COLUMN: Think Again – Time to reject the learning styles myth

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 02/10/2020 (1664 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

To better understand this column, make sure you use your preferred learning style.

If you are a visual learner, look closely at the words. If you are an auditory learner, ask someone to read it to you. If you are a kinaesthetic learner, act out the main ideas in it.

Hopefully you realize that this advice is nonsense. Newspaper column are meant to be read. No matter how much you might like playing charades, you are far more likely to understand this article if you read it word by word.

There are times, however, when working with your hands is a much better way to learn. For example, when changing a tire for the first time, manually going through the steps is going to help a lot more than reading directions in a manual. At other times, listening is the best approach. For example, if you want to learn about the music of Beethoven or Bach, listening to their symphonies is probably more effective than reading about their use of musical theory.

My point is that instead of classifying people according to so-called learning styles, we should recognize that the subject matter itself substantially determines the best way to learn about that subject. Sometimes looking at a picture is best, sometimes hearing it explained is best, and sometimes constructing a representative model is best. For many topics covered in school, the optimal approach is to do all the above.

For example, a Grade 3 teacher who wants her students to learn about the planets in our solar system will probably show pictures, provide accurate verbal descriptions, and give students an opportunity to work with models of the planets. There is no need to categorize students into so-called learning styles and to teach them all differently. Rather, excellent teachers use a variety of teaching strategies with the whole class of students.

Unfortunately, the misguided notion that some students are visual learners, some are auditory learners, and some are kinaesthetic learners, just won’t go away. According to a recent article published by the American Psychological Association (APA), surveys show that more than 80 percent of people believe in learning styles. Learning styles assessments have become popularized in a variety of professional settings.

However, there is no excuse for this ignorance—not when the truth is so widely available. Within seconds, one can easily find articles on the APA website that debunk the learning styles myth. In addition, some of the world’s best-known education researchers, such as Dr. John Hattie and Dr. Daniel Willingham, have long pointed out that there is no evidence to support individual learning styles. In this case, not only does the emperor not have any clothes on now, he never had any clothes in the first place.

While some might argue that the learning styles theory is harmless, the reality is that this myth has caused significant damage to students. Far too often, instead of providing well-designed whole class lessons, teachers waste vast amounts of time trying to adapt to the so-called learning styles of their students. It gets worse when ambitious administrators push teachers to go even further in this direction. The result is that teachers end up working harder, getting worse results, and burning themselves out.

Rejecting the individual learning styles fad does not mean teachers must teach all students exactly the same way. Rather, it empowers teachers to use their professional judgment and their common sense to determine the best way to help students master the curriculum.

No matter whether you look it visually, auditorily, or kinaesthetically, the conclusion is the same; learning styles is a myth.

 

Michael Zwaagstra is a high school teacher and a Steinbach city councillor. He can be reached at mzwaagstra@shaw.ca.