Don’t pick learning methods based on “I’m a visual learner, he’s an auditory learner”
Original: eternity4719 · source details
Original author: eternity4719 · Chinese source: · English adaptation: parveen0029. Translation and grade notes ↗
Bibliographic titles are retained in their original language.
Source author's views and grades; not individually verified by this site.
Cost and benefit at a glance
- Check the cost Cost ↓
- No cost at all. You simply stop using this classification to pick materials or courses, and you also avoid spending money on style assessments.
- Then the source benefit Benefit ↓
- A comprehensive review evaluating evidence on learning styles concluded that to prove “teaching according to learning styles” works, students must first be grouped by style, then r…
In plain terms
Many people believe each person has a distinct learning style — such as being visual or auditory — and that teaching should be tailored to that style for best results. Yet there are very few rigorous studies on this, and almost none provide any support for it; several even show the opposite. While people do have personal preferences, there’s no evidence that instruction aligned with those preferences leads to better learning. There’s also no need to spend money on learning style assessments.
This guide's cartoon · show illustration
Enlarge illustrationOriginal illustration with Chinese lettering; the English dialogue is below. Humour is a reading aid, not evidence.
English dialogue
- Can I just pay to learn it?
- Show me the practice.
Cost: what it takes
No cost at all. You simply stop using this classification to pick materials or courses, and you also avoid spending money on style assessments.
Benefit: what the source reports
A comprehensive review evaluating evidence on learning styles concluded that to prove “teaching according to learning styles” works, students must first be grouped by style, then randomly assigned to different teaching methods, and finally tested using the same assessment. The key indicator of effectiveness would be a specific interaction effect: a teaching method highly effective for one style would be less effective for another. The review found almost no such interaction effects. Although there’s plenty of literature on learning styles, very few studies employ proper experimental designs, and several of those produce results directly contradicting the “match hypothesis.” Based on this, the authors argue current evidence simply doesn’t justify incorporating learning style assessments into educational practice.
Conditions, limits and disagreements
The review also notes this doesn’t mean every version of learning style theory has been tested and disproven; many have never been examined at all. What you should definitely avoid is spending money on learning style assessments or selecting training programs based on such classifications. Criteria for picking training options are outlined in item 9 (prioritizing government-subsidized programs) and item 13 (favoring short-term programs that lead directly to employment).
Original references
Original bibliographic titles and links are preserved; some titles are in Chinese.
Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
Medical, legal, financial and policy conditions vary by person, place and time. Policy material primarily concerns mainland China; check the cited document and current local requirements.