Activity 4.3 (Learning Styles)

I don’t think that people only have one way of learning, but I do think we have preferences, or ways in which we learn most optimally. That doesn’t mean that people can’t learn in various ways. Daniel Willingham claims that it’s not how the information is presented, be it auditory or visual, but rather the meaning behind it. I don’t however agree with him when he talks about the prediction behind the learning styles theory, that a visual learner will always learn information that is presented in a visual way. I do think the theory is attempting to predict that if information is presented in ways that appeal to their preference, then they are more likely to remember it. However, I don’t think the theory is predicting that it will always have that outcome. He does make an interesting point about the acceptance, or individual belief, about learning styles which brings me to my next point.

One of my concerns about categorizing or grouping individuals based on a learning style is that it narrows one’s ability to branch out and learn in other ways. It’s not as if learning happens in only one form for one person. Individuals may have a tendency towards a particular way in which information or a task is presented (interest or familiarity), but it doesn’t mean that it’s the only way they can learn. I couldn’t help but remember a passage from James’ chapter on memory (pg. 61) where he says, “The ‘secret of a good memory’ is thus the secret of forming diverse and multiple associations with every fact we care to retain”. The word diverse is what stands out for me, meaning that information and experience comes from different places.  I realize we aren’t discussing memory specifically, but it is a piece of the learning process.  If I am under the impression, or have categorized myself, as being a kinesthetic learner then I’m more likely to shut out other ways in which information is presented, believing that I’m not able to learn it any other way than the one I’ve pigeon holed myself into.

When I was working towards my master’s in applied psychology (organizational) I had an instructor for a couple classes that was an advocate for Kolb’s learning styles. It was interesting to read in the literature review that it is a popular scheme, particularly in the United States (pg. 3). Reflecting back I realize that I embraced it wholeheartedly because my instructor was such a big supporter. We went through the assessment piece, and then discussed our results and how it applied not only to us but to employees. If I recall correctly I was an accommodator, and who knows maybe I still am if I were to retake the styles inventory. It’s just ironic how I haven’t thought about those learning styles for years (back in 2000) and here I am now reading about the topic only to find out that in 2004 a comprehensive review described 71 different schemes (pg. 2). It sure doesn’t boost my confidence level pertaining to this subject matter, and that’s not even discussing the lack of evidence related to many of them.

              By the end of the article you can’t help but think that it’s all gotten completely out of hand, similar to that of the self-help genre. That it’s been steered in irrelevant directions, and shows no promise to a valid and reliable end in sight. The researchers said it best with, “There is growing evidence that people hold beliefs about how they learn that are faulty in various ways, which frequently lead people to manage their own learning and teach others in non-optimal ways. This fact makes it clear that research—not intuition or standard practices—needs to be the foundation for upgrading teaching and learning” (pg. 13). It’s important to recognize that we have different approaches to learning, diverse experiences, and interest or appeal is generated in various ways. I think its good practice to present information with variety, it assists with repetition, and allows for “diverse and multiple associations” (James, 1899/2001, pg. 61).