Learning Styles: Do They Really Matter-- Implications for Multimedia Design

1. Learning Styles: Do They Really Matter-- Implications for Multimedia Design Jolly Holden, Ed.D. (USAF, Ret.) Associate Professor, School of Education American InterContinental Next slide

2. Why Are You Here? Opinion: The concept of learning styles is probably the most misunderstood and misapplied instructional concept in use today. Fact: Research has revealed that learning styles have little, if any, effect on learning outcomes. Result:So why is there so much discussion on them and why are they still widely perceived as having an affect?

3. Inform--What are learning styles, cognitive styles, and learning modalities Educate--What does the research indicate? Enlighten—So what? Why so much confusion? What can instructors/trainers/instructional designers do to facilitate the transfer of learning? Goals of This Presentation Caution: You are Entering the “No Spin Zone” Prior Next slide slide

4. The “So What” The Debate What are Learning/Cognitive Styles? What are Learning Modalities? What’s the Difference? Review of the Research What Does it All Mean & What Can I Do? Learning /Cognitive Style Resources Presentation Menu(Click any of the hyperlinks to go directly to that topic) Prior Return Next slide to Menu slide

5. Insight [and research] into Learning Styles • An article (Dec, 2009) in the Chronicle of Higher Education entitled Matching Teaching Style to Learning Style May Not Help Students, challenged the prevailing concept of learning styles and their affect on student performance. • The investigators found “no evidence…for validating the educational applications of learning styles into general educational practice.” and concluded “the instructional method that proves most effective for students with one learning style is not the most effective method for students with a different learning style.” • This is not surprising…these results and conclusions have been supported repeatedly in the research for the past 30 years.

6. So What? • This is not a new debate but a continuing investigation into the efficacy of learning styles that has spanned 60 years. • To that end, there is a strong intuitive appeal to the notion there are individual preferences and styles of learning. • That said, we’re not going to solve the problem today, but… at the end of this presentation, you will better understand: The concept of learning/cognitive styles; their variability; and impact [or lack thereof] on learning and instructional design

7. The Essence of the Debate [and the Disagreement] • Learning styles theorists look at how students learn, not what they learned. • By emphasizing the how of instruction, learning styles practitioners lose sight of the what of instruction and tend to “profile” learners based upon perception. • Research does not support designing instruction to match learning styles. • No current holistic [overall] theory of learning preferences. • The point being that what is commonly referred to as learning styles, others have labeled as cognitive styles, learning preferences, learning capabilities, cognitive control, multiple intelligences, etc.

8. How the Misperception Keeps on Being Perpetuated… • At a recent national training conference, some of the preconference workshops and sessions stated you will… • Identify learning styles • Accommodate different learning styles • Discover your learning style • However, there is no discussion concerning what are, their effects, how many there are, and do they really affect learning?

9. And the Misperception Keeps on Being Perpetuated… July 2011 issue of Training & Development Magazine “Instructional design has always had a very important place in the workplace but its importance has increased recently due to a change in workforce expectations, the differing learning styles…” and “How are you blending your content delivery channels to your employees’ learning styles?” AF Manual 36-2234: Instructional Systems Development (p. 17) “Instructional developers look to learning theory to explain how individuals differ in the ways they learn. Understanding different learning styles, in order to target methods and materials to individual students, may become the most important theoretical area for enhancing learning”

10. Learning Styles: A Perpetuated Myth? • Over time, learning styles have been perceived to account for the variability in learning, much the same way that Edgar Dale’s Cone of Experience has been erroneously used to predict retention. • The commonality is that both have been used to make a prediction not based upon evidence…in essence, instructional malpractice. • Over time, learning styles have been perceived to account for the variability in learning, much the same way that Edgar Dale’s Cone of Experience has been erroneously used to predict retention. • The commonality is that both have been used to make a prediction not based upon evidence, but instead perception. Dale’s Cone of Experience is essentially a “visual metaphor” depicting types of learning, from the concrete to the abstract. Dale did not intend to place value on one modality over another:“The shape of the cone is not related to retention, but rather to the degree of abstraction.” Dale’s Cone of Experience is essentially a “visual metaphor” depicting types of learning, from the concrete to the abstract. Dale did not intend to place value on one modality over another. “The shape of the cone is not related to retention, but rather to the degree of abstraction.” Cone of Learning So it went from this metaphor, to this perceived fact (perpetual myth) So it went from this metaphor, to this perceived fact (perpetual myth)

11. The Essence of the Debate:What Do the Experts Say? • Foremost ISD text: The Systematic Design of Instruction (Walter Dick, Lou Carey, & James Carey, 2009) • Learning styles are personal “preferences” rather than “psycho- logical traits” and cannot predict “how a student will learn best.” • Popular ISD text: Instructional Design (Smith & Ragan, 2005) • “View learning styles with extreme caution…not sufficiently prescriptive to aid instructional designers in making design decisions.” • Foremost e-Learning text: e-Learning and the Science of Instruction (Ruth Clark & Richard Mayer, 2008) • Major criticism is that learning styles “makes unwarranted assumptions about how people learn.”

12. The Essence of the Debate:What Do the Experts Say? • Leading learning theory text: Psychology of Learning for Instruction (Marcy Driscoll, 2005) • Doesn’t even address learning styles • Popular learning theory text: Cognitive Psychology and Instruction (Bruning, Shaw, Norby, Ronning, 2004) • Des not mention learning styles • Leading text on cognitive science: Learning Theories (Dale Schunk, 2004) • Differentiates between learning styles and learning modalities, where [VAK] learning styles are essentially “modalities”

13. Let’s explore some Google results. First, it is important to distinguish between learning styles and cognitive styles…they are not the same (we’ll discuss the “what” later). The Pervasiveness of Learning Styles AND NOT “learning styles” “learning styles” “cognitive styles” “cognitive styles” Question: How can you sift thru tens of thousands of hits and find the most useful information? Answer: You can, but you have a life, so it was done for you (View the Resources section in the Menu)

14. What are Learning Styles? • Basically, learning styles refers to the concept that individuals differ in regard as to what specific mode in acquiring information is most effective for them. • However, learning style definitions are characterized by considerable conceptual confusion and the lack of any generally accepted definition. • That said, many educational/cognitive psychologists believe learning styles are a myth…that while individual differences in learning exists, they are a result of acquired/innate preferences but do not affect learning anymore than the truck delivering groceries to your local store affects your dietary habits.

15. What are Cognitive Styles? • Cognitive styles are viewed as a bipolar dimension representing a person's typical or habitualmode of problem solving, thinking, perceiving and remembering; are considered stable over time, and related to theoretical or academic research. • Cognitive styles primarily focus on cognitionand how information is processed in the brain.

16. What are Learning Modalities? • Learning, or perceptual modalities, are sensory based and refer to the primary way our bodies take in information though our senses: visual (seeing), auditory (hearing), kinesthetic (moving), and tactile (touching). • Humans are multi-sensory in that the brain performs several activities at once when processing information (e.g., tasting and smelling, hearing and seeing), but are processed through different channels in our brain. • While the brain processes wholes and part simultaneously, learning engages the whole body. Note: Multi-sensory processing is not the same as multi-tasking (partial tasking) in that the brain is not very good at multi-tasking, per se, attempting to perform multiple tasks simultaneously.

17. What’s the Difference? • Not surprisingly, there is substantial confusion between learning styles and learning modalities where the terms are often used interchangeably. • One of the reasons is the complexity of how the human brain functions as it relates to one’s modalities in receiving information (visual, aural, kinesthetic) and how the brain processes that information (cognition). • Continued research into neuroscience is discovering how the brain processes information acquired through our primary learning modalities: visual, aural, and tactile. • Note: Neuroscience has estimated 85% of the human brain is wired to process visual information, and that 90% of what the brain processes is visual information, so one’s primary learning modality is visual.

18. What’s the Difference? • An important finding from that research is that retention is generally independent of the modality used to acquire whatever is learned. • You typically store memories in terms of meaning-- not in terms of whether you saw (visual), heard (aural), or physically (tactile/kinesthetic) interacted with the information. • To that end, our brain is constantly searching its memory for context based on prior knowledge/experience. • Note: In the absence of visual cues, our brains create “mental pictures” based upon our schema to add context to what is printed/spoken. Click here for an example, click here for another example.

19. What Does the Research Reveal About Learning Styles? • Simply stated, the research has not revealed a compelling argument as to the impact of learning styles and their effect on predictinglearning outcomes. • Postulates learning/cognitive styles have <5% effect on the variability in learning. • The majority of research does not support a significant statistical relationship between learning/cognitive styles and learning outcomes. Based on several decades of empirical evidence, matching learning activities/ strategies with specific learning styles does not often result in improved learning. Dr. Allan Jeong, Associate Professor, Dept. of Educational Psychology and Learning Systems, Florida State University

20. What Does the Research Reveal About Learning Styles? • Small sample sizes, flawed sampling methodology, and non-experimental research designs casts doubt on the results of VAK learning style research. • Low validity and reliability scores of the VAK instruments used to identify specific learning styles raise serious doubts about their psychometric properties. • In other words, if the tests used to identify learning styles are not reliable or valid, then any conclusions or results based upon them are suspect. Note: While the most common learning style test is the 16 question VARK questionnaire, it states “no reliability studies have been conducted” and that “the VARK questionnaire is difficult to use with current statistical methods of validation because of its structure”. The results of the VARK questionnaire indicate 2/3 of the respondents have “multimodal” preferences (www.vark-learn.com).

21. What Does the Research Reveal About Learning Styles? • These tests are not controlled in their distribution and/or reproduction, or administered under controlled conditions. • Scores on the VAK learning style tests vary greatly among same individual. • VAK test questions focus on out-of-context preferences which allows for wide range of interpretations. • Intervening variables confound the results. Research reveals that most learning style instruments have such serious weaknesses (e.g. low reliability & poor validity) it is recommend their use in research and practice should be discontinued. Investigations of the properties of a variety of scales have revealed that even the most widely used are inadequate in this regard. Australian Journal of Education, Vol. 54, No. I, 2010, 5-17

22. What Does the Research Reveal About Cognitive Styles? • The research pertaining to cognitive styles is quite different than learning styles in that the reliability and the validity of the instruments used to identify them are much more robust. • The most researched cognitive style is Herman Witkin’s Field Dependence/Field Independence. • The test used to identify Field Dependence (FD) and Field Independence (FI) is the Embedded Figures Test • Highly reliable and valid (Cronbach Alpha >80% )

23. Characteristics of Field Dependent and Field Independent Learns • Field dependent learner… • Processes information globally • Holistic approach to problem solving • Views the perceptual field as a whole • Socially oriented • Uses spectator approach for concept attainment • Relies on external cues to guide their behavior • Field independent learner… • Highly analytical • Relies on internal cues (gravity and vestibular) to guide their behavior • Breaks the field down into its component parts • Not influenced by the existing structure • Impersonal orientation • Uses hypothesis-testing approach to attain concepts

24. What Does the Research Reveal About Cognitive Styles? • Results of Field Independent (FI) and Field Dependent (FD) cognitive styles reveal: • FI attracted to engineering, hard sciences, mathematics, computer sciences/engineering • FI able to extrapolate detailed information from complex figures • FI correlated in predicting success in engineering courses • FI less influenced by visual effects in media • No difference in learning outcomes based on instructional media

25. Given the Research, Why all the Confusion? • It’ s not surprising the reference to learning styles is one of the most misunderstood and overused issues confronting educational and training communities. • Part of the reason is the wide disparity in the definition of learning styles and their relationship to cognitive styles. • Furthermore, there is continued debate as to whether learning styles even exist, with the only current evidence of their existence being the tests used to identify them. • Confusion is further exacerbated in that research has identified over 71 different types of learning styles (Table 1), summarized into the 13 most influential models (Table 2), and families (Table 3).

26. So What Does it all Mean? • Do learning styles exist…are they a myth? Read the research and decide for yourself. • Do learning styles affect performance and/or learning outcomes? Overwhelming body of research does not support this premise. • Numerous uncontrolled variables affect performance. • Intervening /confounding variables that cannot be identified • Attempting to isolate variables requires a robust multivariate experimental design. • Blaming learning styles as to why some students do not learn is a convenient scapegoat for poor instruction • Dr. David Merrill, esteemed educational psychologist

27. Cut to the Chase—What Can I Do? • Cognitive science has revealed learners differ in their abilities with different modalities, but teaching to a learner’s best modality doesn't affect learning outcomes. • What does matter is whether the learner is taught in the content's best modality…people learn more when content drives the choice of modality. • Consider adapting learning environments and/or designing instruction to accommodate a diverse learning population by integrating cognitive learning strategies. Note: Retention is improved through words and pictures (visual media) rather than through words alone. Clark & Mayer, 2008. e-Learning and the Science of Instruction

28. Cut to the Chase—What Can I Do? • Since neuroscience has revealed 90% of what the brain processes is visual information, one’s primary learning modality is visual. Therefore, compliment text-based. presentations and lectures with visual components/aids. • Employ dual-coding theory: when content is presented through two different channels (visual and auditory),working memory can be increased • Adds context to the written/spoken word. • Integrate sound multimedia design principles Research has indicated prior knowledge and intrinsic motivation account for ~70% of the variability in learning.

29. Dual Encoding Theory Applied to Multimedia Design • Modality Principle – People learn more deeply from multimedia lessons when graphics are explained by audio narration than onscreen text. • Spatial Contiguity Principle - People learn better when corresponding words and pictures are presented near rather than far from each other on the page or screen (click here for an example) • Temporal Contiguity Principle - People learn better when corresponding words and pictures are presented simultaneously rather than successively (click here for an example) • For more on cognitive learning strategies and knowledge construction, click here

30. Conclusion • Learning styles provide no indication of what the students are capable of, nor are they legitimate excuses for poor academic performance. • Assume all students have an intrinsic motivation to learn. • Don’t constrain learning by “profiling” (aka categorizing/ labeling) students based on learning styles. • Integrate cognitive and instructional learning strategies into the curriculum/course. “learning styles‘ theory appeals to the underlying culture's model of the person ensures the theory's continued survival, despite the evidence against its utility. Rather than being a harmless fad, learning styles theory perpetuates the very stereotyping and harmful teaching practices it is said to combat.” Australian Journal of Education, Vol. 54, No. I, 2010, 5-17

31. Final Note • The research on how we learn has generally ignored the agility of humans in being able to adapt to different learning environments. • The research has grossly understated the internal fortitude of humans to employ multiple learning “preferences” in their endeavor to learn. • As educators and trainers, we must never underestimate the ultimate trump card that represents the single most important variability in learning…the will to learn.

32. The End Prior Return slide to Menu

33. Intentionally Left Blank Click this button to return to the prior slide

34. Describing and “Seeing” the Constellation Orion • The constellations are totally imaginary things that have been made up over the past 6,000 years . So how would you describe something imaginary to your students? • You may begin by describing the three bright stars in a row that form Orion’s belt and the other stars that form his sword. • But your students have trouble “visualizing” how the stars shape the figure of Orion. To assist them in creating a mental picture, you show them a star chart of Orion to help them “visualize” this imaginary figure. • But they still can’t quite get it, so to further enhance their mental image, you show them another detailed chart depicting Orion. • The aha moment…they got it because they now can “see” Orion, so they conclude they must be visual learners. Return to main presentation But…are they really visual learners or did you create the visual image for them by adding context to the description?

35. Orion Star Chart Return to prior slide

36. Orion Figure Outlined in a Star Chart Return to prior slide

37. The Constellation Orion Return to prior slide

38. Intentionally Left Blank Click this button to return to the prior slide

39. Example 2 Given the depiction of a power line in the map to the left, identify the power line in the right hand image. Return to main presentation

40. Example 2 If you cannot find the power line, it may be due to your prior knowledge (schema) of what power lines should look like, such as the ones depicted below. Since there are no other visual cues to add context to your prior “visual images”, and due to lack of past experiences, you cannot locate the power line. Return to main presentation

41. Example 2 So lets add some context (meaning). Don’t look for the actual power line structure…instead look where the power line might be. It’s not a matter of “seeing” the actual power lines or visual acuity…it’s a matter of context. Return to main presentation

42. Example 2 Still can’t locate it? Here’s another image – look for the path of the power line instead of the actual structures. Result: Given a different context, you identify the power line path not from your prior knowledge but instead based upon an entirely different context. You have now added a new concept to your schema, which could also be applied to similar situations. Return to main presentation Click for final image/click again to turn off

43. Intentionally Left Blank Click this button to return to the prior slide

44. Table 1: Types of Learning/Cognitive Styles* Return to main presentation * Adapted from: Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles: What research has to say to practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/attachments/c455e462-95c4-4b0d-8308-bbc5ed1053a7.pdf

45. Intentionally Left Blank Click this button to return to the prior slide

46. Table 2: Most Influential Models of Learning/Cognitive Styles* Return to main presentation * Adapted from: Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles: What research has to say to practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/attachments/c455e462-95c4-4b0d-8308-bbc5ed1053a7.pdf

47. Intentionally Left Blank Click this button to return to the prior slide

48. Table 3: Families of Learning/Cognitive Styles* Return to main presentation * Adapted from: Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles: What research has to say to practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London

49. Intentionally Left Blank Click this button to return to the prior slide

50. Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles: What research has to say to practice. Learning Skills and Research Centre, London. Retrieved from http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/attachments/c455e462-95c4-4b0d-8308-bbc5ed1053a7.pdf Clemons, Stephanie (2005). Brain-Based Learning: Possible Implications for Online Instruction. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, September 2005, Vol. 2. No. 9. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Sep_05/article03.htm Cognitive/Learning Styles (n.d.). Theory Into Practice, Retrieved from http://tip.psychology.org/styles.html Curry, L. (1990). A critique of research on learning styles. Educational Leadership, 56(2), 50-56. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_199010_curry.pdf DeTure, M. (2004). Cognitive Style and Self-Efficacy: Predicting Success in Online Education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 21-38. Retrieved from http://test.scripts.psu.edu/users/k/h/khk122/woty/AJDE/DeTure%202004.pdf Resources Return Next to Menu slide