibliographic research, conceptual maps, paper presentations, relating concepts to art, Wiki, Webquest or PBL. As there is always a mixture, I do not determine learning styles, except when I want to know if there is some relationship between them and the results of a specific practice.

I use various inventories to help students understand their uniqueness. I have used Kirton, Lancaster approaches to studying, Jungian/MBTI and Perry. I have not found Kolb to be particularly useful. I used small group self directed PBL. For the first meeting, all members of each group share their values for these four and discuss the implications for them teaching each other. I feel that this works very well.

I've been so engaged by your contributions and ideas, and have been reading all of the articles you have suggested. It does add up to a feeling that the notion of learning itself must be discussed and critiqued with students. This is to encourage them to understand the many variables affecting their learning, take ownership of it, identify tendencies they have as well as contexts in which their learning preferences change, visualise and experiment with ways they can learn that are not as familiar to them, and appreciate the reality that their peers' minds, processes and activities in learning environments actually make some relative sense.

I've been "collecting" learning style theories for many years but was struggling to see them in relation to each other. There is some repetition of course, but also, many varying scales and dimensions. And I read above a voiced interest in a meta-analysis. The one proposed by Elaine Hall I find tremendously helpful: Hall, E. and Moseley, D. (2005) Is there a role for learning styles in personalised education and training? International Journal of Lifelong Education, 24, 3, 243-255. Felder's applications of learning styles to real-life conversations between students of different types are not only entertaining but familiar ways I've seen theory in action. And the articles critiquing this business of learning styles are good too, in helping me challenge my assumptions and preferences, exposing me to new learning theories, and suggesting the questions, What is the role and incidence of valid empirical research on models of learning and teaching in general? How do we reconcile what we know from teaching our various learners, with what might not be scientifically proven?

When I work with residents on developing their teaching and presenting styles, we try to unpack what learning and teaching are together. It can be so hard to accommodate everybody's style at least some of the time in those workshops, and even harder to encourage residents to do that in their teaching. But awareness helps. And the awareness you have been sharing here is enlightening, challenging, intriguing and motivating. I am most grateful, and I read on with great interest.

Kirstie Lang

Some teaching appraochs can adabted with several learning styles. For example use of collaborative or cooprative and problem based learning can be abel to adabting with several learning styles. Becuse there are variaty activities for students to do.

Kolb’s emphasis on experience as the central role in the learning process. Thus, collaborative or cooperative and problem based learning can be used. These methods allow also that and according to Kolb "knowledge is created through the transformation of experience”.

To follow on from Elaine Hall's comments, I recommend to engage with complexity ideas of teaching and learning as interdependent and transformational processes. In particular look at Stewart Mennin's work in Medical Education

Mennin S. Self-organisation, integration and curriculum in the complex world of medical education. Med. Educ. 2010;44(1):20-30.

and the theme section in the Complexity Forum as part of the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice.

Mennin S. Complexity and health professions education. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2010;16(4):835-837.

Mennin S. Complexity and health professions education: a basic glossary. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2010;16(4):838-840.

Bleakley A. Blunting Occam's razor: aligning medical education with studies of complexity. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2010;16(4):849-855.

Doll Jr WE, Trueit D. Complexity and the health care professions. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2010;16(4):841-848.

Davis B, Sumara D. 'If things were simple ...': complexity in education. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2010;16(4):856-860.

Arrow H, Henry KB. Using complexity to promote group learning in health care. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2010;16(4):861-866.

The theory is very interesting. Even more interesting is how to get the rubber onto the road and make it stay there. I don't think it's enough to pigeon hole learners into style categories. This is conceptually useful but has a number of consequences that can be problematic. It fails to recognise the dynamic and contextual nature of the "styles". We find that residents change styles 1) over time 2) between areas of study and 3) depending on setting e.g. urgent care v ward v OR v clinic material and skill. I think it is important to maintain a range of approaches in facilitating learning in any topic, but we shouldn't this to outweigh some of the other major factors including motivation, aptitude, interaction with trainer etc. There's also some nice work recently (will try to find the reference) looking at how learning styles affect the students experience and benefit from e-learning and m-learning technologies. With the increase in remote education and e-learning, this is likely to become a very important area. In the absence of the stimulation of physical presence, facial expression, voice tones etc you could argue that the e-learning and m-learning setting is one where matching the learner with the training and presentation style is very much a critical process.

Dr (Mrs) Adarsh lata Singh .

For post graduate students i usually try to follow OMP Model during opd hrs and for indoor patients problem based learning methodology.

An interesting approach is to look at work published on how the brain actually learns. Judy Willis, M.D. is both a neurologist and a teacher. Learning and the Brain looks at the neurological processes that occur during learning as studied through MRI. The theory is to ignite more than one area of the brain during learning (very simplified) to create retrievable knowledge. While a lot of the work focuses on younger students, the same principles apply and can be adapted easily in medical school. Collaborative groups - PBL or TBL- is one approach. Others are using various media formats. iPortfoliio is an example of using student writing to reinforce learning. Rather than targeting a "learning style" the message is given in a multifaceted approach that would have a broad appeal.

I use internet videos youtube lectures allot after giving the theory part then we discuss the subject (me and the students)

I use multiple learning styles: collaborative learning, videos, chats, fóruns (...)

Kirstie,

Like Elaine Hall, I wonder about the reliability and validity of the many learning style inventories that are available. I've looked at a few of them and they all seem too transparent to me, in that a sophisticated subject can easily determine the particular 'style of learning' that the question is seeking. As such it's too easy for any answers to default to one's own perception of the 'best' learning style, or to default to a learning style that best matches the teaching methods one is currently being exposed to. I'm not aware of any high quality research demonstrating better outcomes if teaching is matched to previously assessed learning styles. Whether that's because there is no effect, or because the flaws are in the inventories themselves is currently open for debate.

Coffield et al's work (Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre. 2004) was critical of learning inventories. They reviewed 800 texts and studied the 13 most common models then in use. Their conclusions (non-peer reviewed) were that many did not meet academic standards, had weak academic foundations, were based in dubious methodology, and did not provide reliable measurement instruments. There was also commonly a fee attached to the inventory, sometimes quite a hefty one.

Given the above, to design a programme that caters for different learning styles is probably wasted time and energy. No doubt there's something in it, but I don't think as much as its proponents are trying to make out. In attempting to design something that caters for all styles the message can get lost in the medium. Far better to stay with broader themes, perhaps using an inventory as a springboard for a discussion about the differences in the way people learn. To that end I usually start with the differences between learning as an adult and learning as a child. That at least does have validated research to back it up. If nothing else it's an oblique way of putting the onus for learning on the learner as an active participant, rather than a passive recipient.

I use different methods, for example: collaborative learning, "learning by doing" strategies, in agreement with my students' learning styles

I am really intrigued as the discussion continues and new ideas are contributed. I am reading to catch up - Stewart Mennin's work on complexity and medical education, how motivation plays a role (and discussion/activities to help increase it in adults), the OMP model, Judy Willis' brain-friendly strategies for learning, Coffield et al's "Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning," journaling and the iPortfolio, the differences between learning as adults and children. I see the point that as e-learning and m-learning increase (styles of teaching unto themselves), styles of learning become of heightened interest again. I like the idea of problematising this topic of learning styles WITH students, asking students themselves how they feel about the subject, how they achieve their learning goals - though their having a repertoire of styles to draw from would help.

Are there good Youtube lectures that you like to show your medical students and residents, on effective ways of learning and communicating?

My sincere thank you again for your thoughtful feedback on this topic. I am constantly adding your ideas to my understanding of this fascinating aspect of education.

Kirstie

Yes, we conducted researches related to student's learning styles and correlate to specific teaching strategy such as process approach in college biology along with cooperative learning in the laboratory. Also, with cognitive learning in the laboratory and the student's learning styles.. Then it was subjected to the right statistical research design to validate any significant relationships..Findings prove significant data along with instructional strategies used in the classroom.

Elaine Hall and Craig Mcbride agreed with both of you. Report from Coffield et al's work (Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning shows that there is no concrete evidence on the effectiveness of using different teaching styles to suit with different learning styles. However, some indicator showed individual difference based on preferred modality give some impact to learning effectiveness. I ve proof it from my phd research. Refer to my research/article.

Like sevearl others have mentioned, the learning styles literature is sketchy, at best. Bottom line -- there is very little evidence that matching teaching styles (or methods) wiht student's so-called "learning styles" has any positive effect on learning. See the following for an easy-to-read summary of the issues. http://chronicle.com/article/Matching-Teaching-Style-to/49497/

The full empirical article referenced in this piece can be found here... http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf

Oh yes, and check out this YouTube video critiquing the learning styles mantra. It's quite good... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIv9rz2NTUk

I find Krushna's response enlightening in relation to intervention strategy.

Sorry I accidentally hit the "add" button before completing my response. I have used learning styles as intervention strategies for a number of years now. Since I work with students across a wide range of disciplines, these strategies have proven helpful and even effective. For instance, I had a student who simply continued to fail her history classes; she simply could not respond to questions about major events like the French Revolution because she lacked a strategy to pull discrete facts together into a more coherent narrative that indicated deeper thinking. Her learning style preferences indicated that she was skillful with charts and graphs, loci memorization and other specific elements common to specific learning styles. We then sat down and graphed the French Revolution and studied the events through loci memorization; her grades improved dramatically as she learned to shift her classwork to a preferred learning style. The same technique has proved helpful for students who are chiefly auditory learners, not print learners. Some of my African-American students, for example, prefer listening to audio tapes of lectures; my foreign students like audio tapes of lectures so that they can spend more time processing the information.

I think it is difficult, if not impossible, for any teacher or professor to attempt to teach to widely disparate learning styles, but total dependence upon one teaching approach like lectures is detrimental as well. My composition and literature classes take place in "smart rooms" or in computer laboratories where we have computer access at all times; thus, we can use multi-modal learning and presentations by both instructors and students. A mixture of technology-based strategies and lecture, video, blogs, wikis, etc. enhance student participation and learning (if personal motivation is present, of course).

Aysha Bey

There is one theory/model that I've tried to use in terms of matching student's learning sytle. That is the VAK preferences in Neuro-lingusitic Programming. Originally this is a coomunication model and I see teaching as essentailly communication. Although I do not have empirical evidence, it seems to work quite well for me.

I'd always try to structure the presentation to cover visual, auditory and kinesthetic aspectsof the same point to communicate to all the students. Doing this has an additional benefit of repeating the "message", again an important communication principle, without boring the students.

learning styles are basically learning preferences. it doesn't mean that a visual learner is unable to learn when auditory stimulus is used for presentation. if his score id 45 for visual preference and 55 for auditory he can learn in both ways.

I agree wholeheartedly with Elaine -- we need to tread carefully in the learning styles literature. The idea of “learning styles” has been around education for at least 40 years; it states that people have different learning styles, and that by matching an instructional method to a student’s learning style, teachers can improve classroom (and online) learning. Stated another way, “students learn more when content is presented in their best modality” (Willingham, 2005, para 4). Such a claim is pervasive in much of the education literature and is commonly taught in teacher-preparation programs and professional development workshops. However, there are many learning theorists who would argue that good learning environments have less to do with attempting to accommodate various learning styles and more to do with using methods and activities that are appropriate to the content being taught. So, if I’m teaching students about weights and measures, it might make good sense to have a hands-on lab where students work with different weights and measures. However, if I’m teaching about history, maybe it makes more sense to show a historical film. So, again, it’s not about trying to accommodate each student’s “style” but instead it’s about matching the learning activity to the learning content.

If you’re interested in learning more about this argument, there are two videos by Professor Daniel Willingham which are quite good. Just do a YouTube search for Learning Styles Don’t Exist; he also has a follow-up clarification to his first video. Also, there’s a very good info graphic on the Myth of Learning Styles (simply Google it), as well as two easy-to-read articles in The Chronicle of Higher Education (Matching Teaching Style to Learning Style May Not Help Students) and Change (The Myth of Learning Styles). And finally, the definitive article on the topic was published in the APS journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest. For all intents and purposes, this article debunks the learning styles myth; it's entitled Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence.