Learning styles are different ways that a person can learn. It's commonly believed that most people favor some particular method of interacting with, taking in, and processing stimuli or information. Psychologists have proposed several complementary taxonomies of learning styles. But other psychologists and neuroscientists have questioned the scientific basis for some learning style theories. A major report published in 2004 cast doubt on most of the main tests used to identify an individual's learning style.
Multi-modal learners are people who have more than one strong learning style.
The researchers, led by Prof. Frank Coffield (now at London's Institute of Education), selected 13 of the most influential models for closer study (including most of the models cited on this page). To ensure consistency they applied the same criteria to each: examining theoretical origins, definition of terms, the instrument itself, the claims made by the author(s), external studies of these claims and independent empirical evidence of impact on teaching and learning.
One of the most popular is the learning styles theory advanced by American researchers Rita and Ken Dunn. The Dunn's model is often referred to as the VAK approach, because it focuses on visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learning styles. But others researchers also use VAK.
The Newcastle team's conclusions about the Dunn's model were unequivocal.
"Despite a large and evolving research programme, forceful claims made for impact are questionable because of limitations in many of the supporting studies and the lack of independent research on the model."
Another model, Gregorc's Style Delineator (GSD), was found to be "theoretically and psychometrically flawed" and "not suitable for the assessment of individuals."
Coffield's team found that none of the most popular learning style theories had been adequately validated through independent research; the idea of a learning cycle, the consistency of visual, auditory and kinaesthetic preferences and the value of matching teaching and learning styles were all 'highly questionable'.
The Newcastle team are not alone in their judgement. Demos, a UK think tank, published a report * on learning styles in early 2005. The report was prepared by a group chaired by Exeter University's David Hargreaves; contributing academics included Usha Goswami from Cambridge University and David Wood from the University of Nottingham. The Demos report said that the evidence for learning styles was 'highly variable', and that practitioners were "not by any means frank about the evidence for their work".
Cautioning against interpreting neuropsychological research as supporting the applicability of learning style theory, John Geake, Professor of Education at the UK's Oxford Brookes University, and a research collaborator with Oxford University's Centre for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain, commented to Revell (2005) that
We need to take extreme care when moving from the lab to the classroom. We do remember things visually and aurally, but information isn't defined by how it was received.
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"Learning styles".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world