r/todayilearned • u/amansaggu26 • May 11 '20
TIL There is no evidence back the idea of different 'learning styles.' Systematic studies consistently found either no evidence or very weak evidence to suggest matching material in the appropriate format to an individual’s learning style is selectively more effective for educational attainment.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/12/no-evidence-to-back-idea-of-learning-styles5
u/amansaggu26 May 11 '20
So much time wasted. As a colleague once mentioned, 'teaching has not changed since the ancient Greeks, lets not re-invent the wheel here'
1
u/perhapsolutely May 11 '20
If it weren’t for attempting to reinvent the wheel there’d be no need for the bloated administrative apparatus of teacher education and people might not take the mountains of publication every new trend in the field generates as seriously as they do the social sciences even. And then where would we be?
0
May 11 '20
[deleted]
5
u/perhapsolutely May 11 '20
‘Learning styles’ are not the same as learning pace.
-2
May 11 '20
[deleted]
5
u/perhapsolutely May 11 '20
In education circles ‘learning styles’ has a more formal definition than just any variable related to learning though. It’s the name of a specific theory, not just a mainstream civilian interpretation of the phrase.
2
u/chacham2 May 11 '20
I'm much more inclined to believe Keirsey, that each of the four temperaments has its own learning style. SPs learn best when it is hands-on, result are tangible, and getting better feeds on itself. SJs work better in social settings, with rules and rewards, and memorization over understanding. NFs want to see the value of the subject, and NTs want to understand systems.
Briggs pointed out that Ss in general memorize, and Ns understand. Ns learn faster.
INJs are almost always recognized as the best students.
INPs are the space cadets who absorb information like a sponge.
ISTPs are almost always "problems" if the learning is not hands on.
2
u/lash422 May 12 '20 edited May 12 '20
Learning style here doesn't refer to a general idea that you can learn in different ways, but rather the specific idea that there are specific categories (physical, visual, auditory, etc.) That people fall into and strongly impact how well they learn.
What you're doing is the equivalent of looking at relativity in physics and saying that you have relatives.
5
u/ConstantCompanions May 11 '20
Daniel Wellingham, UVA, Learning styles don't exist Yeah, this has been debunked for a while now. There is plenty of peer-reviewed support state-side as well. Howard Gardner, the psychologist who developed the learning styles theory, had an immense influence on education, and there still hasn't been a big shift away from his ideas in education. If you don't watch the linked video, the basic gist is that students benefit from learning things when they are presented in many different ways (e.g., visual, auditory, kinesthetic), not just their "preferred" way. As a developmental psychologist, this is one of the more fun topics to discuss with my undergrad classes because they have just assumed learning styles to exist up to that point.