6 ms·

I appreciate the succinct detail they go into regarding how the concept of “learning styles” has been debunked. I’ve always considered myself more of a visual l

I appreciate the succinct detail they go into regarding how the concept of “learning styles” has been debunked. I’ve always considered myself more of a visual learner, and seeing posts here and elsewhere about this supposedly not being a thing has never sat well with me (though I never delved into the actual research). Turns out I do in fact agree with this explanation; that it’s more about what’s being taught that should dictate the how: > While learners have preferred styles, effective instruction matches the content, not learning styles. A science class should use graphs to present data rather than verbal descriptions, regardless of visual or auditory learning styles, just like cooking classes should use hands-on practices rather than reading, whether learners prefer a kinesthetic style or not.

oatmeal1 3y ago
Courses teaching music theory through visual depictions, take note!
- NetOpWibby 3y ago
  This is why I failed music class in high-school. I was the only non-band student so the work was accelerated.
  - jacobolus 3y ago
    This is why trying to rank/judge/grade everyone by a uniform standard is almost universally terrible. Students should be encouraged to try their best in every subject, allowed to make the mistakes they are naturally going to make at whatever level they are currently, and helped to improve over time. Punishing people for being less prepared than peers who did more practice or for making ordinary and expected mistakes actively gets in the way of their learning, as well as making them feel terrible. It's pretty bad for the students who are more prepared as well, as many of them internalize the idea that they are inherently good at some things and inherently bad at others, which is sometimes temporarily gratifying but often stops them from pushing themselves to try anything new or hard.
    - shrubhub 3y ago
      How do you decide who gets to study a subject full time at a famous institution?
      - johnnyanmac 3y ago
        Same way we do now: based on who's parents can donate a new wing for the campus to build. But sure, it's the same problem with any other prestigious venue. Demand far far far outstrips supply. So they don't really need to pick "the best" students. Merely students "over the bar of quality". There's no problem in the eyes of the venue, so there's nothing to change. I think the implied assumption in this question is flawed to begin with in that not everyone needs to be at a famous institution to succeed. But if you want my likely bad take: sports coaches actually have a pretty decent method of scouting by... well, scouting. seek out local/state/national talent and nurture them years before an app goes in. If they can build a relationship, that's a personal referral that goes farther than any essay prompt. It's the most flexible method because scouters can tailor from culture to culture, based on qualities that traditional education metrics wouldn't take into account.
        fragmede 3y ago
        It's a good idea! The Math Olympiad was a thing when I was in school. Just need to turn that into a more mainstream competition and build up a much larger culture and business around succeeding in it.
    - WalterBright 3y ago
      Having some pressure to learn things is essential. I discovered that if I audited a course, I never learned much. I needed the pressure of grades.
      - johnnyanmac 3y ago
        I agree and disagree. I agree in that pressure is good, I disagree that audits are bad because of no pressure. Audits mean that is low priority which means that it will fall off when your busy schedule of "actual" courses have deadlines. Which is not a refletion of your ability nor interest to learn but of your workload. This is the main reason I hold resentment towards GE's. Not because I don't want to be a well rounded person, but because when 3-4 other major classes are already crushing you the last bit of "pressure" needed is some random music theory or history course quizzing you. I never really got the time to breathe in college, and taking my time woulda been a $20k+ decision on top of the $80k I already had in debt. I literally could not afford to learn properly.
- arvinsim 3y ago
  Sorry if it is bot clear. Is it a good or bad thing to teach music theory via visual depiction?
  - tsimionescu 3y ago
    Bad practice. Music is auditory, so you need to focus on audio.
    - Tainnor 3y ago
      Of course, you need auditive input to study music (although interestingly medieval education would have disagreed with this). But visual depictions also help a lot with music theory. Seeing the structure of, say, a sonata's first movement visually makes it easier to understand certain aspects of it. The same is true of understanding relationships between different keys (e.g. the circle of fifths). It's not an either/or, you need both.
taopai 3y ago
Dual coding. The material should present in multiple ways. Visually AND verbally is preferred.
- KingMob 3y ago
  Gonna fall behind the new curriculum using perfume houses to craft real code smells.
josephg 3y ago
> I’ve always considered myself more of a visual learner, and seeing posts here and elsewhere about this supposedly not being a thing has never sat well with me (though I never delved into the actual research). My understanding of the research is that your preference for visual learning is real. But your preference doesn't actually translate into better learning outcomes. Ie, you might prefer visual stimulus but the research suggests you'll still learn content just as fast if its presented in other mediums.
- cncivubyv 3y ago
  Is that for the people that didn't drop out or are the drop outs included in the stats?
  - watwut 3y ago
    Afaik those were short term experiments - people don't drop out that quickly.
    - cncivubyv 3y ago
      That seems like a pretty useless study if it's not covering the full effects of learning styles that cater to an individual's preferences.
- kqr 3y ago
  > But your preference doesn't actually translate into better learning outcomes. Ie, you might prefer visual stimulus but the research suggests you'll still learn content just as fast if its presented in other mediums. These two are not actually the same, despite the "i.e." connecting them. I'm sure you know that -- just pointing itnout because it's a common sleight of hand when referencing science. "Failed to show an improvement in learning speed" does not mean "successfully showed an equality in learning speed". The latter is very hard to prove, and is probably the null hypothesis -- we just assume it to be true without evidence to the contrary.
- mobiuscog 3y ago
  I doubt the research accounts for Neurodivergent folks, assuming it even correctly represents Neurotypical. As with many of these studies, they're treated as fact despite it being clear that it does not address the real-world problems. Do I actually learn better visually ? No idea, but it's also clear that I don't learn in the same way as the majority of people in the classes I attended, and failed many exams despite being able to achieve the same outcomes. I think the definition of 'learning' needs to be considered. It is measured by an exam, or is it a true understanding of the subject taught, as these are often two very different outcomes.
chiefalchemist 3y ago
> While learners have preferred styles, effective instruction matches the content, not learning styles. A science class should use graphs to present data rather than verbal descriptions, regardless of visual or auditory learning styles, just like cooking classes should use hands-on practices rather than reading, whether learners prefer a kinesthetic style or not. I hear ya, but I still don't buy it. Teaching / learning is a fork of the communications heuristic: "It's not what you say, it's what they hear." Receivers (i.e., students) have a spectrum of receiving abilities, skills and expectations. Regardless of subject matter, to assume one size fits all (students) is (to put it bluntly) wrong. Put another way, yes the topic factors is, but ultimately it's about the *individuals* receiving that information.
- gopher_space 3y ago
  > I hear ya, but I still don't buy it. One of my relatives was a learning styles proponent back in the 1980s and talked about it quite a bit. In my mind it feels like the conversation has moved from "here is a tool for you to consider" to "we have scientifically proven that you don't need to create lesson plans for each of The Five Formal Styles". It feels like we might be missing the thread if we're able to talk about "debunking" a point of view.
keiferski 3y ago
I don't see how you can divorce this from motivation. If I much prefer listening to content instead of reading about it, I'm going to be more motivated to learn the subject matter, which results in me learning more overall.
- arcbyte 3y ago
  You will never learn how to cook by listening to it. You will never learn to ski by listening to instructions about it. You will never learn 3d graphics programming by listening to podcast courses. You will learn a lot about Roman history by listening to it. You will learn a lot about the Spanish language by listening to it. If you avoid learning things that you can't learn by listening, then you will only ever learn things that can be learned by listening and that will bias your perspective about learning anything.
  - keiferski 3y ago
    That's not the point I'm making. The point is that people do have "learning preferences" and these have an ultimate effect on learning. To use your example: some people prefer listening to Roman history podcasts. Others would rather watch a film. Still others prefer a book. If you want to maximize learning, it seems best to pick the style/format most suited to your preferences.
    - beej71 3y ago
      > If you want to maximize learning, it seems best to pick the style/format most suited to your preferences. Yes, but iff that format is well-suited to the subject matter.
- Balgair 3y ago
  Typically the researchers pay the subjects. It's a very active area of research though, and many reward schemes have been used and studied. Derek goes into some of the research here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA
brainzap 3y ago
shouldnt any class use hands-on practices, because you know, evolution and stones and stuff
irajdeep 3y ago
you'll definitely find this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA interesting. Here they discuss the (lack of)efficacy of "visual learning"

oatmeal1 3y ago

Courses teaching music theory through visual depictions, take note!

NetOpWibby 3y ago
This is why I failed music class in high-school. I was the only non-band student so the work was accelerated.
- jacobolus 3y ago
  This is why trying to rank/judge/grade everyone by a uniform standard is almost universally terrible. Students should be encouraged to try their best in every subject, allowed to make the mistakes they are naturally going to make at whatever level they are currently, and helped to improve over time. Punishing people for being less prepared than peers who did more practice or for making ordinary and expected mistakes actively gets in the way of their learning, as well as making them feel terrible. It's pretty bad for the students who are more prepared as well, as many of them internalize the idea that they are inherently good at some things and inherently bad at others, which is sometimes temporarily gratifying but often stops them from pushing themselves to try anything new or hard.
  - shrubhub 3y ago
    How do you decide who gets to study a subject full time at a famous institution?
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      Same way we do now: based on who's parents can donate a new wing for the campus to build. But sure, it's the same problem with any other prestigious venue. Demand far far far outstrips supply. So they don't really need to pick "the best" students. Merely students "over the bar of quality". There's no problem in the eyes of the venue, so there's nothing to change. I think the implied assumption in this question is flawed to begin with in that not everyone needs to be at a famous institution to succeed. But if you want my likely bad take: sports coaches actually have a pretty decent method of scouting by... well, scouting. seek out local/state/national talent and nurture them years before an app goes in. If they can build a relationship, that's a personal referral that goes farther than any essay prompt. It's the most flexible method because scouters can tailor from culture to culture, based on qualities that traditional education metrics wouldn't take into account.
      - fragmede 3y ago
        It's a good idea! The Math Olympiad was a thing when I was in school. Just need to turn that into a more mainstream competition and build up a much larger culture and business around succeeding in it.
  - WalterBright 3y ago
    Having some pressure to learn things is essential. I discovered that if I audited a course, I never learned much. I needed the pressure of grades.
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      I agree and disagree. I agree in that pressure is good, I disagree that audits are bad because of no pressure. Audits mean that is low priority which means that it will fall off when your busy schedule of "actual" courses have deadlines. Which is not a refletion of your ability nor interest to learn but of your workload. This is the main reason I hold resentment towards GE's. Not because I don't want to be a well rounded person, but because when 3-4 other major classes are already crushing you the last bit of "pressure" needed is some random music theory or history course quizzing you. I never really got the time to breathe in college, and taking my time woulda been a $20k+ decision on top of the $80k I already had in debt. I literally could not afford to learn properly.
arvinsim 3y ago
Sorry if it is bot clear. Is it a good or bad thing to teach music theory via visual depiction?
- tsimionescu 3y ago
  Bad practice. Music is auditory, so you need to focus on audio.
  - Tainnor 3y ago
    Of course, you need auditive input to study music (although interestingly medieval education would have disagreed with this). But visual depictions also help a lot with music theory. Seeing the structure of, say, a sonata's first movement visually makes it easier to understand certain aspects of it. The same is true of understanding relationships between different keys (e.g. the circle of fifths). It's not an either/or, you need both.

taopai 3y ago

Dual coding. The material should present in multiple ways. Visually AND verbally is preferred.

KingMob 3y ago
Gonna fall behind the new curriculum using perfume houses to craft real code smells.

josephg 3y ago

> I’ve always considered myself more of a visual learner, and seeing posts here and elsewhere about this supposedly not being a thing has never sat well with me (though I never delved into the actual research). My understanding of the research is that your preference for visual learning is real. But your preference doesn't actually translate into better learning outcomes. Ie, you might prefer visual stimulus but the research suggests you'll still learn content just as fast if its presented in other mediums.

cncivubyv 3y ago
Is that for the people that didn't drop out or are the drop outs included in the stats?
- watwut 3y ago
  Afaik those were short term experiments - people don't drop out that quickly.
  - cncivubyv 3y ago
    That seems like a pretty useless study if it's not covering the full effects of learning styles that cater to an individual's preferences.
kqr 3y ago
> But your preference doesn't actually translate into better learning outcomes. Ie, you might prefer visual stimulus but the research suggests you'll still learn content just as fast if its presented in other mediums. These two are not actually the same, despite the "i.e." connecting them. I'm sure you know that -- just pointing itnout because it's a common sleight of hand when referencing science. "Failed to show an improvement in learning speed" does not mean "successfully showed an equality in learning speed". The latter is very hard to prove, and is probably the null hypothesis -- we just assume it to be true without evidence to the contrary.
mobiuscog 3y ago
I doubt the research accounts for Neurodivergent folks, assuming it even correctly represents Neurotypical. As with many of these studies, they're treated as fact despite it being clear that it does not address the real-world problems. Do I actually learn better visually ? No idea, but it's also clear that I don't learn in the same way as the majority of people in the classes I attended, and failed many exams despite being able to achieve the same outcomes. I think the definition of 'learning' needs to be considered. It is measured by an exam, or is it a true understanding of the subject taught, as these are often two very different outcomes.

chiefalchemist 3y ago

> While learners have preferred styles, effective instruction matches the content, not learning styles. A science class should use graphs to present data rather than verbal descriptions, regardless of visual or auditory learning styles, just like cooking classes should use hands-on practices rather than reading, whether learners prefer a kinesthetic style or not. I hear ya, but I still don't buy it. Teaching / learning is a fork of the communications heuristic: "It's not what you say, it's what they hear." Receivers (i.e., students) have a spectrum of receiving abilities, skills and expectations. Regardless of subject matter, to assume one size fits all (students) is (to put it bluntly) wrong. Put another way, yes the topic factors is, but ultimately it's about the *individuals* receiving that information.

gopher_space 3y ago
> I hear ya, but I still don't buy it. One of my relatives was a learning styles proponent back in the 1980s and talked about it quite a bit. In my mind it feels like the conversation has moved from "here is a tool for you to consider" to "we have scientifically proven that you don't need to create lesson plans for each of The Five Formal Styles". It feels like we might be missing the thread if we're able to talk about "debunking" a point of view.

keiferski 3y ago

I don't see how you can divorce this from motivation. If I much prefer listening to content instead of reading about it, I'm going to be more motivated to learn the subject matter, which results in me learning more overall.

arcbyte 3y ago
You will never learn how to cook by listening to it. You will never learn to ski by listening to instructions about it. You will never learn 3d graphics programming by listening to podcast courses. You will learn a lot about Roman history by listening to it. You will learn a lot about the Spanish language by listening to it. If you avoid learning things that you can't learn by listening, then you will only ever learn things that can be learned by listening and that will bias your perspective about learning anything.
- keiferski 3y ago
  That's not the point I'm making. The point is that people do have "learning preferences" and these have an ultimate effect on learning. To use your example: some people prefer listening to Roman history podcasts. Others would rather watch a film. Still others prefer a book. If you want to maximize learning, it seems best to pick the style/format most suited to your preferences.
  - beej71 3y ago
    > If you want to maximize learning, it seems best to pick the style/format most suited to your preferences. Yes, but iff that format is well-suited to the subject matter.
Balgair 3y ago
Typically the researchers pay the subjects. It's a very active area of research though, and many reward schemes have been used and studied. Derek goes into some of the research here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA

brainzap 3y ago

shouldnt any class use hands-on practices, because you know, evolution and stones and stuff

irajdeep 3y ago

you'll definitely find this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA interesting. Here they discuss the (lack of)efficacy of "visual learning"