Find the Latest Resources in Education Today
SUBSCRIBE
Study questions learning-style research
Scientists have yet to prove that students learn better when taught according to their preferred modality, a new study suggests
Teaching to different learning styles, such as visual or auditory, has become widely popular in education.
As educators struggle to define effective 21st-century instruction, one practice that many have viewed as fundamental to teaching and learning has come under new fire: catering to different learning styles.
According to a new review of existing research, scientists have yet to show conclusively that students learn better when they are taught according to their preferred modality—and the study’s authors say it’s time to stop funding a technique that hasn’t been proven effective.
Commissioned by Psychological Science in the Public Interest, the main journal of the Association for Psychological Science, the study is called “Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence.” It was written by Harold Pashler, professor of psychology at the University of California, San Diego; Mark McDaniel, professor of psychology at Washington University in St. Louis; Doug Rohrer, professor of psychology at the University of South Florida; and Robert Bjork, distinguished professor and chair of psychology at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The researchers—all cognitive psychologists with an interest in the science of learning, and how to develop studies so they’re helpful to teachers and students—reviewed all major studies that promoted the effectiveness of teaching to different learning styles to see whether those studies had reached valid conclusions.
The researchers found that, out of thousands of studies purporting to show the effectiveness of teaching to different learning styles, none managed to prove scientifically that students learn better when taught according to their preferred modality.
According to the researchers, if there is no evidence that teaching to different learning styles works, school funds that support learning style assessments and teaching tools should be diverted to support evidence-based teaching practices instead.
“The contrast between the enormous popularity of the learning-styles approach within education and the lack of credible evidence for its utility is, in our opinion, striking and disturbing,” the researchers concluded. “If classification of students’ learning styles has practical utility, it remains to be demonstrated.”
Some advocates of education technology have responded to the researchers’ report with skepticism, arguing that anecdotal evidence suggests otherwise.
“As a parent and former teacher, I wouldn’t be quite so quick to discount teaching to learning styles. All I need to do is look at my son’s learning to know that,” said Don Knezek, chief executive officer of the International Society for Technology in Education.
The report’s findings could have important implications for the ed-tech field, which has benefited from the idea that students learn best in different ways. For example, many educators have used multimedia to differentiate their instruction, so that students who are considered “auditory” learners might listen to a lecture, while those who are considered “visual” learners might watch a video clip of the same information.
Proponents of the learning-style theory believe that effective instruction requires “diagnosing individuals’ learning style and tailoring instruction accordingly,” according to the report. It notes that the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) helped develop a widely distributed learning-style test in the 1980s.
16 Responses to Study questions learning-style research
You must be logged in to post a comment Login
aemerson
January 11, 2010 at 5:38 pm
“Can’t say I have scientific evidence one way or the other. But my personal experience caused me to question the validity of learning styles. I was informed by many teachers in the classrooms I worked in that the students were visual learners. What I felt was that they weren’t any more visual than audial (?), but that they preferred to stop and gain information when they wanted to as opposed to when the teacher wanted them to. Hence, they preferred an asynchronous media (visual) as opposed to a synchronous media (listening). Suggesting this is about students level of self-discipline and perhaps a more general classroom tendency toward self-guiding and independent learning than about learning style preference.
Also, I have long wondered whether a learning preference may be more a way of avoiding using a weak style/skill. If that is the case, learning styles that cater to preferences may limit a person’s ability to develop the weak style/skill.
Just some thoughts. Certainly not evidence : )”
aemerson
January 11, 2010 at 5:38 pm
“Can’t say I have scientific evidence one way or the other. But my personal experience caused me to question the validity of learning styles. I was informed by many teachers in the classrooms I worked in that the students were visual learners. What I felt was that they weren’t any more visual than audial (?), but that they preferred to stop and gain information when they wanted to as opposed to when the teacher wanted them to. Hence, they preferred an asynchronous media (visual) as opposed to a synchronous media (listening). Suggesting this is about students level of self-discipline and perhaps a more general classroom tendency toward self-guiding and independent learning than about learning style preference.
Also, I have long wondered whether a learning preference may be more a way of avoiding using a weak style/skill. If that is the case, learning styles that cater to preferences may limit a person’s ability to develop the weak style/skill.
Just some thoughts. Certainly not evidence : )”
mike caskey
January 11, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Let’s assume that teaching to learning styles has not improved learning as the “research” suggests. Does the “research” suggest that it decreases learning? If the learning is not damaged but he learner “enjoys learning” within their own learning style then why not? Most of us are more likely to be “learners” if we enjoy what we are learning or enjoy the process of learning. Why is it that certain types of “learners” tend to believe that their way is the only way to learn? Why not cater to learning styles as long as the process is not hindering learning, and it holds the promise of promoting learning because the learner is more in tune with the process.
mike caskey
January 11, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Let’s assume that teaching to learning styles has not improved learning as the “research” suggests. Does the “research” suggest that it decreases learning? If the learning is not damaged but he learner “enjoys learning” within their own learning style then why not? Most of us are more likely to be “learners” if we enjoy what we are learning or enjoy the process of learning. Why is it that certain types of “learners” tend to believe that their way is the only way to learn? Why not cater to learning styles as long as the process is not hindering learning, and it holds the promise of promoting learning because the learner is more in tune with the process.
rmdorsey
January 11, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Speaking from personal experience I disagree with this study.
rmdorsey
January 11, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Speaking from personal experience I disagree with this study.
shoemap
January 12, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Here’s my take on this. Comments were disabled over the weekend and for most of the day yesterday, so I wrote about it on my blog, Yes Tech! http://shoemap.edublogs.org/2010/01/11/dispute-of-learning-style-research/
Reading the actual study was helpul to me as I struggled with the tagline, “Scientists have yet to prove that students learn better when taught according to their preferred modality, a new study suggests.” I do worry that people who only read the beginning of the article will conclude that it is not a good idea to include student learning style preferences along with all the other types of information (prior knowledge, interests, experiences, etc) about students when designing lessons. The perspectives of the folks interviewed at the end of the article were helpful, especially the importance of including UDL principles in lesson design.
shoemap
January 12, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Here’s my take on this. Comments were disabled over the weekend and for most of the day yesterday, so I wrote about it on my blog, Yes Tech! http://shoemap.edublogs.org/2010/01/11/dispute-of-learning-style-research/
Reading the actual study was helpul to me as I struggled with the tagline, “Scientists have yet to prove that students learn better when taught according to their preferred modality, a new study suggests.” I do worry that people who only read the beginning of the article will conclude that it is not a good idea to include student learning style preferences along with all the other types of information (prior knowledge, interests, experiences, etc) about students when designing lessons. The perspectives of the folks interviewed at the end of the article were helpful, especially the importance of including UDL principles in lesson design.
keen2learn
January 13, 2010 at 6:01 am
In class size of say 33 children there could be mix of gifted and talented, average learners, struggling and children with special needs. Now add a a range of learning styles matched to the individual child. All we need now are the teaching resources with a capacity to spin 33 plates at different speeds, weights and on poles of various lengths. Narrows the field to probably a handful per State.
keen2learn
January 13, 2010 at 6:01 am
In class size of say 33 children there could be mix of gifted and talented, average learners, struggling and children with special needs. Now add a a range of learning styles matched to the individual child. All we need now are the teaching resources with a capacity to spin 33 plates at different speeds, weights and on poles of various lengths. Narrows the field to probably a handful per State.
joy930
February 3, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Researching Learning Styles for my dissertation allowed me to come across an obviously little known paper written by one of Dr Kolb’s students, Dr Webb. He asked Miriam Weinstein Webb to critique his theory and she made it quite clear that for “deeplearning” students should migrate through ALL the learning styles…not just a preferred learning style. When teaching a concept through all the styles, student can apply the concept through multiple models with both physical and mental manipulations and therefore, acquire a deeper understanding of the material. I interpret this to mean that performing a learning styles inventory and deciding what a child prefers is virtually irrelevant for deep learning. A child needs to struggle with the concept in multiple modes in order to acquire lasting knowledge.
joy930
February 3, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Researching Learning Styles for my dissertation allowed me to come across an obviously little known paper written by one of Dr Kolb’s students, Dr Webb. He asked Miriam Weinstein Webb to critique his theory and she made it quite clear that for “deeplearning” students should migrate through ALL the learning styles…not just a preferred learning style. When teaching a concept through all the styles, student can apply the concept through multiple models with both physical and mental manipulations and therefore, acquire a deeper understanding of the material. I interpret this to mean that performing a learning styles inventory and deciding what a child prefers is virtually irrelevant for deep learning. A child needs to struggle with the concept in multiple modes in order to acquire lasting knowledge.