Learning Styles Theory

When I became a teacher, I was taught that people have different learning styles.

Some people were auditory learners. Students who, for example, learnt best in lectures.

Some were visual learners. If you showed them pictures, diagrams or demonstrated how to do something and they would easily grasp the concept.

Others were kinaesthetic or ‘hands-on’ learners. If you got them doing it, they would learn more effectively than the others.

Further, I learnt that if you deliver training in a way that doesn’t fit someone’s learning style, then the learning would be less effective. I believed that if I asked a kinaesthetic learner to read an article or sit through a presentation, for instance, we’d be wasting time.

I was also given questionnaires so my learners could find out their learning styles. A Google search reveals many free online tests for determining your learning style too.

I completed a few while writing this article.

According to Neil Fleming’s ‘VARK‘ system I’m more of a visual learner.

In the Education Planner questionnaire, it tells me I’m an auditory learner:

By the way, my favourite question was this one:

“When you see the word “cat,” what do you do first?”

1. Picture a cat in your mind
2. Say the word “cat” to yourself
3. Think about being with a cat (petting it or hearing it purr)

There are other learning styles models proposed, such as Honey and Mumford’s ‘PART’ (Pragmatist, Activist, Theorist and Reflector) systems, and the Left Brain / Right Brain theory.

No Evidence to Validate Learning Styles Theory

So do people actually learn better when the delivery method matches the diagnosed learning style?

A team of cognitive psychologists set out to determine whether all this was supported by scientific evidence (Pashler et al., 2008).

The answer was no.

They found very few studies capable of testing the validity of learning styles theory in education, none actually validated it and several contradicted it.

Quoting from one of my favourite books on the science of learning, Make it Stick (Brown 2014 – who is citing others – see references at the end for more info).

“A report on a 2004 survey conducted for Britain’s Learning and Skills Research Centre compares more than seventy distinct learning styles theories currently being offered in the marketplace, each with its companion assessment instrument to diagnose a person’s particular style.

The report’s authors characterize the purveyors of these instruments as an industry bedeviled by vested interests that tout “a bedlam of contradictory claims” and express concerns about the temptation to classify, label, and stereotype individuals.”

What’s Going on Here?

It sounds good. We humans have a strong desire to simplify ambiguity and apply narrative to disorder.

And it’s partly true. Many of us have a preference for how we like to learn new stuff, because that’s what feels most comfortable.

But there’s no evidence supporting the idea that trying to match instruction to a learning preference or style is helpful.

The review by Pashler et al. mentioned above found that it is helpful when the instructional methods match with subject being taught. E.g. verbal for teaching someone how to do voice-overs, or visual for someone teaching about art.

Conclusion

1. There’s no evidence to validate claims that matching teaching to a diagnosed learning style is effective in learning.
2. There are many other strategies (for example, these) that are proven to be helpful for learners.
3. The return on investment in getting caught up in questionnaires, trying to test your student’s learning styles, then floundering around with trying to match your teaching methods to these styles is probably a loss.
4. Yes, many people have learning preferences. But attempting to stay within these preferences when learning may do more harm than good.

Learn More

We love the science of learning. If you’re interested in becoming a Certificate IV in Training and Assessment qualified Trainer and Assessor in Australia, who teaches based on science instead of myth and folklore, let us know!

References and further reading

https://digest.bps.org.uk/2021/02/04/the-learning-styles-myth-is-still-prevalent-among-educators-and-it-shows-no-sign-of-going-away/

Pashler, H. et al. (2008) ‘Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence’, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), pp. 105–119. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x.

Brown, Peter C. (2014) Make It Stick : the Science of Successful Learning. Cambridge, Massachusetts :The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

F. Coffield, D. Moseley, E. Hall, Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning, a systematic and critical review, 2004, Learning and Skills Research Centre, London; the quote by the student (“there’s no point in me reading a book”) is from same source, p. 137. The quote “a bedlam of contradictory claims” is from Michael Reynolds, Learning styles: a critique, Management Learning, June 1997, vol. 28 no. 2, p. 116.