Image by Getty Images via @daylife
Do learning styles exist? Let me answer that by saying, most definitely ‘yes’. In saying that, though, I do realise that I appear to be swimming against the tide of opinion. Over the last few years, it seems, more academics have been coming out to try to dismiss the notion of ‘learning styles’. However, when I read or listen to their arguments, it more often appears that their arguments are not against ‘learning styles’ but against one particular theory of learning styles and how it can be used, or misused, in education.
In some way, I guess the study of learning styles is a bit like the study of the universe. It is clear that we do not yet understand the universe fully and we have many different theories to try to explain it. Just because we don’t like one theory, we cannot dismiss the universe. The same is true of learning styles; just because existing theories may be wrong does not mean that learning styles do not exist.
The problem seems to be that when people talk or think about ‘learning styles’, they are refering to one theory; the VAK theory which categorises learning styles according to a person’s dominant sensory mode (Visual, Auditory or Kinaesthetic). This, however, is not the only theory of learning styles nor the original. It is probably, the most well known, however, because it is simple and easy to apply. Being simple and easy, of course, does not mean it is correct.
Now let’s consider a question. As a teacher, do you believe that all and each of your pupils learn in the same way, at the same time, at the same speed and have the same ability to retain, recall and apply their learning? Okay, that’s a rhetorical question, only a few inexperienced teachers would answer ‘yes’ to that, yet, by rejecting ‘learning styles’, that is what teachers are being asked to believe.
So in some ways, rejecting the idea of ‘learning styles’ might be seen as a regressive step for it would mean that teachers need not be concerned about differentiation, about providing a range of resources or adopting a variety of teaching approaches. Teaching could be reduced to its lowest level, take no heed of differing learner needs and any learner who fails to learn or keep up could simply be considered ‘thick’, inattentive or both. I know that sounds a bit extreme but this actually reflects a viewpoint I have heard from some opponents of learning styles.
So I think we can accept that people do not all learn the same way and that rejecting ‘learning styles’ wholesale would lead to a regressive approach to education that few would desire. On the other hand, the VAK model of learning style categorizes learners into very broad categories and very easily leads to learners being ‘labelled’ according to their supposed ‘style’, V A or K. It is this ‘labelling’ of learners that I find objectionable, experience as a teacher has shown me that broad labelling of pupils is almost always wrong and often objectionable.
For me, learning styles is not about labelling, it is about understanding. It is about understanding how, maybe why, learners learn. As a teacher, by understanding how learners in my classes learn, I am better able to select or create learning resources and experiences for them. I am also able to avoid teaching approaches that are not likely to produce effective learning for the learners.
It is my belief that learning styles are far more complex than any simple model can explain and that each person has their own preferred styles. Moreover, it is likely that one’s learning style changes and develops with time and experience. As an educationalist, what I believe we need is not another theory of learning styles but a tool that records how each pupil learns best.
Related articles
- Learning Styles and their Importance (youreducationisalwaysyours.wordpress.com)
- More Left Brain / Right Brain Nonsense (theness.com)
- An Investigation into the Learning Styles and Self-Regulated Learning Strategies for Computer Science Students (downes.ca)
Possibly Related Posts:
- Learning Without Frontiers 2012 a quick view
- Who’s Going to Buy Apple’s New eTextbooks?
- Mr Gove’s Challenge to Us All
- Grumpy Old Men and Technology
- Microsoft’s Stealthy Strategy for Taking Over Education Technology?
Post Revisions:
This post has not been revised since publication.
Do Learning Styles Really Exist? http://t.co/kQQciM9B #education
Thank you for attaching my post. The awareness of the different kinds of styles (regardless of how they are labeled) is the importance, as you point out well. Enjoyed reading.
http://t.co/YNo131PQ via @deerwood
Arguing whether learning styles exist or not is a little like arguing for the existence or God. Or aliens. I guess you can say, in the absence of any evidence I’m going to go with my gut and have faith, but really: how useful is that?
And, just because I going with the scientific concensus here and saying, ‘no, learning style don’t exist,’ is not some sort of tacit admission that my teaching must therefore become dry and monotonous.
Of course children learn different stuff in lessons: that’s because they arrive with different sets of experiences, knowledge, backgrounds and motivation. Not because they learn in different styles.
What I guess we can agree on is that no one want boring, one-note teaching, and perhaps, therefore, we should stop talking about the tarnished brand of learning styles and instead refer to ‘teacher approaches’.
I deal with all this at more length here: http://learningspy.co.uk/2011/12/05/some-thoughts-on-learning-styles-2/
“Arguing whether learning styles exist or not is a little like arguing for the existence or God”,- not really. That question would appear to be one of faith or belief. We know that learners do not always learn in the same way, to the same extent or in the same timescale. ‘Learning Styles’ is an attempt to understand the differences in the way learners learn.
If, as you say, learning styles do not exist then it does not matter how a teacher teaches; whichever approach the teacher employs, the outcome will be the same for all pupils. Clearly, though, that does not happen, any one approach employed creates a range of results among the learners.
You say in your article “it would appear that no one is seriously claiming that people actually possess a preferred learning style in which they must be taught else their ability to learn will be severely impaired.”, I think that is what is being claimed; if the teaching does not match the preferred style of the learner then that learner’s learning is not at its optimum (so is impaired). The difficulty lies in understanding the preferred style of each learner and employing a range of resources, approaches etc to match those styles.
You and I may have to agree to disagree but for me, the approach you advocate may be tantamount to ignoring the needs of the learner and that, I find, unacceptable.
Pretending learning styles are meaningful is more than tantamount to ignoring the needs of the learner and that I find wholly unacceptable. The needs of the learner are indeed complex: I recommend read Graham Nutall’s book The Hidden Lives of Learners to better understand both how we can begin to understand these needs and why learning styles are not the answer. I have weir ten about it here: http://learningspy.co.uk/2012/01/08/what-is-learning/
I think the terms ‘learning styles’ and individual differences’ get conflated. In that case then ‘learning styles’ do exist – they’re individual differences!
However, there is a whole industry built up around Learning Styles (capital letters) which sees Learning Styles as real things that exist and can be measured and packaged into lucrative courses and books. It’s the latter definition that I have a problem with – where’s the evidence?
I also think you’ve put forward a straw man argument in your characterisation of people who reject learning styles, however if you change the phrase ‘learning styles’ for ‘individual differences’ you have a valid point.
Yes, I’m happy to accept ‘individual differences’ too. There’s much too much controversy attached to Learning Styles and the term needs to be abandoned.
RT @profology: Do learning styles really exist? http://t.co/QR5NZmHE #highered #edchat
[...] 2012 at 11:07 and is filed under education. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 [...]
Thank you for the insightful post. I appreciate your statement, “For me, learning styles is not about labeling, it is about understanding.” As an educator, it’s important to instruct students in a way that enables them to learn at optimal levels.
One possibly way to gain additional information in regards to learning styles is to survey the students at the beginning of the year.
“@LearningSpy: Yet more on learning styles. Read the comments too http://t.co/iFqHucfl >>another perspective?
good question – VAK definitely part of the problem not the solution
Do Learning Styles Really Exist? http://t.co/F0KqREDS via @zite
Do Learning Styles Really Exist? http://t.co/5U1FoyQ2 via @zite
Do Learning Styles Really Exist? http://t.co/Cbc8iMBa via @zite #elemchat #edchat
Interesting article Do Learning Styles Really Exist? http://t.co/ui1TzpiJ via @zite #gwgraham
RT @tomwhitby: Do Learning Styles Really Exist? http://t.co/QfildsYD #Edchat
Do learning styles really exist? Yes and no. http://t.co/pcWwZ3yn #rvsed
Do Learning Styles Really Exist? http://t.co/TGJ1Rvhc
Do Learning Styles Really Exist? by @deerwood nails it. http://t.co/oKpBLEgk #edchat #edtech #ldchat #ell #esl
Do Learning Styles Really Exist? by @deerwood via @danielbeylerian http://t.co/rt0S3Onu #efl #ell #esl #english