Skeptoid - Skeptoid #764: Learning Styles, Re-examined
Aired: 2021-01-26
Duration: 17:44


=== Debunking Learning Styles (06:21) ===

[00:00:03]  Some of us are visual learners.
[00:00:05]  Some of us are hands-on learners.
[00:00:07]  Some learn best by reading or by hearing a lecture.
[00:00:10]  We know this because we were all raised with the idea that learning styles are real and have solid evidence behind their existence.
[00:00:19]  Today we're going to shine some skeptical light upon this old idea and see if it stands up to the scrutiny of modern science.
[00:00:27]  That's today on Skeptoid.
[00:00:32]  Hi, I'm Alex Goldman.
[00:00:34]  You may know me as the host of Reply All, but I'm done with that.
[00:00:38]  I'm doing something else now.
[00:00:40]  I've started a new podcast called Hyperfixed.
[00:00:43]  On every episode of Hyperfixed, listeners write in with their problems and I try to solve them.
[00:00:48]  Some massive and life-altering and some so minuscule it'll boggle your mind.
[00:00:52]  No matter the problem, no matter the size, I'm here for you.
[00:00:55]  That's HyperFixed, the new podcast from Radiotopia.
[00:00:58]  Find it wherever you listen to podcasts or at hyperfixedpod.com.
[00:01:08]  You're listening to Skeptoid.
[00:01:10]  I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
[00:01:13]  Learning Styles Re-examined.
[00:01:17]  If you are involved in any remote way with education, you've almost certainly heard of the VARC questionnaire.
[00:01:25]  V-A-R-K stands for Visual, Oral, Read-Write, and Kinesthetic.
[00:01:31]  Four styles of learning.
[00:01:33]  Some of us are visual learners.
[00:01:35]  Some are oral learners, preferring to hear a lecture.
[00:01:38]  Some learn best by reading, and others are kinesthetic or hands-on learners.
[00:01:43]  The 16 questions in the VARC system will help you nail down which of these four you are.
[00:01:49]  This allows teachers to tailor the curriculum to your particular learning style.
[00:01:55]  And then, the theory goes, you'll learn more effectively.
[00:01:59]  Sounds like a wonderful deal, right?
[00:02:01]  The only problem is it doesn't work.
[00:02:05]  The promise of learning styles is that there is an easy way to make education more effective, to break students down into groups, each of which has its own learning style, and then to teach to each group in that style which will work best.
[00:02:20]  One group may be visual learners, so we'll show them videos.
[00:02:23]  One group may be auditory learners, so we'll give them lectures.
[00:02:27]  Another group gets the hands-on lessons.
[00:02:29]  And then at the end of the day, each student will have learned the same lesson much more effectively than they could have with a one-size-fits-all approach.
[00:02:38]  Same effort, better outcome.
[00:02:40]  And as a side benefit, each student got to spend the day doing what they enjoy best.
[00:02:45]  So it works out great for everyone.
[00:02:49]  With an idea having so much promise as that, we've, somewhat predictably, seen an enormous amount of research go into it, hoping to find that perfect model.
[00:02:59]  And by enormous amount, I mean that the four styles proposed in VARC are just one of at least 71 different theories that have been proposed.
[00:03:09]  That number coming from the most often cited survey of the subject, a 2004 paper by Caulfield et al., titled, Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 Learning, A Systematic and Critical Review.
[00:03:24]  Caulfield and his co-authors found that most of these theorized models were dichotomies, like, are you this type of learner or that type?
[00:03:33]  As a brief sample, these include convergers versus divergers, holists versus serialists, activists versus reflectors, assimilators versus accommodators, globalists versus analysts, initiators versus reasoners, and so on.
[00:03:53]  Some of these sound pretty odd, and they are, by and large.
[00:03:57]  Nearly all learning styles systems in use rely on three of the four VARC styles, visual, auditory, or kinesthetic.
[00:04:05]  And it turns out that a solid majority of educators believe that learning styles are real and that using them will improve educational outcomes.
[00:04:15]  A 2017 paper in Frontiers in Psychology summarized, A 2012 study demonstrated that 93% of school teachers in the UK agree with the statement, individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning style.
[00:04:32]  A 2014 survey reported that 76% of UK school teacher used learning styles and most stated that to do so benefited their pupils in some way.
[00:04:43]  A study of higher education faculty in the USA showed that 64% agreed with the statement, does teaching to a student's learning style enhance learning?
[00:04:53]  A recent study demonstrated that current research papers about learning styles in the higher education research literature overwhelmingly endorsed their use.
[00:05:04]  And as you might expect, the market has responded.
[00:05:07]  All kinds of educational materials and products are sold to teachers, to students, to parents, and even to corporate workplaces.
[00:05:16]  Nearly all publishers and other companies devoted to education technology and resources promote learning styles as if they are a given, and their product catalogs reflect that accordingly.
[00:05:30]  The problem is that no sound evidence suggests that learning styles work.
[00:05:35]  For decades, major research projects have looked into this question and come up empty-handed.
[00:05:41]  Perhaps the most often cited is by Pashler et al. in Psychological Science in the Public Interest from 2008.
[00:05:49]  We conclude that at present, there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning styles assessments into general educational practice.
[00:05:59]  The paper in Frontiers in Psychology stated this rather bluntly.
[00:06:03]  The empirical evidence is clear that there is currently no evidence to support the use of learning styles.
[00:06:10]  But these are just the tip of the iceberg.
[00:06:12]  Any reasonable review of just a small percentage of the academic work on learning styles gives you the same answer.
[00:06:19]  There's no evidence that they work, despite widespread belief in them among educators.

=== Why They Don't Work (08:46) ===

[00:06:24]  One paper even quoted our dear friend, the late James Randi, no amount of belief makes something a fact.
[00:06:34]  So let's have a look at why they don't work.
[00:06:37]  Well, first of all, if you're a long-time skeptoid listener, this idea of dividing people into two groups based on dichotomies may sound familiar.
[00:06:46]  Do you remember episode number 221 on the Myers-Briggs personality test?
[00:06:52]  This personality indicator separates people into 16 groups, each based on their classification into each of four dichotomies.
[00:07:00]  What are those dichotomies?
[00:07:02]  Well, no big surprise, you will also find them to be four of the 71 learning style theories identified by Caulfield's team.
[00:07:11]  Extroverts versus introverts, sensing versus intuition, thinking versus feeling, and judging versus perceiving.
[00:07:25]  In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
[00:07:32]  Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
[00:07:46]  And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
[00:07:57]  It's an easy ask.
[00:07:58]  Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
[00:08:02]  By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
[00:08:10]  Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
[00:08:16]  You can even use the telephone.
[00:08:18]  I know that might sound crazy.
[00:08:19]  It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
[00:08:24]  I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
[00:08:27]  The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
[00:08:30]  When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
[00:08:35]  And that's how we shape a better future.
[00:08:37]  In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
[00:08:44]  Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding together.
[00:08:48]  Get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
[00:09:02]  And this segues us right into the first problem that critics of learning styles often raise.
[00:09:07]  And this is that people don't fit neatly into one of two groups, or even one of three or four groups.
[00:09:14]  While it's true that most of us can probably answer a simple question like whether we prefer to learn by watching a video or by reading a textbook, that answer might change day to day based on how we feel or what we're in the mood for.
[00:09:27]  It might change based on the subject matter, and the answer might be no preference or only a slight preference.
[00:09:33]  You can ask people a question, and if you only offer two answer checkboxes, well, you'll get two groups.
[00:09:40]  But when we ask much finer graded questions, you'll find people's answers cover the full spectrum.
[00:09:46]  Forcing everyone into just a few compartments may yield a small number of compartments, but it does not accurately represent any individual person's actual place on that spectrum.
[00:09:59]  The second problem is also one shared with Myers-Briggs.
[00:10:03]  A preference for something is not the same thing as an aptitude for it.
[00:10:08]  This is a stark problem with the VARC questionnaire.
[00:10:12]  Every one of the VARC questions asks what you would like, what you would prefer.
[00:10:18]  Do you want the doctor to show you a plastic model of your heart, to give you a pamphlet to read, to explain your heart, or to show you a diagram?
[00:10:26]  This is fundamental, and it's a crucial fact.
[00:10:29]  A preference is not an aptitude.
[00:10:32]  You may love plastic models, but that absolutely does not mean you're going to remember its structure better than if you heard a well-worded and well-organized lecture on how and why the heart works.
[00:10:46]  A third problem with learning styles is that the vast majority of the models proposed are junk science.
[00:10:53]  And what I mean by that is that they fail to satisfy basic criteria that qualifies them as scientifically valid.
[00:11:00]  One 2016 paper titled, Stop Propagating the Learning Styles Myth, is among the most widely cited of all this vast library criticizing learning styles.
[00:11:11]  The author, Paul Kirschner, took the 13 most common models analyzed by the Caulfield team and matched each with the four most basic criteria.
[00:11:22]  Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity, and predictive validity.
[00:11:30]  We'd like to see all the papers satisfy all four of these criteria, which any decent scientific theory would.
[00:11:38]  However, of these 13 most common learning styles models, the average number of criteria satisfied was 1.5.
[00:11:47]  Three of them met none at all, and only one met all four.
[00:11:51]  And that one was about cognitive styles, not really learning styles.
[00:11:54]  Kirshner made four conclusions.
[00:11:57]  One, the premise that there are learners with different learning styles and that they should receive instruction using different instructional methods that match those styles is not a proven fact, but rather a belief which is backed up by precious little, if any, scientific evidence.
[00:12:13]  Two, there are a lot of very fundamental problems regarding measuring learning styles.
[00:12:19]  Three, the theoretical basis for the assumed interactions between learning styles and instructional methods is very thin.
[00:12:28]  And four, significant empirical evidence for the learning styles hypothesis is almost non-existent.
[00:12:36]  When we wonder why teachers, whom we presume to be thoroughly knowledgeable when it comes to pedagogy, would buy into a theory so thoroughly beaten down by academia, we find a familiar old friend at the root of it, confirmation bias.
[00:12:51]  From a 2010 article in Change, the magazine of higher learning, Learning styles theory has succeeded in becoming, quote, common knowledge.
[00:13:01]  Its widespread acceptance serves as an unfortunately compelling reason to believe it.
[00:13:06]  This is accompanied by a well-known cognitive phenomenon called confirmation bias.
[00:13:11]  When evaluating our own beliefs, we tend to seek out information that confirms our beliefs and ignore contrary information, even when we encounter it repeatedly.
[00:13:23]  I'd like to sum up this episode by offering my thoughts on the question of whether learning styles is a pseudoscience.
[00:13:30]  My answer is that it's usually not, but sometimes is.
[00:13:34]  And those cases that I'm thinking of are where companies try to sell some learning styles-based product or method or service to either parents, students, or teachers.
[00:13:44]  These products always list the research they claim supports the effectiveness of their product.
[00:13:50]  And by and large, those are deliberately misrepresented in order to promote the product.
[00:13:55]  This misuse of research toward a for-profit goal is definitely pseudoscience.
[00:14:02]  But for the rest of it, that massive body of research constituting the 71 models found by Caulfield et al., it's more fair to characterize them as genuine, well-intentioned scientific research directions that led to dead ends.
[00:14:18]  Such dead ends are not only a fundamental of the scientific method, they represent the vast majority of all scientific experiments.
[00:14:27]  Ask any molecular biologist how many of the countless Petri dishes she's taken out of the incubator in the middle of the night that turned out to be the cure for cancer.
[00:14:36]  Precious few of them, probably none.
[00:14:38]  In science, a million ideas lead nowhere for every one that ends up working.
[00:14:44]  Half a century of beating the bushes looking for a way to make education better was not a pseudo-scientific pursuit, despite the great big zero that it's given us.
[00:14:54]  It's pretty clear by now that there's nothing to it.
[00:14:57]  That doesn't mean that tomorrow someone won't overturn everything and find the miraculously easy solution to education, but it does mean that's a lot less likely now than it was 50 years ago.

=== Support Skeptoid Premium (02:32) ===

[00:15:11]  So, as we see, with so many other offerings life throws our way, magically easy solutions to complicated problems are much scarcer than we wish.
[00:15:21]  The promise of improving a one-size-fits-all teaching method by splitting it into two, three, or even four variants may sound like a great idea and was certainly worth the experiment, but it's been tried and it hasn't worked.
[00:15:36]  Whenever you see a product or service offered with a pitch about learning styles, pass.
[00:15:47]  But please don't pass on premium membership, which lets you be just like Christopher Ashton, Nulius Inverba, Darren Oxier, the best beer brewer in a three-block radius, Katie Jacobs, and Alexander Schubel.
[00:16:03]  Premium members get the show ad-free, and you get more than 15 times as many episodes in the feed.
[00:16:10]  That's right, 15 times as many episodes.
[00:16:13]  And that's among other benefits, which you can learn about on the website.
[00:16:16]  It's easy to do.
[00:16:18]  Just come to skeptoid.com and click Go Premium.
[00:16:25]  You're listening to Skeptoid, a listener-supported program.
[00:16:28]  I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
[00:16:37]  Hello, everyone.
[00:16:38]  This is Adrienne Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and mousse.
[00:16:46]  And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as $5 per month.
[00:16:55]  And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double-doubles.
[00:16:59]  And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
[00:17:04]  Why support Skeptoid?
[00:17:06]  If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, premium is for you.
[00:17:12]  If you want to support a worthwhile nonprofit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the Teacher's Toolkit, then sign up today.
[00:17:26]  Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
[00:17:30]  Next to giggling, of course.
[00:17:32]  Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
[00:17:43]  From PRX.