The Learning
Styles article supports or confirms what I have learned in my program at the
University of Kentucky. I remember
reading Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences. At the time, it was a very popular theory and
I believe that the reasons set forth by Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, and Bjork for
the popularity of the learning styles concept (the appeal of finding out what
type of person you are, the feeling of being treated as an individual by
educators, the decreased responsibility for one’s own learning) are the real
reasons for its’ popularity, not the fact that outcomes demonstrate a true
effect of the use of learning styles.
Gardner discussed multiple intelligences that learners use to effectively
access information, including such intelligences (or styles) as musical or kinesthetic
learning. I think these are learning
styles and in my opinion learning styles are preferences. As the authors state, when asked to provide a
preference most learners are very willing to do so. There is one way in which
the process of matching learners’ learning styles to instruction could be
effective; this is in generating motivation for enthusiasm. Perhaps, if specially designed or tailored
instruction is provided to learners they might respond with increased levels of
motivation or enthusiasm, which could possibly lead to improved outcomes. I believe this would be in response to the
attention more than in response to the style of learning and I don’t think
there would be any way in which you could predict the level of engagement. Also, as the authors point out, the benefits
of this approach would potentially be outweighed by investment in other,
research-based and proven, approaches.
You raise an interesting point about the effect of matching teaching and learning styles as a means of increasing interest and motivation. William James somewhere wrote that "we ought to believe what is better for us to believe," and perhaps believing that we have a learning "style" is more adaptive. Hmmm.
ReplyDelete