3 ms·
Could anyone link to the "learning styles" claim? If it is about as coarse categories as "visual" vs "verbal", then debunking does not sound strange (but I gue
by stared 11y ago
Could anyone link to the "learning styles" claim?
If it is about as coarse categories as "visual" vs "verbal", then debunking does not sound strange (but I guess mostly because not many people are very polarized wrt this axis).
But in general - well, almost each single person has her/his tastes (senses involved, brevity/verbosity, level of challenge, level of feedback, amount of social interaction, amount of noise, etc, etc). So, I would rather guess than psychological research are flawed (too few categories, misaligned categories, binning, self-reported data, etc) than anything else.
(I do have both experience with teaching and with doing research-level psychology.)
- analog31 11y agoI can't link to it, but I've heard it cited in at least two training sessions that I've been in. The first was when I was hired to be an adjunct teacher at a Big Ten university. One of the presentations was about the different styles of learning. Another was in some kind of corporate management training that I took, where we were also told about the Kubler-Ross stages. These ideas take on a life of their own outside of the research community. From what I can tell, the effect is a fragmented and disorganized approach to teaching, for example, that's evident in the typical elementary school curriculum. On an amusing note, there's an inside joke in my family, that "children have different ways of learning" is a euphemism for when somebody just did something really dumb.