Skip to main content

Is the Sky Really Blue?


I was first introduced to the idea of learning styles when my first-born started school.  I remember researching schools, going to new parent orientations, learning about the different approaches different schools took to their educational philosophies, and meeting teachers.  During this time, I remember feeling quickly overwhelmed with the import of the decision I was making and the many factors that would weigh into our ultimate choice.  Transitioning a child to a more structured learning environment, I remember quizzing teachers on whether they included kinaesthetic and physical learning approaches into their practice – thinking that it would be hard for my son to sit still for a full-day.  We eventually ended up at the Lab School where the emphasis on experiential learning (among other reasons) resonated with me.

 

Fast forward to my experience as an educator.  My interest in education is firmly rooted in the idea of experiential and place-based education.  I didn’t come to this home-base because of learning styles theory specifically.  As an avowed generalist, I think that I have intuitively embraced the idea that we benefit from a wide and balanced base of learning approaches.  Experiential learning satisfies this understanding as it balances classroom learning (visual, aural, verbal, logical) along with personal reflection – all grounded in the physical act of doing.   From the reading, it seems the primary critique of a learning styles approach is that it forces one to choose distinct categories (or learning preferences) and enables one to dismiss other approaches.  The research indicating that this rationale can be counter to effective learning fits with my own experience and teaching/learning philosophy.

 

Why do people gravitate to a learning style theory?  Way back when my son was starting school, I took it on faith that this was grounded in empirical evidence.  The same reason I don’t feel the need to do extensive research on the theory of gravity before taking on faith that this is the reason something dropped falls to the ground.  I had heard the idea of learning styles so much that I assumed it to be true.  It does make you wonder what else I take to be true on good faith.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Let’s throw Learning Styles AND Multiple Intelligences out the window!

Logical-mathematical, musical, analytical, practical, tactile, olfactory, poetic, faith-based, monochromatic—everyone has their own best way of learning and we should cater to each individual’s fundamental learning needs. Maybe some people learn best when surrounded by abstractions in navy, turquoise and yellow. They should all carry this artwork around with them everywhere.  Right? Nonsense! Learning styles and multiple intelligences are related concepts and stem from related literatures. Some of these concepts that have emerged are reasonable, while others are not.  Reasonable:   Gardner’s fundamental argument that people can access learning through multiple avenues—for example, through reading a book, watching a video, and practicing in the field—and learners should engage a variety of avenues in order to optimize learning.   Unreasonable:   The way in which the idea of learning styles has taken root in our collective psyche is not so reasonable. Individuals ...

Learning is an experience. Everything else is just information.

A quote from Albert Einstein.     A quote that spoke to me as I believe it summarized well the concept of Illusions of Comprehension presented by Dr. Robert Bjork.     Illusions of comprehension is the idea that we confuse performance with learning.     Performance is described as that which we can observe – learning as that which we must infer.     I looked up the word infer to make sure I had the exact definition.     To infer is to deduce or conclude from evidence and reasoning.     It is that step beyond memorization where you actually apply the knowledge gained.     What do our intuitions tell us about learning?     Messages we get going through school tell us that learning means doing well on that test or getting a good grade.     I got an ‘A’!     I must have learned the content!     The structure of school contributes to this sense that learning happens and is assessed w...

To grade, or not to grade, that is the learning question.

         “I know grades don’t matter in grad school, but it’s so validating to get a 4.0!” I sent this message to a few friends at the end of FA20. I was happy to know I received a 4.0 GPA after taking 2 PhD classes while working full time (something I hadn’t done in 2 years). If I believe “grades don’t matter in grad school,” why did I get so excited about this assessment of my performance? Why did I finally get A+ grades? I have been in school for over 20 years now…Am I smarter this many years later? Or am I studying better? Is it both? Robert Bjork would probably tell me it is both. On one hand, I am “performing better” because I have deeper foundational knowledge and am able to successfully generate connections/engage processes (Brown et.al., 2014, p.76). On the other hand, graduate school forced me to do my readings before the lecture. As it turns out, learning is optimal for ESL students if they read the content before a lecture (Uni...