learning styles

PhillipC    says:

Be careful!! The whole learning styles thing - and especially VAK - is deeply suspect. There is no respectable research evidence that it has any value as a tool in teaching, and an increasing amount of evidence that it inhibits the effectiveness of teachers. Have a look at David Hargreaves' (Exeter University, England) work for Demos (London), or the work done at the University of Newcastle on Tyne (also England).

One of the biggest problems is the inadequacy of the various psychometric tools that are commonly used
Posted 37 months ago. ( permalink )

cedar_9 says:

I do feel that the kids end up thinking of themselves as one particular kind of learner, rather than a blend, and that the information (withor without targets) can narrow their thinking a bit.

Also, as PhillipC says about the testing methods - something I personally find quite interesting for myself (but also rather annoying) - they're not so accurate anyway. Every time i try it on myself it turns out differently.

I think it's beign used too formally, and that making sure there's a variety of learning styles in the lessons, and broadly catering in smaller groups for broad particular groups with broad dominant styles, will cover everyone. But that's my opinion only.
Posted 37 months ago. ( permalink )

LindaH    says:

Hi Phillip :-) I take your point but I disagree that the whole concept of learning styles is so easily dismissed. I believe there is 'respectable' research (interesting concept that - I wonder if you'd count action research in that?) about learning styles. I don't see that it inhibits teachers to have to take into account the different learning style needs of children. It may challenge them but all that it asks of them is really to be prepared to present material in a variety of formats. Look carefully at the display and you'll see that we are working towards encouraging the children to widen their learning styles. I do believe that we probably all start off with some preferences but that we can widen our range with practice.
I agree that many of the psychometric tools are of little use but the children's test scores threw up no surprises. The teacher and I agreed that we'd have placed each one of them exactly where they placed themselves.
In the primary classroom the main implications of learning styles are the effect that our knowledge of them will have on our classroom practice.

In my own context it is useful to me to know that:
Child A has a predominately visual learning style as this may help me differentiate work in a way that supports his learning
Child B is fidgeting not to be naughty but because he is trying to think and that he might appreciate being given a stress ball to fiddle with so as not to disrupt other children.
Child C needs to talk his ideas through with his partner in order to really grasp the concepts and is not 'just chatting'
Child D sometimes 'knows' that he needs to be on his own to concentrate and might need to move himself round the corner to the quiet area.
My class teacher is very much auditory and finds it hard to put ideas across to visual and kinaesthetic learners
My own visual/slight kinaesthetic preferences make it easier for me to see ways of getting things across to other learners.

These tiny things can make it possible for individuals to cope in the classroom and stops their learning needs disrupting those of others.

cedar_9 says:

I also think that the amount of research, recommendation, sets of programmes to help kids catch up etc, does indeed lead to less effectiveness. things change too quickly, in addition.

I agree that tailoring teaching is important, and often thes programmes and research do have value and effectiveness in themselves, but trying to make all of it work in the classroom makes it so hectic that it can hamper things rather than help. Again, opinion only :)
Posted 37 months ago. ( permalink )

PhillipC    says:

The debate developing in this thread encapsulates the wider debate well.

In my view the problem lies with the kinds of observation based theory generation that you describe Linda. How do you come to KNOW that the explanation for the observed behaviour of the children you describe is associated with learning style differences? And even if you do 'know' the cognitive strategies of a particular child how do you know that the learning style explains the behaviour?

It seems to me (to take just one element of the child's environment) that the socio-cultural context of schools as institutions have much more explanatory power about children's learning behaviour in classrooms than does any individual pattern of cognitive functioning. In other words I believe that if the goal is to have children 'learn' better (that is - learn what the curriculum and the institutions that design the curriculum want them to learn - because 'not learning' actually means 'not learning what we think they ought to learn') then it is more productive to explore the appropriateness of the school's performance as an institution than it is to concentrate on what may well be spurious measures of how the children appear to be cognitively accessing and processing information.

My challenge here is about treating the school as a 'black box' - a given and unproblematic entity. I have co-authored a book chapter on this subject and would be happy to send it to you if you provide me with an email address. To put my view absolutely straight -I believe that the interest in learning styles as a way to individualise learning is a poor substitute for what is regarded as far too threatening and difficult - to reassess the whole proposition that schools as we presently conceive of them are the best way that we can deploy resources to facilitate socially desirable learning.

As an aside - your suspicion that I am one of those that discount action research is unfounded. However, having spent a whole career (i.e. 35 years) as an action researcher I have become increasingly uncomfortable with how much action research is atheoretical. This does not mean I have turned into a traditional positivist researcher, but it does mean that I believe that we need to link action research to mainstream research in a a feedback loop. I now work in such a multi-disciplinary and multi-methodological team, and for the first time in my life I feel that I can identify some real and useful progress.
Posted 37 months ago. ( permalink )

AndyRob    says:

Re: learning styles as a substitute for the complete reassessment of the role of schools in society.

If you believe that the complete reassessment is needed, as do I, then it could be possible to discount any proposed improvements as short of the mark. Indeed, anything which empowers schools to do their job more efficiently could be seen as a 'bad thing' since it gives more power to their elbow, which will then be used to consolidate their functioning as an arm of the state which works not in the interests of the many, but of the ruling elite.

But that would be to assume that we are in a volatile situation in which there is the possibility of people regaining control over their local schools, councils and governments. As if power somehow hangs in the balance and could be tipped one way or the other through the application or not of the theory of learning styles.

Sometimes I believe we have to focus on the smaller battles and the practice being described in the display is being deployed by some class teachers and particularly teaching assistants to better empower certain individual children who don't fit in so well with the dominant "sit still and listen to me" teaching style. If this allows a few children to be accommodated rather than alienated, and the rest of the class to continue with less disruption then it's probably a worthwhile compromise while waiting for the abolition of the classroom as we know it.
Posted 37 months ago. ( permalink )

LindaH    says:

Blogged at the Classroom Displays Blog
Posted 35 months ago. ( permalink )

LindaH    says:

Also used on wikieducator : Facilitating the learning process of kinesthetic learners in the online environment
Posted 32 months ago. ( permalink )