Learning Styles: Myth Busters

1. Learning Styles:Myth Busters Jessica Cockroft, Aphton Kostopanagiotis, Allie Perrotta

2. Goal= offering a different perspective on learning styles

3. What’s Ahead… • Learning styles: fact or fiction? • Learning styles counter-arguments • Evidence against learning styles • Issues with learning styles assessments • Implications for teachers • Workshop activity

4. Counter-Arguments Overview • Evidence AGAINST Learning Styles • Auditory/Visual Experiment • Computer Programming Experiment • Issues With Learning Style Assessments • People DON’T Fit One Particular Style • Abundance of Styles • Self-Reporting is DANGEROUS!

5. Evidence AGAINST Learning Styles 1) A reliable auditory & visual experiment shows that people DON’T memorize words based on learning style • Video: Daniel Willingham, Cognitive Psychologist Conclusion: People don’t learn words visually or auditorily, they learn them by attaching MEANING!

6. Evidence Against Learning Styles Cont’d 2) Computer Programing Experiment Reflective Impulsive VS. • Generation Method: Writing a Programming Code • Completion Method: Completing an Existing Programming Code FINDINGS: Completion Method was SUPERIOR to BOTH types of learners CONCLUSION: Learning styles and instructional methods have NO practical, educational implications

7. 2. Issues with Learning Style Assessments

8. People DON’T Fit One Particular Style • Pigeonholing: Classifying people into distinct groups (ex. Visual, Auditory, etc.) • Learning Style Inventories use arbitrary criterion (mean, median, etc.) • Ex) Matching Familiar Figures Test • CONCLUSION: Differences in cognition is gradual, NOT nominal

9. Abundance of Learning Styles • There are over 70 learning styles! (Coffield, Moseley, Hall, & Ecclestone, 2004) • The number of learning styles is skeptical and impractical • Cumbersome for teachers to link learners with particular learning styles ?

10. Self-Reporting is DANGEROUS! • People are often not able to report on the styles they use to learn • Reliability is low (.60/.70) for diagnostic measures such as Myers-Briggs Type Inventory & Carbo’s Reading Style Inventory • What people prefer is NOT ALWAYS what is best for them!

11. Implications for teachers

12. Implications for teachers • Be cognizant that much more affects student learning • Students should still not all be treated the same way • Learning styles is not a “theory of instruction”

13. Implications for teachers • You don’t have to believe in learning styles to appreciate differences among students • Museum example • Labeling students tends to limit options

14. Implications for teachers • Think of it this way:    The lesson clicks or does not click because of the knowledge that the child brings to the lesson (BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE), interests, etc.

15. Implications for teachers • “Universal learning style of the human mind” • Match instruction to the content you are teaching • Remember: All humans are born with an astounding capacity to learn!

16. Let’s practice !!! • REMEMBER: experiencing material in multiple ways and attaching meaning promotes deeper understanding of material!! • Break up into your grade level and subject PLTs • 3rd grade language arts • 6th grade science • 9th grade world history • 5th grade mathematics • Each worksheet will have a common core or essential standard. Using your assigned standard, create a lesson plan that demonstrates multi-modality and demonstrate how you will attach meaning to concepts that will deepen understanding.

17. references Forget about learning styles. Here is something better. Retrieved April 5, 2014, from http://anniemurphypaul.com/2013/10/forget-about-learning-styles-heres-something-better/# Kirschner, P. A. & Merienboer, J.J.G. (2013). Do learners know best? Urban legends in education. American Psychological Association, 48(3), 169–183 Matching teaching style to learning style may not help students.Retrieved April 1, 2014, from http://chronicle.com/article/Matching-Teaching-Style-to/49497/ Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Association of Psychological Science, 9(3), 105-119.