Today, I want to talk about the truth behind learning styles. We’ll discuss why learning style theories, including the idea that you are a visual or kinaesthetic learner, or not evidence or science based.
We’ll talk about the problems and flaws in learning style theories, and I’ll end with some recommendations for all of you listening!
Listen Here!
Apple Podcasts
Spotify
YouTubeInteractive Transcript!
You Can Now Read and Listen at the Same Time With an Interactive Transcript!
Vocabulary
- Tailor (Verb): To adapt or modify to suit a particular need or condition.
- The teacher tailored her lessons to match the students’ learning styles.
- Visual (Adjective): Related to seeing.
- Visual learners prefer to use diagrams and charts to understand information.
- Kinaesthetic (Adjective): Related to physical activity and hands-on learning.
- Kinaesthetic learners excel when they can engage in hands-on activities.
- Hands-on (Adjective): Involving active participation and practical experience.
- The workshop offered hands-on training to help participants understand the concepts better.
- Flawed (Adjective): Having imperfections or weaknesses.
- The theory was criticized for being flawed and lacking scientific evidence.
- Satisfaction (Noun): Fulfilment of one’s wishes, expectations, or needs.
- The students expressed satisfaction with the new teaching methods.
- Multifaceted (Adjective): Having many aspects or sides.
- Learning is a multifaceted process that involves various techniques and methods.
Introduction
What is your learning style?
I’m sure many of you listening have heard about learning styles before. I remember being 13 or 14 and my school geography teacher making us all take a questionnaire or test to determine our own learning style.
This questionnaire used the most popular, widespread, and well-known learning style theory, often called VARK. VARK is an acronym standing for Visual, Aural, Read/Write, and Kinaesthetic.
We took the test, were assigned into a learning style based on our answers, and my geography teacher then tailored her activities based on our style. For example, she gave different activities to students who learned through hand-on learning compared to visual learning.
She was tailoring, designing, her lessons based on how the students best learned, according to the VARK theory.
You might be thinking that this was a great thing. A teacher paying attention to learning styles, creating lessons based on how her students learn, and caring about student learning outcomes.
There is a major problem with this approach.
There is absolutely no evidence that learning styles, especially the VARK theory of learning styles, exists.
Many learning style theories are categorically not based on science, not based on the reality of how people learn, out of thousands of research papers out there none (that I could find) show that people can be easily categorised into learning styles, and it is quite likely that belief in learning styles actually harms your learning outcomes.
This might be surprising to many of you, especially the teachers out there. Learning styles like VARK are in the official curriculums taught to many teachers at universities and in training programmes. If you actually look at the research, there is no evidence that they exist, work, or relate to reality.
Today, we are going to take a deeper look into the truth behind learning styles.
What are Learning Styles?
If we are going to discuss why the learning style theories and learning styles themselves are a problematic concept, we should probably start with a definition of “learning styles.”
Learning styles refer to the theory that individuals have preferred and consistent ways of receiving and processing information. Some people learn through listening to information, others learn by seeing information, or others learn by experiencing information. Learning supposedly becomes more effective when teaching methods align with these preferences.
There are many different learning styles theories out there – they look at how people learn in different styles, contexts, using different equipment, and more.
The most commonly referenced to learning style is probably VARK. VARK stands for Visual, Auditory, Read/Write, and Kinaesthetic.
According to this theory, visual learners prefer using images, diagrams, charts, graphs, and other visual aids to understand information. They find it easier to grasp concepts when they can see spatial relationships and patterns.
Auditory learners prefer listening to spoken information. They benefit from lectures, discussions, audio recordings, and verbal explanations.
Read/write learners prefer interacting with text. They excel when they can read and write information, using lists, notes, and textual materials.
And kinaesthetic learners prefer a hands-on approach. They learn best through physical activities, experiments, and real-life examples.
A great article from the University of Michigan which summarised the exisiting research out there on learning styles mentioned that all learning styles theories have two core assumptions.
First, the individuals (like you and me) “have a measurable and consistent “style” of learning.”
No matter what we are learning or studying, the way we learn is consistent. A visual learner will always do better with visual resources and a read/write learner will always do better with taking notes. It doesn’t matter if you are learning languages or math, the theory is consistent.
Second, “teaching to that style of learning will lead to better education outcomes.”
In other words, teachers should give visual learners charts and pictures, lecture to auditory learners, and allow kinaesthetic learners to experience things hands-on.
These assumptions are problematic. Let me try and explain why.
The Flaws in the Learning Styles Theory
No Evidence of Learning Styles
The idea that people learn in unique ways and that we can identify these learning styles is obviously appealing. It would mean that, once we discover your learning style, we can make sure that you learn in the optimal way.
Researchers, education theorists, and neuroscientists have published countless papers online on the way that people learn new things and the best way to teach students. They have discovered a lot of information about the process of learning. I’ve actually released episodes in the past on research backed learning approaches.
However, what they haven’t discovered is the existence of solid and consistent learning styles. In fact, some researchers have described the existence of learning styles as a “neuromyth” or even the same as believing in fortune telling. Basically, they don’t exist.
There is no research-based evidence that people learn better when they are taught in accordance with their learning style. There is no evidence that broad teaching is worse than teaching to a specific learning style.
You don’t need to believe me, here is some quotes form research papers.
Katzig & Arbuthnott concluded in 2006 that “[learning styles] are commonly justified in terms of brain function, despite educational and scientific evidence suggesting that the learning style approach is not helpful.”
A 2017 study in Frontiers in Psychology wrote that “this idea [learning styles] has been repeatedly tested and there is currently no evidence to support it.”
The American Psychological Association states that “there is no scientific evidence to support this common myth [of learning styles].” They actually argue that belief in learning styles is a negative, as “previous research has shown that the learning styles model can undermine education in many ways.”
And the British Psychological Association has commented that the entire theory is flawed as the average person has a poor grasp of how they learn best, teachers and students often misunderstand the concepts, and the preferred learning style of students doesn’t necessarily mean it is the best one for their learning.
How to Measure Learning Styles?
Actually, how do we measure learning styles? How do teachers decide if you are a visual learner or a kinaesthetic learner?
The most common method is simply asking learners and students (usually using some questions or a quiz).
I found an example VARK test online (the first one that comes up when you search VARK test). Here are some of the questions:
I want to learn how to play a new board game or card game. I would:
- use the diagrams that explain the various stages, moves and strategies in the game.
- read the instructions.
- listen to somebody explaining it and ask questions.
- watch others play the game before joining in.
I prefer a presenter or a teacher who uses:
- diagrams, charts, maps or graphs.
- question and answer, talk, group discussion, or guest speakers.
- demonstrations, models or practical sessions.
- handouts, books, or readings.
All of the questions followed this style. After 10 similar questions, it would tell you what style of learner you are.
Can you see the problem with this?
They are asking your opinion on how you study best. It relies on your self-report, your opinion about yourself, and your preferences to determine what type of learner you are. It is not based on how you actually learn and it doesn’t test how you learn, but instead simply asks you how you think you learn.
A great article from the University of Michigan went into more detail about this.
In general, we are not very good at judging ourselves and we are definitely not very good at understanding how we learn.
These kinds of tests are measuring your preference, how you like to study, rather than how you actually learn. In real life, the way you like to study may not actually be the best or most efficient approach. Many of you probably think you learn best through reading or through listening or through doing….
But what proof do you have? Have you ever conducted a scientifically backed test? Or are you just reporting what you think you are best at?
The other issue with the way these learning styles are measured is that they tend to focus on satisfaction rather than results.
Learning styles are basically the type of learning that you think you enjoy the most. They have nothing to do with how you actually learn or with which style of learning actually achieves the best results.
Confirmation Bias and Self-Limitation
Despite the lack of evidence of learning styles, I often hear students describing themselves as “visual learners” or that they “learn best from experiences.”
There is nothing wrong with having a way you enjoy studying, but you should be aware that there are risks involved with labelling yourself.
Many people believe in learning styles because they experience moments when they seem to learn better through one mode of instruction over another. This can be attributed to confirmation bias – the tendency to notice and remember information that confirms pre-existing beliefs.
For example, you might believe you are a visual learner because you recall using diagrams effectively, ignoring the many other instances where you learned through listening or hands-on experience.
Labelling yourself with a specific learning style can lead to self-limitation and reduced flexibility in learning. When you are categorized as visual, auditory, or kinaesthetic, you may become fixated on using only that method, avoiding other potentially effective strategies.
This can hinder your overall development and adaptability as learners.
In fact, focusing on learning styles can actually mean you don’t use enough evidence-based instructional strategies that are proven to be effective.
Going back to the beginning of this episode, my geography teacher who made us take a VARK test spent a lot of time making four different activities for each group of student every single week.
The problem is that she would probably have been much more effective if she had employed universal and evidence-based teaching methods that benefit all students, such as retrieval practice, spaced repetition, and active learning.
Learning is Relative and Multifaceted
An important point to note is that learning is relative and multifaceted. The issue with learning styles is that they suggest people learn most efficiently in one specific way, when this is obviously not the case.
I want you to learn the location of every country in Africa. How are you going to achieve this? By listening to me read out a description of the locations? By reading an essay describing African countries? Or by looking at a map?
In this situation, visual information is probably the best for your learning.
How about learning to ride a bike? You could, of course, read a book about it or watch a YouTube video on riding a bike… but you will learn much quicker once you are sat on the bike and practicing with “hands-on experience.”
The best approach to learning often depends on what you are learning.
In fact, this can also change regularly. It is possible that you used to be great at studying English using a textbook, but now using podcasts is better for you, and in the future visual resources could be better.
In other words, learning styles are not stable. They way you learn changes depending on the subject or thing you are learning and when you are learning.
Moreover, research has shown that using a range of different styles of learning is the most efficient way to learn. Listening, reading, looking at visuals, and trying with hands on experience should all be combined to learn well.
In order to learn, our brains need to be engaged. By using different approaches (a video, a textbook, a conversation exercise) you are keeping your brain engaged and learning more effectively.
Recommendations for English Learners
So, I’ve spent the past 10 or 15 minutes talking about learning styles, how they are not a research-backed theory, and how they can actually harm your learning goals.
What does this mean for people like you?
First, use different approaches and methods to study. Instead of trying to determine and match your learning style, engage with English learning materials in various forms.
At the beginning of July (maybe just after this episode is released) I am taking a Japanese proficiency test. Each week I use a variety of different study methods. Once a week I take a Japanese class with a teacher. A few times a week I use textbooks to study. I watch videos on YouTube from Japanese teachers. I use a smartphone application.
When I’m tired of one study method, I will switch a re-engage my brain!
Second, however you study, make sure you are taking an active role in the process of learning. Use English and use your skills as often as possible. One of the problems with learning styles, especially the “listening” and “reading” styles, is that they can encourage passive learning.
If you believe you learn best through listening, you may just sit and listen to lectures or lessons. Instead, you should be actively listening – making notes, summarising the content of lessons, answering follow up questions, using the language you have learned.
Third, combine what you enjoy doing with the methods that are most effective for you. How do you find the most effective methods? You could ask for feedback from a teacher. You could experiment with different approaches and see which ones help you remember things.
Finally, think critically about your learning. Focus on strategies that are proven to be effective, such as spaced repetition, active recall, and contextual learning. Question the validity of any learning style theory you encounter and focus on methods that are evidence based.
Set specific, measurable, and achievable learning goals. Focus your learning activities to meet these goals rather than trying to conform to a particular learning style. For instance, if your goal is to improve speaking skills, prioritise speaking practice regardless of whether you consider yourself an auditory or visual learner.
Final Thought
In conclusion, the concept of learning styles, particularly the VARK theory, is widely taught but lacks scientific evidence.
Studies have shown that people do not learn better when taught according to their perceived learning styles. Instead of relying on these unsupported theories, it’s more effective to use a variety of learning methods and evidence-based strategies.
Combining different approaches, actively engaging in the learning process, and setting specific goals are key to improving learning outcomes. By focusing on proven techniques, you can achieve better results and adapt to different learning situations more effectively.
What do you think?
Extended Vocabulary List
Become a Patreon Subscriber to Access the Extended Vocabulary List!
Vocabulary Games and Activities!
Learn and practice vocabulary from this Thinking in English episode.
Practice using 5 different study games and activities – including writing, listening, and memorisation techniques!
Flashcards
Matching Game
Learning Game
Test Yourself
Listening and Spelling
Do you want to Think in English?
I’m so excited that you found my blog and podcast!! If you don’t want to miss an article or an episode, you can subscribe to my page!
