Learning styles & the importance of critical self-reflection | Tesia Marshik | TEDxUWLaCrosse
- Articles, Blog

Learning styles & the importance of critical self-reflection | Tesia Marshik | TEDxUWLaCrosse

Translator: Denise RQ
Reviewer: Thipnapa Huansuriya There’s a few different versions – actually, many different
versions – of learning styles. But probably the most common one
that you’ve heard of, is that some of us are auditory learners, where we learn best
by listening to things; some of us are more visual learners, where we learn best by seeing things; and some of us might be more
tactile or kinesthetic learners, where we learn best
by actually doing things or engaging in physical activities. How many of you have heard of that before? Well, the good news and bad news: the bad news is, if you believe
in learning styles, you’re actually wrong. I’ll explain that in just a minute. But the good news is that it’s not
entirely your fault. This belief in learning styles
is incredibly pervasive. It’s so common that few people
ever think to even question it. Right? It sounds so logical. It sounds so real. But when put to the test, we found
that learning styles don’t exist. And there are tons
of people that believe this. When we survey, for example,
students and teachers, we find that something
like 90 percent of them or over 90 percent of people
believe they have a learning style. And many teachers today
are still told that part of their job, in order to be effective teachers, is to figure out what
their students’ learning styles are, and then accommodate them
for the classroom. There are even a host of companies
and organizations out there that support learning styles, and who, for a fee, will train you on how to maximize
your potential or that of your students, by addressing learning styles
and learning what yours are. But again, the key
is, when put to the test, these learning styles don’t exist;
it doesn’t make a difference. I will say that when we survey people, many people say they have preferences. So if I asked, “How would
you like to learn something?” or “How would you like to study?”, many of you might say,
“I’d prefer to see it,” or “I’d prefer to hear it,”
or “I’d prefer to actually do it.” So that’s true. But the key is that those preferences
don’t actually enhance your learning when we test them
in experimental conditions. And there are many
different ways to test this, but the basic design is this: We bring in a bunch of different people who supposedly have
different learning styles. We teach them in a variety of ways. Then we see if teaching them in one way
was somehow better for them or more effective than others. So for example, let’s say I had a list
of words I wanted you to memorize. In one group I might
show you that list of words; I’ll present the list of words for you. Or in another group, similarly, I might show you images of those words. In yet another group or another condition, I might just let you listen
to those words and hear them, so you wouldn’t actually see anything, but you would hear someone
saying: dog, hose, coat, etc. Now if learning styles
existed, if it was true, we would expect that visual learners,
or so-called visual learners, would be able to recall
more words when they saw them. So, either when they saw the list
or when they saw the actual images. And we would expect
that so-called auditory learners would be able to recall more words
when they heard them, right? But the finding is,
learning is actually the same. The number of words
you recall is exactly the same, regardless of how the material
is presented to you. I know that’s just one example
of one particular study, but I’m asking you to trust me that this has been replicated
in many different contexts with many different people
of all different ages, and tested in slightly different ways
with exactly the same results. In fact, there have been several
meta-analysis papers where they’ve looked at all the research
on this topic for 40 years, and all of them have concluded
the same thing: that there is still no evidence that matching teaching styles
to supposed learning styles or students’ preferences
actually makes a difference. But I would encourage you to look up
some of this research on your own. In particular, these review articles. So how is that possible? I’m sure some some of you are wondering,
“How does that even make sense?” Because it sounds so good. And there’s a lot of different research
on learning and memory to explain this, but one of the main ideas is that most
of what we learn in the classroom and most of what our teachers
want us to know in particular is stored in terms of meaning, and it’s not tied to one particular sense
or one particular sensory mode. Now, just like people have preferences, it’s also true that some of you
might have better visual memories or better auditory memories
or auditory processing skills compared to other people, and that might be advantageous
for certain type of tasks. So for example, if I wanted
you to remember: What was the color of the coat
on that last slide? or: How many windows were
on that house on the last slide?, then having a really good visual
memory would help with that. Likewise, if I had read you
the list of words and I said, “Were they read in a high voice
or a low voice?” or, “Which words were read by a woman, and which ones were read by a man?”, then having a really good auditory
memory would help with that. But those aren’t typically
the kinds of questions that teachers are asking you to remember, or the things teachers want you
to learn in the classroom. Mostly what you learn in the classroom
is much more conceptual, or meaning based. It’s not just what something looks like
or what something sounds like. And by the way, this finding,
this whole idea, also helps to explain why simple rehearsal strategies,
like rereading your notes or just rewriting your notes, even though they’re very
commonly used strategies, they tend to be not very effective, because rereading your notes
or rewriting your notes doesn’t necessarily help you
understand the material. In order to retain information, we have to organize it
in a way that’s meaningful. We have to make connections to it, connecting it to our experiences
or coming up with our own examples or thinking of how we’re learning
something in one class, and how that relates to what else we know. That’s what helps us remember it. There’s a lot of research
to support this idea that most of what we learn
is stored in terms of meaning, and not according to visual images
or auditory sounds. But some of the best,
most relevant research comes from these classic studies
that were done in the 70s. Chase & Simon were interested
in chess players’ abilities to recall pictures of chessboard
games in progress. So what they would do is show players
an image of a game in progress for a short time — typically,
only five seconds or so — and then it would disappear. Then they would ask the players
to recall where all the pictures were, where all the pieces were in that picture. And what they found was a big difference between novice players,
or beginner players, and experts. Beginner players, when asked
to recall where the pieces were, could only remember about four pieces. Experts, on the other hand, could
actually identify almost all of them – over 20 of them, they could
correctly identify on the next game board
when asked to recall these. Again, they were interested
in knowing: Why is this difference? Why do we see this difference
between beginners and experts? It wasn’t because,
like you might be thinking, that the experts had better visual
memories than the beginners. It was because the experts
had more experience playing chess, and more knowledge. In other words, this game board
was more meaningful to them. They could see the strategy involved. They could imagine what was happening and why the players had their pieces
positioned the way they did. And to further support this idea,
they did a follow-up study. In the follow-up study, they showed the chess players pictures
of randomly arranged chessboards. That’s this picture here. Now to you or I,
or to a beginner chess player, these might look basically the same. I mean, yeah, the pieces
are in different places, but for the most part, they might be
equally difficult to remember. To an expert, though,
we found big differences when presented with
a randomly configured board. Once it was random, experts no longer had an advantage
in remembering pieces, because it wasn’t meaningful to them. Because there’s no meaningful
arrangement in the second piece, they lost that advantage, which again,
it just shows us further evidence that we store information
in terms of meaning, and not according to a sensory mode. And this basic finding, by the way,
has been extended to other contexts, everything from chess to basketball, to computer programming and to dance. We store information in terms of meaning and not limited to particular
sensory modes. So that’s the first reason. Another reason why this learning-styles
theory doesn’t pan out is that the best way to teach
something or learn something really depends on what it is
you want to learn. It depends on the content itself. Now, if I wanted you, for example, to know what a bunch
of different songbirds looked like, the best way to teach you that is to let you look at pictures
of those songbirds, or let you see them in real life. But note that that’s true for everybody, not just because you’re a visual learner. That’s because looking at them
is what I’m asking you to do, to remember what they look like. On the other hand, if I wanted you
to remember what they sounded like or be able to distinguish between
different songs of different songbirds, then letting you hear them
would be the best way. But again, that applies to everybody. Just like if I wanted you to know
what different flowers smell like. The best way to teach you that is to let you experience
those flowers by smelling them. But that doesn’t mean
you’re an olfactory learner, or that you learn everything
better through smelling. I mean, take a minute to imagine what that would look like in a math class or an anatomy class or a physics class. And as absurd as that sounds,
it’s really important to remember that the same problems,
the same criticisms apply whether we’re talking about
so-called olfactory learners or whether we’re talking about
auditory learners or visual learners or even kinesthetic learners. The last three might seem
more palatable or more reasonable, but the same issues apply. It really depends on what I’m asking
you to learn, the best way to teach it. But that also brings me to another point, this idea that many things
can be taught using multiple senses. So it’s not just limited
to one, for example. So, say I wanted you to learn
the game of football. Probably the best way
to teach you football is to get you out there and play football, to actually practice and have
that physical experience playing. But you would also probably benefit
from being able to watch a football game, or being able to look
at schematics or drawings of the different formations
and different positions, just like you’d probably also
benefit from hearing coaching or hearing feedback as you’re playing. You’re getting the kinesthetic experience,
the visual and the auditory. Similarly, if a music teacher
wanted you to know the different parts
of a symphony orchestra, then going to an orchestra
and listening to one would be beneficial. But it would also add to the experience if you had the capability
to touch the instruments, or maybe to learn how to play them. Or to actually watch one live. Again, it’s not that different modes
make it meaningful to different people based on their learning style. It’s not like the visual learners
are only going to learn by seeing it. It’s because incorporating
multiple sensory experiences into one lesson makes it more meaningful. So then you might be wondering: Why does this myth persist? There’s a few different explanations. The first one is quite simply
that everybody believes it. It’s so common that you never
even think to question it. How could so many people be wrong? If so many people believe it,
how is it possible that it’s wrong? But as you know, just because
something is commonly believed doesn’t necessarily make it true. Remember, just as an example,
at one point we used to think that the Earth was the center
of the universe, until scientists like Copernicus
and Galileo proved us otherwise. Likewise, there was a time
in which some people actually believed or were worried
that polio might be caused by ice cream, which we now know is nonsense. And, unfortunately, even today
one unfortunate myth that still persists is this idea that vaccines cause autism, despite the lack of any
scientific evidence. Just because a lot of people
believe it, doesn’t make it true. And that might seem really obvious to you, but again, the key idea is that
when something’s so pervasive it doesn’t even occur to people
to challenge it. We need to be willing
to critically reflect on beliefs, even if they’re commonly believed. Another reason why this persists
is, quite frankly, the idea of learning styles is sexy. It sounds good, it feels good. Saying people have
different learning styles is another way of acknowledging
that people are different. And differences are important,
especially when it comes to the classroom. But by saying that learning
styles don’t exist, I’m not saying people are the same. People do differ in many important ways. Learning styles just isn’t one of them. And just because some ideas
sound really good, just because we really want something
to be true, doesn’t make it so. We have to remember that, even when we’re talking about something
as appealing as Santa Claus, unicorns, Bigfoot or learning styles. Last but not least, another reason
why this belief persists is something called “confirmation bias.” This is this natural tendency
we have as humans to want to be right. People don’t like to be right —
to be wrong, I should say. So when people have
this belief, or any belief, we tend to look for information
that fits our beliefs, and we ignore information
that doesn’t fit our beliefs. We don’t really very frequently
try to prove ourselves wrong. More often than not,
we try to prove ourselves right. We look for evidence to support
whatever it is we think. And sometimes this is deliberate. Sometimes this bias is very deliberate. You all know that person
who deliberately closes their eyes or plugs their ears and says, “La, la, la, I’m not listening,
I don’t want to hear that,” and turns their back. More often than not,
this is unintentional. This is subconscious. We don’t even realize we’re doing it. How many of you, for example,
have ever been thinking of someone, only to have them call or text you? Or how many of you
have experienced déjà vu, or had a dream, only to have it come true? And you start to think, “Whoa,” I’ve got something going on here, some extra-sensory perception,
telepathic powers.” Again, I’m sorry to say: you don’t. That’s been studied frequently, too, and there’s no evidence to suggest that we have these telecommunicative
powers to talk to each other. But the problem is that we notice
every time it happens. We notice every time we’re thinking
of someone and they call us because it’s a cool coincidence;
it’s kind of exciting. We notice when we have
that moment of déjà vu. We don’t notice all the times that we’re thinking of someone
and they don’t call us. Or we don’t really think about
all the dreams we’ve had that don’t come true. It’s just like that other common belief that full moons are somehow
associated with crazy behavior or increases in emergency room visits. This has also been something
that people have scientifically studied, and despite common belief,
there’s no significant correlation between full moons
and emergency room visits. So now you might be wondering,
“Why does it matter? Who cares?” “Yeah, learning styles don’t exist,” —
I hope you’re buying that by now — “I see why it’s still
so common, but who cares? Why not believe in learning styles?” I would argue there’s at least
two important reasons why we need to stop believing this and stop spreading this idea
that people have learning styles. The first one is that we’re wasting
valuable time and resources — valuable educational resources. Teachers already have a momentous task
of accommodating students from all different backgrounds,
of different ability levels, different disabilities in their classroom, different interests and motivations. That’s not easy. The fact that learning
styles don’t matter, to some extent, should be a relief, because it’s one less thing
teachers have to worry about. But at the very least, we can’t afford
to be wasting our time and resources trying to promote learning styles, when there’s no evidence
that it actually helps learning — especially when there are
research-supported strategies, things that we know we can do,
that actually do impact learning. So that’s the first reason. The second reason is this whole idea
that labeling yourself as a learner or labeling a student as a learner, can not only be misleading,
but it can be dangerous. If I as a teacher think that you have
a particular learning style or that you only learn in one way, that might prevent me
from trying other strategies that could otherwise help you
learn the information better. Likewise, if you, as the student, believe you have
a particular learning style, that could cause you
to shut down or lose interest when a teacher isn’t teaching in a way that’s consistent
with your preferred style. And that might actually
perpetuate your failure — but it’s not because
you couldn’t learn that way, it’s because you gave up
and you stopped trying. This whole idea that learning styles
don’t exist, in many ways, should be further good news, because it means all of us are capable
of learning in a variety of ways — we are not as limited
as we sometimes think we are. So in conclusion, when I teach
about this topic in my classes, and even when I talk to other
professionals and colleagues, the first reaction I get
is usually a little a bit of surprise that something so common
and so ubiquitous isn’t actually true. But that’s oftentimes followed
by a little bit of defensiveness. And I’m sure some of you
out there right now are thinking, “OK, I hear what she’s saying.
I don’t really care, though. I know how I learn; I know
that I still have a learning style.” People don’t like to be wrong,
and belief change is really hard, especially when it’s a belief
you’ve held for a really long time, or one that’s essential to your identity. But again, it’s really important
that we’re willing to let our guard down sometimes
and challenge our beliefs, and truly consider other
perspectives or different ideas. How often do we get defensive
when we hear information or hear ideas that we don’t like to hear, or that go against our beliefs? How often do we surround ourselves
intentionally with like-minded people, just so we don’t have to face
different perspectives? And in a day and age when information is more readily accessible
than ever before, how often do our Google searches
take us to “show me I’m right.com,” rather than unbiased evidence? Thank you.

About James Carlton

Read All Posts By James Carlton

100 thoughts on “Learning styles & the importance of critical self-reflection | Tesia Marshik | TEDxUWLaCrosse

  1. I don't think she really understands learning, though. She seems to be talking about something else. I 100% still believe my brain has a preferred learning style.

  2. A trainer of 25 years I couldnt disagree with this presenter more. I have seen first hand proof time and time again of how meeting a persons learning style increases their uptake and absorption let along their enjoyment of learning.
    Considering the opening blunt statement that we are all wrong I am surprised so many people have even watched this load of rubbish as she clearly has no idea on how to present and get a winning argument across. That's 18 minutes of my life I wont get back.

  3. Just one note here (and this doesn't undermine the premise that learning styles are a myth–which I would also argue) that not "everybody" can see or hear, and so "showing pictures of a bird if I want you to know what a bird looks like" is not applicable to "everybody," as the speaker keeps insisting. I think the argument against learning styles can be made even stronger by moving away from ableist assumptions. For example, a blind person can learn what a bird looks like through other senses, including, for example, touch (feathers, anatomical models, real [tame] birds, dissection, descriptions of the relationships of hue and saturation [depth of a color]); a deaf person can "feel" what a piece of music "sounds like" (sounds are waves, and the effect of the waves on the physical components of an ear is 'translated' by our brains). These cognitive abilities suggest that we process, rearrange, and make meaningful lots of different sensory data, which we can then assemble into what we might say something "looks like" or "sounds like."

  4. Has been a long time since I heard BS like this, Tesia using her knowledge on psychology prepare a huge pile of banal arguments just pretending to be different and "intelectual", this kind of pseudo-studies do not deserve to be on TEDx Talks. She is a psychologyst, not a teacher watch this video is a waste of time

  5. Its very funny reading all these comments. People saying they are teachers and it worked for them…CONFIRMATION BIAS. She literally went over that in the talk! People are acting like this is her idea and its just her opinion. She is simply presenting evidence from a plethora of studies that have taken place on the subject. She didn't just wake up and think you know what I'm gonna rail against learning styles because I think its wrong; She did the research and drew a logical path to a sound conclusion.

  6. Ummm, but with regard to the chess players' memories, I'd like to know if she tracked their memories. So, were the novices going to eventually be experts? Or were their less "experienced" memories going to be what that held them back from eventually becoming experts? And she talks about "preferences," so can't we all agree that she just put a different label on "styles"?

  7. It seems to me that we all posses in varying degrees the 5 senses with which we learn just about everything. Someone who has a hearing problem will depend more on other senses to learn what needs to be learned. However, we tend to use them all at the same time to different degrees depending on our task/need. Some people will automatically favor certain senses to understand, and remember information, because it's just easier or more natural to do it that way. Perhaps the terminology is misleading when we talk about 'modes' of learning, which suggests the other 'modes' are somewhat redundant for a particular person to learn effectively. A better word for 'modes' when talking about the 3 Learning Modes may be 'senses'. I have experienced how effective auditory, kinaesthetic and visual teaching techniques are when teaching language. I just don't buy the idea we should forget about it.

  8. The theory might be right but I don't think she discovered fire by saying we better remember sounds by listening and pictures by looking. Seriously?

  9. She spends a reasonably long time just on talking about how much we like to believe certain things while her point was not even that strong. I also don't even understand what is so delightful about believing in learning styles. On the contrary… I would love to think that I can learn as well by listening as I can by reading since as a language learner I know I am way more exposed to verbal language. As a teacher, it also doesn't feel as comfortable to think there are actually learning styles as she depicts it. On the contrary, it would be great to think that I can reach out to all students at the same time. I really think she had a weak point and not very reasonable.

  10. no one argues that we learn only one way, rather our learning style helps us to learn a meaningful information better, or efficiently, that's it. she

  11. Interesting comments below. I've been a teacher in schools in several countries, and also in alternative learning contexts and have actually taught Gardner's theories over the last 13 years. However, I'm not longer convinced. The issue is, that what we know of the brain and how it learns has shifted dramatically since Gardner first postulated his theory. Neuroscience (and what we know from people who have adapted and learned anew following damage to parts of the brain) shows that how we learn is infinitely more complex and wonderful than once thought.  Learning 'styles' don't go far enough to cover the unique learning process of every person. Howard Gardner himself had concerns about how his early ideas were re-purposed to influence generations of teachers. So –while I find Marshik's presentation rather 'thin' on current evidence about brain function and human learning (which challenges the reality of 'multiple intelligences/learning styles' – but replaces it with something much more interesting,) I've recommended it to future teachers in Masters Degree courses.

  12. I don't know about learning styles but I am really bad at hearing tasks where I have to think because when I switch my brain to think and solve the problem, I have forgotten what it was and what I hear I don't remember if I have to problem solve. So, knowing that I'll have an extremely tough time, I write down or draw the task so that I can think about solving it without immediately forgetting what was the problem I had to solve. I wonder if there's a fix for it. It's like my brain won't allow for those both processes to occur.

  13. For the people that disagree, I think that what she is saying is that all people are capable of learning information no matter how it is presented as long as they are able to apply meaning to the information being taught and that is why self reflection is critical to the learning process

  14. I remember I emailed the skeptics society in 2011, I still have that email in my inbox folder. I wanted to know if they had articles written about the multiple intelligence theories because in that moment I found it very hard to believe in. Until this day I don't believe in the multiple intelligence theory.

  15. I am a chess player, too. Not a strong one, of course, but I like a lot playing chess and let met tell you that in the same place that your brain records the faces you remember, it is in that same place that your brain records the chess positions ¿How do I know that? Watch the documentary NatGeo "My Brilliant Brain" featuring Susan Polgar here in Youtube. I believe in pure and hard training in any science, language, chess or whatever you want to learn not in learning styles. Although I have been in courses where I have been required to believe in the natural intelligence theory and I have been silent about it in order not have a discussion..

  16. There is truth to her general idea. There is learning styles but they don’t impact performance in the way we think. Its human nature to push any concept and apply to an extreme. The challenge is to find that golden middle, considering the impact of our learning styles. In this case i agree experience will prevails.
    Also its not right to disregard telepathy. Some concepts like telepathy are too complexe and not understood to be studied just yet.

  17. when corporate companies enter in a business they do marketing in business even their product is not worth ..if some one proven that product is not has the value then the company will start resisting to the person..cause they need only profit not your goodwill..as the same i am seeing so many people in comment box

  18. Summary:
    Learning styles (auditory, sensory and kinaesthetic) do not exist, just as seeing notes is not conducive to long-term memory, because learned information is stored in terms of meaning, not arrangements of letters (words). Therefore, effective learning is subject to the required method of recall (e.g. learning the sounds of a song-bird is best taught through listening to them). However, using a variety of sensory information is more effective to learning, only because it creates a wider depth of meaning, not because it appeals to more types of learning styles.
    The ultimate conclusion is that differences in recalling (between people) through 'preferred' systems is non-existent, or at least irrelevant.
    Personal thoughts (can someone answer these PLEASE?, thanks =) ):
    Firstly, what about sensing and storing of memories between people? Do these differences also not exist?

    If this is in fact the case, am I wrong in assuming that there is a difference in the retrieval of certain sensory memories, perhaps that it is less energy-consuming for people to retrieve visual memories as opposed to the other forms of sensory memory?
    Or is this phenomenon wholly accountable to the fact that I personally habitually retrieve visual memories, so am simply deceived by the difference in the quantity of certain sensory recalls?
    If this is so, then does this mean that there is no difference in capacity and myelination between different sensory memories?

    If this is the case, this would mean that, individually, we all have very little or no difference in size and speed of sensing, storing and recalling all the different types of sensory memories. I appreciate that this is not her actual argument (which is regarding the differences of recall between people), however, I feel this should have been at least addressed in the talk, just as her elaboration on the increase in 'richness of meaning' that use of different sensory systems creates when learning. Can someone please clear this up for me?


  19. Very interesting argument and video.  Tesia Marshik frames learning style as in "a specific mode where a student can ONLY learn from."  Is that really true?  People are different when it comes to learning.  Recognizing different learning styles is not the same as saying people can ONLY learn in their "preferred" way.  Having multi-touch points involving different senses of course help and enhance learning–no one said otherwise.

  20. It's not about matching learning style with teaching style, but it's about 'integrating' preferred and non-preferred (dominant and non-dominant) styles in a way that slightly challenges the learners.

    That's all.

  21. 1. Learning depends on the meanings we give the material 2. Learning style depends on the contents 3. Many subjects can be learned in a mix of learning styles

  22. The USA vaccine court awards millions to family’s of children whom suffered adverse effects (swelling of the brain) form vaccines. This swelling causes “autism” symptoms, but officially they don’t award for autism but for brain damage. However the children are diagnosed with autism. So the govt don’t officially admit vaccines cause autism.

  23. I absolutely disagree with her!!!! Everyone has learning styles. After watching her video until the end, I, therefore, conclude that all she said will go back that learning styles exist.!!!!

  24. What she says makes sense but I’ve seen so many examples where learning styles make a difference not just for me but my class mates as well.

  25. Differentiated Instruction/Education is invented as a control mechanism by BOEs and admins. There is no pedagogical nor research support for it.

  26. Well, this being a video about critical self-reflection she cannot argue that she is right and everyone who believe in learning styles are wrong. Because this is just a belief and not a fact as well as her arguments. Also she accepts the fact that people have different abilities and this can influence the learning styles preferences that people have, and if she stated that the study shows that there is no evidence of any difference by learning in different styles, then believing that one has a learning style doesn't have any consequence for that who believes it.

  27. Perhaps Ms Marshnik would benefit from a quick look at the "hierarchy of disagreement" so she learns how to present an argument without insulting the listener.

  28. I don't think there are learning styles but I believe there are learning preferences..
    just like everyone has the capacity to learn to drive a car or a bike or a bicycle.. but every has their choice to move around the city..
    similarly its like every one is capable of filling their stomachs by eating anything by any method of eating(maybe by hands or forks or chopsticks). but everyone has a preference to eat only certain things in a certain way.
    same is true with subjects.. I believe everyone can learn and progress in any subject…. but because of whatever reasons we have more willingness and tendencies to pursue one subject and prefer to do that than others.
    same way we may be are capable to learn through all the ways.. but with time we develop preferences..
    some people like to read stories and remember the stories, some people prefer to watch a movie, some might prefer a graphic novel.

    sometimes our subjects guides us to the preferable mode of learning and sometime our preference of learning mode decides our subjects.

  29. OMG! I cannot believe that this presentation is delivered in 2015!!! I studied education back in early 2000 at an Australian university and during the second year, we already learnt about these viewpoints. So, why on Earth is this shown in 2015??! This is dated information.

    Big problem here is she never refers to memory recall – because that is a crucial area as to see if a person has learnt something.

    People can learn things – but many ways to ensure learning takes place is through a means of recalling it. Tests, assessments, demonstration, or simply re-enacting an action learned are ways of recalling to see where people remember.

    Learning can be further tested through critical thinking – e.g. once you can recall something, do you agree with this or not and why? Or, what would you do in a situation and why?

    Also, another area of memory recall that hasn't been touched upon is – WHICH EFFECTIVE WAYS can a person demonstrate learning?

    In some assessments, some people are not only required to write down what they know, as a form of illustrating what they have learnt, but through a viva voce assessment – this is where people take your written work and ask questions why or how you came up with that information – seeking reasons for that.

    Through this kind of assessment, we may find that some people have strengths in being able to recall information via spoken word, and others have better abilities through the written word.

    A person with dyslexia, for example, may feel happier to be assessed through a spoken manner, rather than writing, because, if the test requires correct spelling as part of the criteria to pass, the person with dyslexia will feel stressed, which, in turn, can inhibit their ability to recall information, due to the worry of taking time to ensure words are written correctly – OR – they will just continually write down things to the best of their ability and will be graded down, unfairly, due to their disadvantage of writing some words incorrectly.

    This illustrated bias can hinder and falsely display the real recalling potential of someone's learning. Imagine, for instance, someone who has ADHD and Dyslexia.

    The environment, also plays a crucial component for a person's learning, coupled with motivation – is it positive or negative motivation, for instance –

    All in all, the presentation is, quite old information – and I felt like, this was more of a review of some education viewpoints about learning, that should have been updated.

    Technology is a huge influencer for learning, it would have been interesting, for example, to see how that impacts on learning or how teachers integrate that with learning – and memory recall.

    It would have been good for Tesia to indicate the meaning of learning – is it the process of taking in information, or taking in information and recalling it, or recalling information, alone?

    To clarify that, would be beneficial – I'm uncertain here, because, the examples provided shift for the definition of learning.

    E.g. at one point, learning about "types of learner" people are, emphasises on how we take in information – e.g. is a person an auditory or visual learner" – so, there's no clear correlation of the results demonstrated for this – but when Tesia talks about Chase & Simon, learning adds the area of memory recall – e.g. Chess players – so, this switching of what "learning" is, is inconsistent – and as a result, there are holes in her argument.

    I would have liked it if she spoke it as either "the intake of information from learning processes" or "the result / aka the results of recalling from learning processes" for more accurate understanding.

    This is dated information – and I am only amused by her ability to inform, but didn't see any "eye-popping" new information that made me wonder, "wow!" I never knew that!

  30. I was always confused by the different types of learners because I could never really learn well using any one of the types of learning styles. I only do quite well when I practice things over and over again and I always need a lot of time to recall a lot of information.

  31. ~ "we learn best by meaning connection" is an impressive concept and I think the ideas may be 'spot on' here about learning styles. However, I thumbs down the talk overall. Why? Because from my perspective, rejecting the concept of "esp" n schoolyard probability logic, seems to me like a very limiting position to hold- and makes me wonder how do you relate to the concept of genius- in a reality that does not accept power beyond the 'ordinary senses'. It seems you do not accept it. In this sense you propose 'inside the box thinking'. If the art of disproving 'impossibility' has anything to educate us on- it is the good idea that we should at least think of reality as an open box, even if we are not willing to think outside it.

  32. I understand her point, but in both ways whether I just (prefer) visual learning or
    believed that my (style) of learning is visual, I still want my teacher to have some images or slides…
    NOT only listening to her speaking,
    and I still want to buy colorful book over a plain book that doesn't have any images !!

    it doesn't matter if its a learning style or preference because the result is the same for me…
    it makes me more comfortable and easier to learn.
    + I believe that teachers will have better results with their
    students if they put in mind the 5 senses in general.

  33. 저도 예전엔 저만의 학습 스타일이 있다고 생각했었는데 모두 의미가 있는 것에 달려있는 거였어요!

  34. As a part of my class assignment i watched this video. I found it very interesting and partial holding some truth. The only part i disagreed with is letting science be the determining factor of whats real. Science can only process to a certain level, but lacks the ability to deep dipper and go higher. 🙏🏾

  35. She just undercut her own argument by saying that their people have preferences and not styles. Your preference is often got it by your style but she also make some other points that I have to assess further

  36. Learning styles is not a myth, it is a fact. Some learners learn better through seeing things, some through listening while others through experimenting. At the same time , the best way is to combilne the three styles while teaching.

    Regarding what she said about meaning, she really nailed it with the example of chessboard. It is true "experts" of the game can easily memorize what they are required to memorize because they are familiar with the game and its rules so they understand it, while starters cant cuz their brain spends time raising questions about what it is all and why each element is placed here not there etc. And while this happening the memory is inactive, therefore, the person can't remember a thing.

    Learning through meaning gurantess that the info would last in our memory forever or at least for a long time. I ve seen people learning by heart history lessons without understanding for the purpose of passing the exam and have high grades. Once exam is over, the info goes away.

    Learning through understanding the meaning is the best and the only way for learning.

  37. Whilst this woman may be a professor, she is patronising towards educational professionals, says the word right countless times and frankly her supporting research is outdated and her example about the belief in the yeti is simply ludicrous. This may pass for academic rigour in crazytown these days but I live in the UK and I'm not impressed.

  38. There's a lot of nitpicky comments about memorization vs. learning, but I think this is mostly the defensiveness she mentioned. I thought the talk was well done and gave very good examples AND anticipated the arguments of the audience. Plus, in the end it talked about real-world applications. Well done!

  39. DR… I don't want to write a PhD chapter on LeArning styles, but let me confirm that there are learning styles, never 2 people learn the same way, this issue we learn in the kindergarten and there are tons of research to explain it…

  40. She spends too much time explaining silly reasons why we believe in learning methods, and a lot less time actually giving us evidence on why we shouldn't believe it.
    Oh, and the "we once thought the earth was the centre of the universe" is a non argument. You can basically use it for everything.

  41. OMG ! THANK YOU ! YOU GAVE A PROUVE because most of people told me that i'm a liar because I learn with all the different styles !

  42. I found it pretty believable when I first heard about learning styles. Years went by, and never questioned it. As soon as I started hearing about the opposing viewpoint, I found that believable as well- more so when I started considering the number of people who stand to make a buck off of the idea. I'm no scientist, I never read any studies on it, but my belief is that while we all learn in different ways and while some people might be a little more or a little less able to understand something based on the manner in which it's presented, it's probably not so extreme as to justify all the labels.
    Good teaching addresses a subject in a variety of different ways anyway. Discard all the nonsense and just get down to it.

  43. If misogyny comes into this forum and ruins the potential of the conversation we could have about this controversial topic, so help me God I will lose it. Some things are just too important to miss.

  44. How are you going to use a blanket research system to disprove a belief that everyone has a specific learning style. What if someone uses a little of all 3 learning styles, you are now going to say none of that truly matters? This is just another effort by the powers that be to control the masses with one way of thinking, its toxic. Accommodate people who are comfortable learning the way they want. Smh numbers, stats, evidence. Most evidence based research is just as fragile as beliefs when pertaining to how people think and learn

  45. It's not that learning styles don't exist, but that tailoring teaching methods to specific learning styles is no more beneficial to learning than teaching information and ideas in a variety of ways. This explains experimental studies resulting in students learning the same amount of tested information, even though it was (or was not) presented to them in their preferred learning style.

  46. Who paid for it to spread that BS saying telepathy does not work end learning styles are not there. I give you thousans of exapmles for it. We process much more information visually than from hearing. That is a proven fact. She says it has been proven in many ways. How and who she does not say. Also the moon is influencing earthy environment proven in millions of instances.

  47. Interesting presentation.
    It is clear that whilst we may identify with one particular learning style, all the theories agree that we have within us the ability to access any combination, and all the styles within that particular theory. Also that our "preference" can change in different situations..So in fact everything that you are saying is in part true as their are no learning styles that we cannot utilise to our benefit, as it is commonly agreed we just find that some work better than others in some circumstances.
    But to rebuff all the theorists as being wrong, may just be a way of being contraversial and standing out.. which has been achieved.
    Well Done..very thought provoking … which adds the element of self reflection.

  48. Your presentation reminds me of the Chinese proverb : Tell me and I forget , show me and I remember, involve me ,make me do, and I undestand.involvement leads to understancing is the key to learning

  49. I'm a homeschool mom of 4 and I discovered at an early age for my two oldest boys, that a way of learning, I call it a "processing style", made memorization almost magically easier for them. I developed a test when they were ages 4 and 6, presenting a question that was beyond their current grade level, to each boy separately. I found that with very little repetition, as in one time, they could tell me the answer to the quiz or question and it was one particular style of learning. For one of my boys or was auditory and one it was tactile. I have a theory though, being that probably all the test subjects have been adults who have been saturated in a strictly visual/auditory education system, that their brains have learned to learn in the way they've had to, but that they're actually wiref fairly strongly for a primary learning style. I continue to see rapid growth with my kids, having been able to tailor their learning to what works best for them.
    I say it's absolutely true that people have a learning style and that they would learn much better and faster if taught from a young age to work with it.

  50. Well, why is she using this presentation in the background to give her speech…. She could easily stand just do talking to her audience. With visuals are definitely the way I learn better. Some people learn better not only by visuals but also listening. Anyway, that is the way I am. If she did not have visual presentations in the background, I would be bored after a few minutes and loose interest listening some one like a motor mouth.

  51. The number of people in the comments saying that PhD professor doesn't understand the research (or lack thereof) behind "learning styles" is astounding.

  52. I agree to some extent, but I still believe that everyone has a learning style that best suites them. may be more than one.

  53. A child coming from a domestic and social setting with a myriad exposure to situations of behavior change attends a class programmed to just a typical mode of learning and finds himself or herself baffled by the way content just because only a bit of learning habit is featured and we call it teaching to the learning styles! The world doesn't give us information in just one method, rather we gather it through a variety of means. Unless the lesson makes any sense,we shut out our brain. What a beautiful presentation and convincing too.

  54. …It's not the number of emergency room visits during a full moon that matter, rather the "chief complaints" of those emergency room visitors during a full moon 🙂

  55. visual people listen and create a visual in their minds … therefore understand… so concepts are learned this way… arent you embarrassed to post a 1973 finding?

  56. Lady are you a teacher? Have you observe learners in a class using the different learning styles? Clearly not!!! Please don't state things as educational facts when you don't understand what it is about. First of all it does exist. How do I know? I observed it in my class. Second ,no one taught us ,the EDUCATORS to label a child e.g as a visual learner and then teach that child or group visually, then teach the other group auditory,etc. NO NO NO NO , The curriculum speaks about differentiation . That means that there are different learners with different needs who learns differently and each one on his /her own pace. That means that my lessons should be differentiated . It does not mean that I have to do extra work. It simply means if I teach a learner tables in Maths.From Monday to Friday we will learn it in different ways. Everyone at the same time. If we work with cards ,everyone works with it. The tactile learner,visual learner and auditory learner might understand immediately,whereas the kinesthetic learners will struggle. The next day I will teach the same tables,but we will dance as we do it ,The kinastetic learner will then grasp it. Let me tell you, I did it with my class and what did I discover? The kinesthetic learners were my 3rd group ,but when we danced or used our bodies they did better then my first group because it was their learning style,their way of learning . The others could not keep the rhythm and think at the same time . They knew the tables ,if I asked them they knew , Its only that when it came to moving their bodies and think at the same time they could not do it as fast as the kinesthetic learners. Usually it is the kinesthetic learner who cant sit still and we think that they cant learn,when in fact they can,but in their way. I still teach all the learning styles to all the learners,but they just understand it better when its their learning style. THE CURRICULUM IS BASED ON THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND POLICY. THAT IS WHY WE DIFFERENTIATED IN LESSONS SO THAT WE REACH EACH CHILD. PLEASE DON'T FEEL YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO STATE THINGS WHICH IS FARFETCHED AS EDUCATIONAL FACTS . PLEASE REMEMBER YOU ARE TALKING TO PEOPLE WITH EDUCATION.!!!!!!!!!

  57. She talks about learning, and when she impart the knowledge so others could learn from her…honestly i lost what she was saying from the start…i guess i need pictorial or illustration learning or add some humour in her talks..

  58. I struggle to taking this information maybe you have voice or it's the speed of her voice but I find it hard to take him what she was saying

  59. Even though it may be true based on the research, please don't you dare to underestimate the power of preference and its impact on the motivation to learn. This is why these "types" do influence learning in a real world conditions. Rational research is often misleading because we do have feelings.

  60. just because people belive it it doesnt neceesarily mean is true , forget about it¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ ,most people is driven by herd mentality and there little if anything to do about it , this is the sad truth

  61. People's senses are inclined towards one particular one .. say it.. visual.. that gives more intrest and more meaning..
    Learning styles exist based on which medium the meaning is made out.. and which type work is more preferred..
    An artist can memorise a scenery or details in an cartoon character .. better coz he/she makes more meaning out of it .. being more visual task oriented or .. in other words a dominated visual learner..

    We subconsciously concieve meaning via different senses… And the most dominated one…. (It can even be genetics.. of which part of the brain activated more.. over generations.. and subconscious triggers)

    It's like the learning is the pipe and the meaning is the water that flows in!

    And not like.. anyway the water can flow.. it depends on how well how often the pipe is maintained.. by usage!

  62. I was very weak at accounts ..maths.. I did not give up and worked hard.. I was taking a lot more time and efforts to find meaning out of the logical concepts in maths and accounts…

    I wanted to find a way.. by which like others.. I could learn at the same place and speed..

    After a lot of hit and trial.. I started learning accounting by drawing .. YES ACCOUNTING BY DRAWINGS..and its possible! creating visual metaphors to remember the logic that's verbal.. and letting my brain understand and find "meaning" in visual ways…

    Yes I dint do as well as them.. but if I still struggled the normal verbal way..I would be nowhere! I know it and it wasn't a mental block for sure…

    It was coz of ..shifting from logical to verbal content .. and converting to visual logic.. that my brain was more part of… It took good time to convert.. but slowly improved..and not to learn it visually unlike..verbally in the classroom!.. I learnt how much I could and had less time for revisions… That's all but I rocked coz I found my way..

    The scientific tests lack experience.. they are generally constrained via.. finances and time… .. but experience is not…limited to them.. that's what shaped me..

    Sorry but u are in illusion urself and wrong.. .. apply the last 5 -7 min also applies to u now .. 😊😊😊😊😊😊


  63. She is just matching learning to the way some teachers are teaching. She is also playing with vocabulary. Background knowledge is important to teaching. Is this teacher thinking teachers do not teach background knowledge. It is as if she thinks people use "learning styles" as the end of all ends. Good teachers also take into account what they are teaching. So her criticism is only valid if a teacher uses the idea of learning styles as the WAY to teach rather than a tool in our backpack. When I taught in Saudi Arabia the women really PREFERRED auditory learning. When teaching I could accelerate the students learning, but incorporating activities that used this awareness. However, I also worked on making students more aware of the visual activities. I taught students skills to help them learn more visually. Good teachers instruct using all modalities. This will benefit ALL students like kids with disabilities (i.e. deaf students, blind students) and also help students from various backgrounds.

  64. This was amazing and kind of dissapointing at the same time, taking into account that I believed in learning styles.

  65. A great viewpoint. Enjoyed her logical viewpoint. Even agree with her. But, I doubt with the kind of research she underwent.

  66. The conclusion was a bit unrefined and didn't reference the research, when she said "this idea" is just that in Webber's theory.

  67. She is actually trying to tell someone that is learning in their way that they are wrong and she is right just because she says so. The person is the one who knows because it is their life and they are learning. This is fact.! She also doesn’t know what she is talking about in other areas as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *