3 ms·

“The fact that some people are visual thinkers while others are auditory” I thought the “visual learner” classification was a myth.

hprotagonist 4y ago
It is. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/the-myth-of-learning-styles/557687/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/the-myth...
- ff317 4y ago
  For me personally, I classify myself (whether it's valid or not!) as an experiential learner. I have a very hard time learning abstract things in purely abstract ways. I can read a book about a branch of mathematics and try intently to learn from it and totally fail. But give me one practical, real-world problem which demands some knowledge of that type of mathematics, and I might pick up the bulk of the same subject matter quickly, to the degree necessitated by the project. Whatever my conscious intentions may be, my brain throws a toddler tantrum about it and is like "Prove to me that I can use this for real or I'm not investing in it".
  - vaidhy 4y ago
    I will go back to the top comment as of now.. you do not learn math by reading. You learn it by solving the problems. Some subjects (maybe some of the softer humanities) are more theory than practice.. Math and programming are not one of those.
caddemon 4y ago
"visual learner" as it is used in education theory does appear to be mostly bunk. For a variety of reasons, one of which is that most people have both auditory and visual thoughts. However I would caution not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There is a growing body of evidence that some people are better or worse at visualizing, have a stronger or weaker internal monologue, etc. than others. There are reported neurophysiological differences as well as task behavior differences if you look at people with Aphantasia for example. As the other article sent to you mentions, someone who is not very visual could potentially benefit even more from visual examples, so these results are not really in conflict with the failures of education theory. It's also not clear how common large disparities in the modalities of thinking are, so perhaps it is not something worthwhile to consider for mass education policy regardless. But I think in a neuroscience context it remains an interesting topic for future research. I'll also note that the author of the original piece is autistic, and she has clearly demonstrated savant-level abilities on certain visualization tasks. It's not surprising that she would feel this way about "learning styles", because her entire life experience has likely been extremely lopsided towards visual thinking.
mindcrime 4y ago
I thought the “visual learner” classification was a myth. That may be over-generalizing. From what I've seen, the studies that debunked this idea debunked something fairly specific, not necessarily every possible formulation of what this phrase could mean to people.

hprotagonist 4y ago

It is. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/the-myth-of-learning-styles/557687/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/the-myth...

ff317 4y ago
For me personally, I classify myself (whether it's valid or not!) as an experiential learner. I have a very hard time learning abstract things in purely abstract ways. I can read a book about a branch of mathematics and try intently to learn from it and totally fail. But give me one practical, real-world problem which demands some knowledge of that type of mathematics, and I might pick up the bulk of the same subject matter quickly, to the degree necessitated by the project. Whatever my conscious intentions may be, my brain throws a toddler tantrum about it and is like "Prove to me that I can use this for real or I'm not investing in it".
- vaidhy 4y ago
  I will go back to the top comment as of now.. you do not learn math by reading. You learn it by solving the problems. Some subjects (maybe some of the softer humanities) are more theory than practice.. Math and programming are not one of those.

caddemon 4y ago

"visual learner" as it is used in education theory does appear to be mostly bunk. For a variety of reasons, one of which is that most people have both auditory and visual thoughts. However I would caution not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There is a growing body of evidence that some people are better or worse at visualizing, have a stronger or weaker internal monologue, etc. than others. There are reported neurophysiological differences as well as task behavior differences if you look at people with Aphantasia for example. As the other article sent to you mentions, someone who is not very visual could potentially benefit even more from visual examples, so these results are not really in conflict with the failures of education theory. It's also not clear how common large disparities in the modalities of thinking are, so perhaps it is not something worthwhile to consider for mass education policy regardless. But I think in a neuroscience context it remains an interesting topic for future research. I'll also note that the author of the original piece is autistic, and she has clearly demonstrated savant-level abilities on certain visualization tasks. It's not surprising that she would feel this way about "learning styles", because her entire life experience has likely been extremely lopsided towards visual thinking.

mindcrime 4y ago

I thought the “visual learner” classification was a myth. That may be over-generalizing. From what I've seen, the studies that debunked this idea debunked something fairly specific, not necessarily every possible formulation of what this phrase could mean to people.