Learning Style Myth
We have received questions on “learning styles” which according to Pashler (2009) refers to “the concept that individuals differ in regard to what mode of instruction is most effective for them.” A more recent 2018 study by Husmann provides further evidence that learning styles should be rejected. So, we would like to share the authors paper, “Learning styles: Concepts and evidence.”
From the article …
“Proponents of learning-style assessment contend that optimal instruction requires diagnosing individuals' learning style and tailoring instruction accordingly. Assessments of learning style typically ask people to evaluate what sort of information presentation they prefer (e.g., words versus pictures versus speech) and/or what kind of mental activity they find most engaging or congenial (e.g., analysis versus listening). The most common hypothesis about the instructional relevance of learning styles is the meshing hypothesis, where instruction is best provided in a format that matches the preferences of the learner.
The authors researched the concept using three parameters:
Students must be divided into groups on the basis of their learning styles, then students from each group must be randomly assigned to receive one of multiple instructional methods;
Students must then take a final assessment that is the same for all;
To demonstrate that optimal learning requires that students receive instruction tailored to their learning style, the experiment must reveal a specific type of interaction between learning style and instructional method: Students with one learning style achieve the best outcome when given an instructional method that differs from the instructional method producing the best outcome for students with a different learning style.
In other words, the instructional method that proves most effective for students with one learning style is not the most effective method for students with a different learning style.
The research disclosed ample evidence that adults will express preferences about how they prefer information to be presented. There is also plentiful evidence arguing that people differ in the degree to which they have some fairly specific aptitudes for different kinds of thinking and for processing information. However, they found no evidence for the interaction pattern mentioned above, which was judged to be a precondition for validating the applications of learning styles. Very few studies have used an experimental methodology capable of testing the validity of learning styles and those that did found results that flatly contradict the meshing hypothesis.
The authors conclude that there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning-styles assessments. Thus, limited education resources would better be devoted to adopting other educational practices that have a strong evidence base (for example through SoTL, such as active learning, etc.).
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2009). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
