When it comes to learning preferences, I totally agree that people can differ in many ways. But I think we should be very careful not to give the impression that teachers should adapt their teaching to the supposed learning styles of their pupils. There’s just no evidence for that. In fact, it seems to be one of the biggest educational myths. I like it when you say we should try to present information in a variety of ways, as most people seem to learn better if they’re taught in several different ways, especially if one of them is visual (dual-coding theory). Even the self-declared “auditory learners” learn better when you add pictures to the material. In short:
– People have preferences for how they learn.
– All people learn better when more senses are engaged.
– Some people benefit from additional modalities more than other people.
– No one suffers from the addition of a modality that’s not their favorite.
(https://researched.org.uk/myth-busting-learning-styles)
There are learning differences that matter more and therefore are more likely to benefit students when taken into account, like the knowledge and skill level of learners for example.
(https://www.worklearning.com/2014/08/04/learning-styles-challenge-year-eight)
I only partly agree, Julia. It is a good idea to plan lessons to include a range of sensory experiences. Planning lessons to include phases that appeal to each (or several) of the learning modes/preferences provides a range of learning experiences for all of the students, provides variety, a range of engagement and intrinsically helps the lesson to ‘breathe’.
However, I believe that differentiating for knowledge and skill level is inadequate…. And even that is more than just task modification and can be intrinsic in catering to learning modes. I can see this in one particular class that I teach. It is quite similar to the class that Margareta described working with for 7 years. Over half of the class have diagnosed learning difficulties, several struggle with difficult conditions for growing up, and the group is very heterogenic, though they have been together for a long time and have good relationships with each other. Peer-learning exercises and group work that involves a range of tasks, draws on student’s varied skills and caters to various learning modes allows each student to contribute with their strengths. Tasks are included that challenge each student, but because of the variation in group members and tasks offered encourages them to work cooperatively and doesn’t overwhelm anyone. This develops sociality, and students are not measured against each other but are able to build on the ‘level’ at which they found themselves before the project. In this context, everyone’s contribution is valued, the atmosphere becomes one conducive to expansive learning and there is a general sense of curiosity and pride fostered.
I disagree that we, as teachers, should not adapt our methods to cater for learning styles and modes. I think that we should always be striving to adapt our practices to meet out students where they are and offer them something meaningful. I believe this includes learning styles, but also disposition, life and social circumstances, student preferences and requirements. I think the reason for this is that we are not only looking to build on a students’ pre-existing knowledge or skills base, rather, to provide meaningful engagement with the world that will facilitate deep learning and personal development.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.AcceptPrivacy Policy
2 Comments
When it comes to learning preferences, I totally agree that people can differ in many ways. But I think we should be very careful not to give the impression that teachers should adapt their teaching to the supposed learning styles of their pupils. There’s just no evidence for that. In fact, it seems to be one of the biggest educational myths. I like it when you say we should try to present information in a variety of ways, as most people seem to learn better if they’re taught in several different ways, especially if one of them is visual (dual-coding theory). Even the self-declared “auditory learners” learn better when you add pictures to the material. In short:
– People have preferences for how they learn.
– All people learn better when more senses are engaged.
– Some people benefit from additional modalities more than other people.
– No one suffers from the addition of a modality that’s not their favorite.
(https://researched.org.uk/myth-busting-learning-styles)
There are learning differences that matter more and therefore are more likely to benefit students when taken into account, like the knowledge and skill level of learners for example.
(https://www.worklearning.com/2014/08/04/learning-styles-challenge-year-eight)
I only partly agree, Julia. It is a good idea to plan lessons to include a range of sensory experiences. Planning lessons to include phases that appeal to each (or several) of the learning modes/preferences provides a range of learning experiences for all of the students, provides variety, a range of engagement and intrinsically helps the lesson to ‘breathe’.
However, I believe that differentiating for knowledge and skill level is inadequate…. And even that is more than just task modification and can be intrinsic in catering to learning modes. I can see this in one particular class that I teach. It is quite similar to the class that Margareta described working with for 7 years. Over half of the class have diagnosed learning difficulties, several struggle with difficult conditions for growing up, and the group is very heterogenic, though they have been together for a long time and have good relationships with each other. Peer-learning exercises and group work that involves a range of tasks, draws on student’s varied skills and caters to various learning modes allows each student to contribute with their strengths. Tasks are included that challenge each student, but because of the variation in group members and tasks offered encourages them to work cooperatively and doesn’t overwhelm anyone. This develops sociality, and students are not measured against each other but are able to build on the ‘level’ at which they found themselves before the project. In this context, everyone’s contribution is valued, the atmosphere becomes one conducive to expansive learning and there is a general sense of curiosity and pride fostered.
I disagree that we, as teachers, should not adapt our methods to cater for learning styles and modes. I think that we should always be striving to adapt our practices to meet out students where they are and offer them something meaningful. I believe this includes learning styles, but also disposition, life and social circumstances, student preferences and requirements. I think the reason for this is that we are not only looking to build on a students’ pre-existing knowledge or skills base, rather, to provide meaningful engagement with the world that will facilitate deep learning and personal development.