Learning Styles? Dear scientists we need to get our act together!

The past week learning styles have been in the buzz again, but we can’t blame teachers for believing in them. They have been thought over and over again, but even worse: scientists keep promoting them.

Take for example this brandnew PhD, released this week at my home town university. It’s all about cognitive load theory – and doesn’t stem from the educational science departement to be clear – but what is mentioned over and over again? Yep. But if you read carefully, you’ll notice that in fact what the researcher is describing, are learning preferences. Oops, but you can’t blame teachers for not noticing the difference.

It’s even worse as Phil Newton shows in his new article in Frontiers:

The overwhelming majority (89%) of recent research papers, listed in the ERIC and PubMed research databases, implicitly or directly endorse the use of Learning Styles in Higher Education. These papers are dominated by the VAK and Kolb Learning Styles inventories. These presence of these papers in the pedagogical literature demonstrates that an educator, attempting to take an evidence-based approach to education, would be presented with a strong yet misleading message that the use of Learning Styles is endorsed by the current research literature. This has potentially negative consequences for students and for the field of education research.

This is not dissimilar to previous research showing how many papers cite the even flawed learning pyramid.

That’s why I never blame teachers. But dear scientists, we really need to get our act together (and don’t be stubborn).

 

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under Education, Myths, Research, Review

4 responses to “Learning Styles? Dear scientists we need to get our act together!

  1. Pingback: Just a little reminder if you’re into UDL: learning styles don’t exist | From experience to meaning...

  2. Pingback: Sometimes you can’t help wondering why oh why: check this ‘study’ on the effects of video games | From experience to meaning...

  3. Pingback: Depressing read: Oh dear, even people with neuroscience training believe an awful lot of brain myths | From experience to meaning...

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s