Neuromyths in design: Learning styles
Reasons to avoid using Learning Styles and some alternatives
Learning Styles refer to the belief that individuals can benefit from receiving information in their preferred format (e.g., visual, auditory, kinesthetic). This is usually measured using a self-report questionnaire. The aim of the Learning Styles approach is to optimize learning by tailoring teaching materials to the individuals’ preferred mode. For example, a visual learner would receive materials based on visual aids.
This belief has been promoted in the media and has intuitive appeal due to the fact that individuals are better at some things than others. As a result, it wouldn’t be far-fetched to believe that catering to different learning styles would be effective. This approach has been very popular with educators as well as designers.
“No amount of belief makes something a fact” — James Randi
Numerous studies and systematic reviews going back to 2004 have been conducted but no evidence has been found to support the hypothesis that matching material in the appropriate format to an individual’s learning style improves learning. Evidence suggests that it is unhelpful to assign learners to groups or categories on the basis of a supposed learning style and can, sometimes, cause more harm. As a result, the Educational Endowment Foundation in the UK has concluded that Learning Styles is “Low impact for very low cost, based on limited evidence”.
Learning preferences are not consistent; they do change depending on the situation and the task, and over time. Most learners are very unlikely to have only a single learning style, so matching their activities to their reported preferences may have a negative impact on learning. For example, there is substantial research showing that individuals are often skilled at both verbal and visual processing and that the two are correlated (i.e., individuals with high verbal skills also have high visual skills). In addition to this, both types are important for learning, and both can be improved through instruction. This is especially true for younger individuals whose preferences and approaches to learning are still very flexible.
Furthermore, many of the measures of learning styles lack reliability and validity, so using them to categorize individuals as different types of learners is not appropriate. Using self-report measures is also problematic; what people prefer is not what is best for them. Knoll and colleagues (2016) found that learning styles are associated with subjective aspects of learning but not objective aspects of learning. In other words, learners do not actually “know” what is best for them.
Even though there is so much evidence against the Learning Styles theory, surveys in the United States and other countries across the world have shown that 80% to 95% of people still believe in it. In fact, the myth is so prevalent that even when people are presented with evidence against the myth, a substantial number of them (32%) state that they would still continue to use this approach. This demonstrates that ‘debunking’ Learning Styles alone may not be effective. Alternatives need to be provided.
Individuals differ in their abilities, interests, and background knowledge, but not in their learning styles. They may have preferences about how to learn, but no evidence suggests that catering to those preferences will lead to better learning. — Riener & Willingham, 2010
It is important to note that the criticism against Learning Styles does not mean all learners are the same. A certain number of dimensions (ability, background knowledge, interest) vary from person to person and are known to affect learning.
Alternatives to this approach
So what can we use if not Learning Styles? Research from cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and educational psychology can inform the way we design. Some suggestions are discussed below.
Instead of focusing on a specific type, we can provide multiple sensory representations of information for all users. Research has shown that multiple sensory representations result in multiple, linked representations in memory that improve understanding and recall of the material. A way to achieve this is by using a combination of text, picture, sound, movie, animation, and other media.
Avoid focusing on strengths and ignoring weaknesses. Studies have found that individuals who have weaker spatial or visual processing skills can improve these skills through instruction. This improvement has been linked to positive learning outcomes.
Using learners’ prior knowledge to help them learn new things is another effective approach. There is evidence suggesting that an individual’s existing knowledge affects how well they learn new information. As designers, we can do this by finding out what users already know and help them connect that to the new information.
Read More
How Common Is Belief in the Learning Styles Neuromyth, and Does It Matter? A Pragmatic Systematic…
Evidence-Based Higher Education - Is the Learning Styles 'Myth' Important
Neuromyths in Education: Prevalence and Predictors of Misconceptions among Teachers
When will learning style go out of style? - Advances in Health Sciences Education
"An additional reason to abandon learning styles" - teachers and pupils do not agree on the pupils'…