Robin:

I have to admit I never questioned what was published. It appears that once research is published, it almost becomes believable especially from reputable researchers. I used the learning styles premise for determining how much multimedia to use when teaching online. The article was an immediate success on Faculty Focus and was taken up by several websites. I did enjoy the attention but realise that with more research now debunking it, the argument is not foolproof.

Many thanks,

Debra

Article How Much Multimedia Should You Add to PowerPoint Slides When...

 @Debra Not quite sure what you mean by using the "learning style premise when determining how much multimedia?  Wouldn't the use of multimedia be dependent on the concepts/skills being taught and the extent to which the multimedia would enhance learning?

@Ben You make an excellent (albeit discouraging) point and yet some people do change their minds, do seek evidence, are open to change.  And of course, we could not have made much progress in certain areas without accepting evidence - medicine comes to mind. I wonder if this resistance to evidence can be changed?  Or is the situation even more bleak with the excess of information and an inability to sort through it or simply pick what one likes.

@Ben: I am citing your second paragraph in my CPD course as the opening quote. It is very apt and true. Thank you.

Robin:

Thanks for the follow-up question. I used a learning style inventory to determine how many visual, auditory, and tactile learners were in the class and then used these percentages to determine how much visual, audio, and interactive media features should be added to the PPT. For example, if there were 70% visual learners, then 70% of the PPT slides should contain graphics etc. I hope this clarifies my use of the learning style premise.

Many thanks,

Debra

I think we need to guard against a pendulum swing back towards teaching everyone in exactly the same way.

I am not in favour of an extreme learning style approach that only caters for the way students want or find it easiest to learn and ignores the need to choose learning or teaching styles that are appropriate to the subject matter and/or the task at hand.  As  Lilienfeld et al point out in 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology, such an approach “encourages teachers to teach to students’ intellectual strengths rather than their weaknesses.” and thus does not help students to develop the skills and the strategies they need to perform well academically. However, I believe that people do learn better if individual needs and preferences are taken into account.

 As Pashler et al note in their article Learning Styles: Concept and Evidence, it is far too early to close the door on the learning style approach:

"Given the lack of methodologically sound studies of learning styles, it would be an error to conclude that all possible versions of learning styles have been tested and found wanting; many have simply not been tested at all. Further research on the use of learning-styles assessment in instruction may in some cases be warranted, but such research needs to be performed appropriately."

With a less rigid, more balanced approach to learning style-based teaching and more careful and complete research,  more evidence in favour of adapting teaching methods to learners' styles may come forth.

If we take another approach with another lens we need not start with the learning styles of the students but rather we provide all students with a multisensory and multidisciplinary approach to learning so that they may live fuller more enriched lives. We know that people learn best in particular ways but isn't it our role to extend other ways of seeing, feeling and understanding? This approach is just sound teaching.

Yes I have read Pashler's  article and as a scientist I would agree that there is scarce evidence in support of the construct of "learning styles".  On the other hand, as a practitioner it appears obvious that students differ in the way they approach the task of learning.  Successful learners apply strategies that may be taught but some learners appear to more easily acquire (and apply) these strategies than others.  Perhaps, "learning styles" pertains to a construct that has been misrepresented (not defined and therefore not well measured).  

Dear Robin,

Learning style! with cumulative experience in teaching, I found myself do the lectures differently. I found myself  doing the same lectures in different styles (Tertiary education), and found  the situation of teaching made me changing my style of teaching sometimes moods, political situation, current events affect me to use different styles of teaching. In some years I add or remove a chapter or two to be changing according to the level of students!. At the end of the day I obliged with ILOs but definitely in different styles, you may see me a different person from place to another! 

Aly

 @Ben (again) I think you are spot on here - Emotion could and probably does have a very powerful influence.  It occurs to me that simplifying a problem/issue through catch phrases and rhetoric is probably quite appealing (as I watched the US election).  It is very hard to resist the instinct to accept simple, emotional responses and ignore how complex many issues in education are.  BTW just finished publishing a rather formative/simple paper with a student who referred to your work quite regularly. 

Article Examining School Board Leaders' Use of Online Resources to I...

Ben: 

1) In reply to:

"But given limited time and energy, why would we do more research on an idea that is already substantially discredited?"

What is amply discredited? The idea that people have different learning styles, or the learning style-based teaching approaches  that have so far been researched?

I agree entirely with Alfredo that the existence of different learning styles is obvious to practitioners. Is there really no hard evidence that learning styles exist? With the present possibilities available in neurological research, is it not possible to answer this question once and for all?

2) In reply to: 

"The issue isn't whether we should do A, but whether doing A is the best choice in the face of all the other possibilities.  It's often not enough to do something good, if with a little more thought we could have chosen to do something even better."

This argument could be turned on its head: with a little more thought, we can identify areas of learning style-based teaching approaches that have not been well researched; only by researching these will we be able to know if any learning-style based approach can be the best choice in the face of all other possibilities.

Ben , thanks for your reply. First of all, the arguments I offer below attempt merely to be considered, personal opinion,  and are not based on a thorough reading of all the literature available on the topic. Secondly, most of what I have read on learning style approaches focuses purely on language teaching.

OK, so I gather from your analogy that teaching which takes into account learning styles is the ineffective treatment, while teaching which ignores learning style differences is the treatment which "consistently shows good results".What would happen if  the active ingredient of the drug being used was fine, but was prevented from working by the way it was administered or by other elements in the drug mix?

In my opinion, a lot of the learning style-based approaches that I have encountered in my readings on teaching languages and in the places where I have taught or been taught contain a number of elements which render the treatment ineffective; these include do-goodism, pandering to fads, the unquestioning acceptance of cogently argued but theoretically unsound and/or empirically unproven ideas, and the wholesale rejection of, as opposed to the considered selection from more traditional approaches. 

It is not inconceivable that the active ingredient of the treatment, teaching which takes into account how learners learn, could be perfectly operationalizable if administered correctly in the right teaching contexts and separated from the extraneous elements that have often rendered it ineffective.

Given the gravity of the disease itself, an ineffective educational system which leaves many people unprepared for the challenges they will face in the job market and in their future lives, couldn't we devote a bit more serious research to one of its possible treatments?

This does not of course prevent us from studying other treatments. As you can gather from my answers, I am by no means an acritical devotee of learning style- based teaching.

@Alfred Learning styles have numerous permutations and combinations and I think you are right that “definition” or what we assume to be “learning styles” is not clear.  Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences, for example, were NEVER meant to be interpreted as learning styles.  See 3:28 on in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2QtSbP4FRg Individuals may have different areas of strength and interest and this can be accommodated in a one-on-one situation, but not as a whole class.  Gardner never meant this to happen with his theory. And of course, there is considerable debate that these “intelligences” are as distinct as they are made out to be.

@ALY - What teaching styles are you referring to specifically?

@Denra - You appear to be using the multiple intelligence theory which was never meant to be applied to the classroom (according to Gardner).  You certainly can capitalize on a student's strengths and areas of interest one-on-one, but as a class, the theory does not make much sense.  In your example, no matter what approach you use, you will put students at a disadvantage. Assuming the learning style theory has merit,  if 70% of your slides are visual and 30% of your students are non-visual, then you are systematically excluding them from the information you wish to convey.  I am unsure what a tactile slide looks like BTW.  Plus the act of using a PPT and presenting information biases your teaching approach to students who might be strong verbally.  That said, providing a variety of teaching approached is probably a good idea, simply to garner student interest.  I think you are better to match your teaching approach to the concepts/skills being taught.  How odd would it be to teach basketball skills by writing about it?  How strange would it be to teach higher level mathematics by singing? And the research is pretty clear that student's preferred "learning style" is not connected to performance.  

@Chris Thank you for your detailed message and Pasher quote.  I think there have been literally 100s if not 1000s of studies on learning styles. And Pasher is correct in saying the methodology is weak.  Given the nature and complexities of educational research, it is unlikely that a definitive answer will ever be provided.  However, it does seem like an odd idea to use learning styles or any approach when there is little or no research to support its use. It has a seductive charm for sure - hence my question. 

Teaching approaches and learning styles are very different though.  There are a number of effective teaching approaches that are not based on learning styles - but rather based on reasonably learning theory and practice (e.g., See Hattie).

Finally, you also mentioned that " people do learn better if individual needs and preferences are taken into account." I would agree with you 100%, but I believe needs and preferences are different from "learning styles".  Styles are treated as if they are genetic, hard-wired - as if this is the only way a student can learn.  That simple is not true.  That said, catering to interests and personal needs can highly motivate a students and help make learning far more meaningful.

@Gloria - I quite like what you wrote and yes, I think it is a wise approach to provide different opportunities and ways or viewing concepts/information. Tthe other feature that we need to consider is that students can find their own ways of learning.  Lecturing, fro example, is probably the worst way to teach in a meaningful way.  Collaborative, problem-based learning incorporating student choice is a far more effective approach.  

@Debra It occurs to me that teachers might embrace learning styles in the transmission of information (especially in higher education), but not in assessment.  Do you allow students to communicate and use "different learning styles" when being assessed?  The idea of a final written exam would hinder 70% of your students, if they were truly visual learners.

I agree Robin. Attention to Learning Styles also narrow possibilities. It can direct students solely to disciplines that adhere to those ways of learning.  For me, university education should open students to new ideas, new ways of thinking and learning never before imagined. It seems a way to incorporate preferences would be to provide assessment variations that allow students the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge, skills and understanding in a number of different ways. Of course this would mean that a standard Rubric could not be used. What a shame!

Hi Robin,

I agree entirely that learning styles are not hard-wired. Learners can benefit from training that will provide them with new strategies and skills that may gradually help them to change their learning style. As I implied in my quote from Lilienfeld, we need to address students' learning style weaknesses, not simply teach to their strengths.

Why is the belief so prevalent?

It only needs one person to get his PhD thesis-theme on "learning styles" accepted. He then propagates his ideas further by publishing papers in the area, starting a summer school on it, holding an international conference on it, monopolising a journal on it and creating a chair in it. In the process he creates hundreds of uncritical "devotees" and "followers".

We should learn from this process, and propagate our solid ideas.

Hi Ian, I certainly agree but feel it's even a greater issue than what you suggest. I feel it goes back to reading papers from people in well established academic journals who tell us what Howard Gardener and others said about Multiple Intelligence and Learning Styles and what is said is believed. We are not questioning the research or revisiting the original source of the claims. 

As well, once an idea takes hold in many of us, it is truth. John Hattie's Visible Learning meta-analysis research has been shown to be flawed by many statisticians yet the high profile of the man and the sheer size of his research ( the largest collection ever of evidence based research) appears to preserve all his claims. 

Hi, Gloria! It is a widespread problem, not just in education and engineering research, but elsewhere too. A small, unsupported, casual remark in a research paper can trigger off a whole new field full of foolhardy followers. The older and more inaccessible and inscrutable the original source is, the more difficult it is to reproduce and refute the remark or research. "Unwriting" an existing paper is more difficult than writing one. Every time you negatively cite it, up goes their Citation Index!

As far as I know some peple believe it to be a personality factor while others consider it as some thing learned. As the controversy continues so does the belief..