Skip to main content

Learning Style or Money Maker?

By

 



 

Myers Briggs. Love languages. True colors. Learning styles. Strengths Quest. 

 

Any of these terms sound familiar? These are all “type” money makers. Each of these is a “type” theory turned into an organization. Each organization charges per test/questionnaire taken and per individual trained to be a certified facilitator. As a certified facilitator, you provide trainings about the styles to an individual/team and get paid. If I know anything about business, it is that the more money your organization/reps make, the more leverage to promote and expand the ideas. Before you know it, these ideas become part of your work email signature and you are wearing a $35 strengths necklace! If you ask me, learning theories are popular because they are money makers. In 2004, Britain’s Learning and Skills Research Centre compared over 70 learning style theories (p.143). With this many styles (products) available, it is hard not to buy into these learning and personality tests. There wouldn’t be an entire market of learning styles if people weren’t spending on them. Why wouldn’t we want to invest in learning about ourselves? The key to success lies in knowing your strengths and maximizing on your abilities. After all, you are your own expert, right? Wrong!

 

In reality, taking these tests and questionnaires limits our potential because “what you tell yourself about your ability plays a part in shaping the ways you learn and perform” (p.140). If you take a test and find out you are a visual learner, you are likely to limit your learning to visual opportunities because you are convinced it is the only way you can learn. What the style and personality tests fail to emphasize is the idea that your results are preferences, not absolute ways of being. If your learning preference is visual, it means that when visual learning is not available, you will need to turn to instructional techniques like dynamic testing. While a learning style theory tells you a strength or preference to focus on, dynamic testing supports you in identifying your weaknesses and ways to correct them (p.151). In doing so, your learning is broadened. You will learn with your learning style preference and you will strengthen other areas of learning. This means you can prefer to learn visually, but you can also learn kinesthetically! That is double the knowledge and double the chances of making money! That is the point of learning, right? Learn how you learn so you can sell your ideas? If we cannot trust the evidence currently available to validate learning styles theories (p. 146), let’s trust there is money to be made in labeling and classifying ourselves (insert eye roll here).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

By Corinne
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 ...
1 comment
Read more

Learning is an experience. Everything else is just information.

By
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...
1 comment
Read more

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

By
         “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...
2 comments
Read more