Learning Styles: a Myth 1

Running Head: Learning Styles: a Myth with Serious Consequences

Learning Styles:

a Myth with Serious Consequences

Jason P. Neiffer

University of Montana

C&I 510, Fall 2010

 Learning Styles: a Myth 2

It is a persuasive argument that must be very luring to hard-working teachers: because all of our

students are unique and different, of course they must learn differently. Any teacher faced with a class

of 30 students knows that not all lessons speak to all students in the same way and frequently, changing

up the delivery model seems to engage students at a level that seems impossible with “traditional

learning” methods do not seem to match. Plus, how is one to explain those learners that don't find

success in our classrooms? Certainly there must be an explanation of why students fail in our

classrooms despite our best efforts otherwise. Born of these well-meaning feelings is the concept of

learning styles. While learning styles are mentioned with hushed and reverent tones that border on

religious truth, a brave set of cognitive scientists, after years of research trying to explain these

concepts, conclude that there is no evidence that such classifications exist. Despite hundreds of casual

reference in educational literature, there is no conclusive study that proves that learning styles exist and

worse, a number of for-profit educational groups have latched on to learning style theory to help sell

their cure-alls for this non-problem.

There are countless references to learning styles in educational literature, ranging from how to

best utilize e-learning in K-12 schools to how to best train employees in human resource practices.

Many of these sources seem to conclude that learning styles are an obvious extension of our modern

scientific study of the brain and its function. Fontichiaro (2009), for example, uses learning style

theory to justify adopting for adopting “21st century skills” in elementary library training, noting, in

part, that “We now know much more than ever before about individual learning styles, learning pace,

and preferred learning modalities. We know that children of similar intelligence may work at different

speeds, follow different thinking paths, or process information differently,” without making any

reference to a study or proof that these learning styles exist. Other writers use learning styles to argue

for more individualized education, an argument articulated by Grasha (2002), who argues that college

teaching should be transformed to be focused on the one-on-one experience. He uses learning styles as
 Learning Styles: a Myth 3

a justification for his advocacy, although admitting that most research seems to focus on the “traditional

learning environment.” Grasha also writes with Yangarber-Hicks that technology could be used an

equalizer among learning styles, as technology provides different avenues to present content to

classroom learners. Grasha and Yangarber-Hicks also find no question in the theory of learning styles,

writing that “there is no question that learning styles should be taken into account when teaching with

technology” (2000). Others go as far as suggesting that even if debate exists about learning style,

broad assumptions useful in the classroom can be drawn from the theory, even if research disagrees

with the conclusion (Moallem 2003).

This advocacy transcends teaching and is often intertwined with political advocacy related to

education. Governmental organizations have adopted learning styles advocacy, often uncritically, as

part of their larger educational agenda (Revell 2005).

With all of these references to learning styles and the advanced knowledge of the brain

possessed by scientists and the educational community, certainly ample evidence must exist that these

patterns are real. However, cognitive scientists argue that there is no support for learning styles.

There is first a problem with defining learning styles and determining a functional vocabulary to

discuss the issue using similar terms. Even advocates of learning style theories find the problem

daunting. Pitts (2009) refers to “confusion” related to terminology concerning learning style research,

citing one article that notes 127 different factors that impact learning styles. An opposite, but similar

force, that confuses matters is the desire on the part of educators, schools of education and political

leaders to develop a “silver bullet” to answer the problems of why schools don't always work with all

students (Ansari 2008). This has the unfortunately impact of obscuring the debate, as the sheer number

of learning style theories make arguing against the popularly held myth difficult (which may,

unfortunately, include this paper) as it requires looking at each framework independently to discover its

faults (Dembo and Howard 2007).

 Learning Styles: a Myth 4

The second problem that exists with learning styles is that, simply put, research does not

confirm the existence of learning styles. Despite decades of research attempting to identify differences

between students to help educators better serve their needs, there is no conclusive evidence that says

that learning styles exist. Willingham (2009) goes as far as stating that “Children are more alike than

different in terms of how they think and learn.” Despite strong assertions and statements otherwise

from learning style components, the evidence is clear that learning styles are “based on fiction, not

fact” (Dembo and Howard). There may certain preferences or talents related to learning channels,

however, these difference mean little in relation to learning or the classroom and should be discounted

in planning instruction (Willingham 2009).

One must then ask if learning styles are, indeed, not confirmed by research, why is it such a

popularly held view among educators? Dembo and Howard (2007) attempt to answer this by looking

at the blind faith that seems to accompany so many of the claims regarding learning styles. Many

accept these theories because it seems to be confirmed by instructional practice or reactions from

“untrained observers” which may include those practitioners.

Dembo and Howard also question the tools used by those trying to measure learning styles,

which in most cases amount to a simplistic way to categorize learning that push certain conclusions.

Dembo and Howard write that, “A choice of demonstration over uninterrupted lecture, on its face, can

be interpreted as an indicator of a visual learner. However, if most respondents choose the same answer,

then it does not really measure anything in particular except, perhaps, the ability to read the question.

Furthermore, the question has little value in discerning possible distinctive characteristics of the

learner” (2007).

Although it is certainly troubling that so many seem to adopt the learning styles theory despite

the scant evidence in favor of the model, there may be additional implications to holistically adopting

these theories in classrooms. First, well-meaning professionals adopting learning styles in their
 Learning Styles: a Myth 5

learning environment may find that it create a less engaging and effective learning environment for

their students. Learning styles theory has been widely used as both a system and classroom reform,

sometimes to extreme ways. Revell (2005) describes schools in England that physically label students

with their learning style and entire states in Australia that have adopted systems based on learning

styles, something that Howard Gardner described in an interview as something that made him

“uncomfortable.” In individual classrooms, learning style theories have been used to justify lessons

described as “rag-bag” and “irresponsible” (Mumford, quoted in Sadler-Smith 1996).

Second, many of the advocates seem less interested in the profess of students than in selling

materials used to support learning systems supporting by learning styles. Many of those advocating

learning styles offer commercial products ranging from professional development to computer software

that can be used to meet the gaps in education created by traditional instruction (Ansari 2008). Worse,

any of these commercial products carefully guard data of their effectiveness, making trials and research

impossible to judge their effectiveness (Ansari 2008).

Despite the persuasiveness of the arguments, learning style theory must be carefully examined

before classroom practice is modified. Not only does research conclude that little support exists for the

concept, practical suggests vary widely on how a teacher might even adopt such a teaching theory,

making caution incredibly important (Learning Skills and Research Centre 2004). To do otherwise

risks learning outcomes in the classroom and may even endanger teaching's standing among

professionals (Dembo and Howard 2007).

 Learning Styles: a Myth 6

References

Ansari, D. (2008, Fall). The Brain Goes to School: Strengthening the Education-Neuroscience

Connection. Education Canada, 48(10), 6-10.

Dembo, M. H., & Howard, K. (2007). Advice about the use of learning styles: a major myth in

education. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 37(2), 101.

Fontichiaro, K. (2009, March/). MORE THAN FRIENDSHIP: SOCIAL SCHOLARSHIP, YOUNG

LEARNERS, AND THE STANDARDS FOR THE 21-CENTURY LEARNER. Knowledge

Quest, 37(4), 64-67.

Grasha, A. F. (2002). The dynamics of one-on-one teaching. College Teaching, 50(4), 139+.

Grasha, A. F., & Yangarber-Hicks, N. (2000). Integrating Teaching Styles and Learning Styles with

Instructional Technology. College Teaching, 48(1), 2.

Learning & Skills Research Centre. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning.

Retrieved from The University of Hull website: http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/edskas/learning

%20styles.pdf

Moallem, M. (2003). Applying learning styles in an online course. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 7(4),

209.

Pitts, J. (2009). Identifying and using a teacher-friendly learning-styles instrument. The Clearing

House, 82(5), 225+.

Revell, P. (2005, May 31). Each to their own. The Guardian. Retrieved from

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2005/may/31/schools.uk3

Sadler-Smith, E. (2006). Learning styles: a holistic approach. Journal of European Industrial Training,

20(7), 29+.

Terrell, S. R. (2005, Summer). Supporting Different Learning Styles in an Online Learning

Environment: Does it Really Matter in the Long Run? Online Journal of Distance Learning
 Learning Styles: a Myth 7

Administration, 8(2). Retrieved from

http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer82/terrell82.htm

Willingham, D. (2009). Why Don’t Students Like School: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions

About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom. Hoboken, New Jersey:

Jossey-Bass.