5 ms·

I doubt the research accounts for Neurodivergent folks, assuming it even correctly represents Neurotypical. As with many of these studies, they're treated as f

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.

Jensson 3y ago
Exams not being a good measure has nothing to do with learning styles.
- savolai 3y ago
  I do not see how it would not? Appears to me that responding to exams is at once an expression and practice of the learning. It’s not as if a test situation is isolated from the overall learning process. If a learner is not oriented towards written or read communication, their exam results may not reflect a written test. If a learner has problems with their practical skills being observed in action, a practical test may not reflect their actual skills or understanding.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    > If a learner is not oriented towards written or read communication, their exam results may not reflect a written test Being unable to communicate what you have learned is a serious disorder and not a learning style issue. Learning styles are about how you learn, not how you demonstrate what you learned. But yes, people who are unable to write or read or very bad at writing have problems and tend to get extra support on written exams to make it fair for them, as the exam should test their knowledge and not their ability to write. For example they don't give blind people a zero just because they failed to read the exam.
    - mobiuscog 3y ago
      > Being unable to communicate what you have learned is a serious disorder and not a learning style issue. It's absolutely a learning style issue if those teaching are not able to pick up on the issues with learning if the person being taught is unable to effectively communicate how they are struggling. I spent years trying to explain to teachers why I did not understand some of the concepts they were telling me, and they would often tell me to just 'accept it' and move on. Bad teachers perhaps, but that's all part of the learning and others seemed to be fine... so that is a learning 'style'. Your suggestion of 'serious disorder' is also misplaced.
    - savolai 3y ago
      Please see social constructivist or cognitivist learning theory. Learning and expression of what is learned are part of the same learning process and it is entirely artificial to separate one of them to be part of learning style, and the other as not being part of it. Virtually all learning is also learning how to express the subject being learnt.
oblio 3y ago
> I doubt the research accounts for Neurodivergent folks, assuming it even correctly represents Neurotypical. I'm curious about this, do we have more recent studies about neurodivergence/neurotypical? I'd be curious how many people are neurodivergent (to significant degrees).
- 2devnull 3y ago
  It’s trivial. Define it operationally as a collection of conditions (autism + adhd + depression) and plot the trend. Ask an LLM if you can’t do it yourself. You’ll find the definition you choose matters a lot but autism has increased and it’s worth researching that if you never have before!
omnicognate 3y ago
What does neurotypical mean?
- anon25783 3y ago
  "Neurotypical" means "not neurodivergent". In the colloquial usage, a "neurodivergent" person is someone who is autistic or has ADD/ADHD. More generally, it means someone's cognition and behavior differ from the average to a clinically or socially significant degree, which could include e.g. schizophrenia, bipolar, etc. as well as autism or ADD/ADHD.
  - omnicognate 3y ago
    I've heard the term before but not researched the thinking behind it. From Google/Wikipedia I'm getting a confused picture and one I'm not sure I like. According to wikipedia the word has its origins in the idea of "neurodiversity", which it describes in these terms: > Neurodiversity is a framework for understanding human brain function and mental illness. It argues that diversity in human cognition is normal and that some conditions classified as mental disorders are differences and disabilities that are not necessarily pathological. I absolutely agree with all of that, but the word "neurotypical" seems to suggest that there is a large, probably majority group that can all be lumped together and tagged with a single label, separate from those who are "neurodivergent". I don't think I'm comfortable with that at all. Given I've been diagnosed with Tourette's syndrome, I am presumably considered "neurodivergent" in this world view. However I don't think there is some "normal" that I deviate from. Everyone I know has an entirely unique mind, and despite the diagnosis I don't see mine as deviating in a way that puts me in a group distinct from the mainstream. I know people who think in ways that are arguably more idiosyncratic than mine, but who haven't been diagnosed with anything and would presumably be judged "neurotypical". Neurodiversity sounds like a great idea from what little I've just read: stop stigmatising particular "syndromes" and acknowledge the uniqueness and variation present in all human minds. But dividing the world into "neurotypical" and "neurodivergent" people seems like the exact opposite of that. Am I missing something?
    - 3y ago

Jensson 3y ago

Exams not being a good measure has nothing to do with learning styles.

savolai 3y ago
I do not see how it would not? Appears to me that responding to exams is at once an expression and practice of the learning. It’s not as if a test situation is isolated from the overall learning process. If a learner is not oriented towards written or read communication, their exam results may not reflect a written test. If a learner has problems with their practical skills being observed in action, a practical test may not reflect their actual skills or understanding.
- Jensson 3y ago
  > If a learner is not oriented towards written or read communication, their exam results may not reflect a written test Being unable to communicate what you have learned is a serious disorder and not a learning style issue. Learning styles are about how you learn, not how you demonstrate what you learned. But yes, people who are unable to write or read or very bad at writing have problems and tend to get extra support on written exams to make it fair for them, as the exam should test their knowledge and not their ability to write. For example they don't give blind people a zero just because they failed to read the exam.
  - mobiuscog 3y ago
    > Being unable to communicate what you have learned is a serious disorder and not a learning style issue. It's absolutely a learning style issue if those teaching are not able to pick up on the issues with learning if the person being taught is unable to effectively communicate how they are struggling. I spent years trying to explain to teachers why I did not understand some of the concepts they were telling me, and they would often tell me to just 'accept it' and move on. Bad teachers perhaps, but that's all part of the learning and others seemed to be fine... so that is a learning 'style'. Your suggestion of 'serious disorder' is also misplaced.
  - savolai 3y ago
    Please see social constructivist or cognitivist learning theory. Learning and expression of what is learned are part of the same learning process and it is entirely artificial to separate one of them to be part of learning style, and the other as not being part of it. Virtually all learning is also learning how to express the subject being learnt.

oblio 3y ago

> I doubt the research accounts for Neurodivergent folks, assuming it even correctly represents Neurotypical. I'm curious about this, do we have more recent studies about neurodivergence/neurotypical? I'd be curious how many people are neurodivergent (to significant degrees).

2devnull 3y ago
It’s trivial. Define it operationally as a collection of conditions (autism + adhd + depression) and plot the trend. Ask an LLM if you can’t do it yourself. You’ll find the definition you choose matters a lot but autism has increased and it’s worth researching that if you never have before!

omnicognate 3y ago

What does neurotypical mean?

anon25783 3y ago
"Neurotypical" means "not neurodivergent". In the colloquial usage, a "neurodivergent" person is someone who is autistic or has ADD/ADHD. More generally, it means someone's cognition and behavior differ from the average to a clinically or socially significant degree, which could include e.g. schizophrenia, bipolar, etc. as well as autism or ADD/ADHD.
- omnicognate 3y ago
  I've heard the term before but not researched the thinking behind it. From Google/Wikipedia I'm getting a confused picture and one I'm not sure I like. According to wikipedia the word has its origins in the idea of "neurodiversity", which it describes in these terms: > Neurodiversity is a framework for understanding human brain function and mental illness. It argues that diversity in human cognition is normal and that some conditions classified as mental disorders are differences and disabilities that are not necessarily pathological. I absolutely agree with all of that, but the word "neurotypical" seems to suggest that there is a large, probably majority group that can all be lumped together and tagged with a single label, separate from those who are "neurodivergent". I don't think I'm comfortable with that at all. Given I've been diagnosed with Tourette's syndrome, I am presumably considered "neurodivergent" in this world view. However I don't think there is some "normal" that I deviate from. Everyone I know has an entirely unique mind, and despite the diagnosis I don't see mine as deviating in a way that puts me in a group distinct from the mainstream. I know people who think in ways that are arguably more idiosyncratic than mine, but who haven't been diagnosed with anything and would presumably be judged "neurotypical". Neurodiversity sounds like a great idea from what little I've just read: stop stigmatising particular "syndromes" and acknowledge the uniqueness and variation present in all human minds. But dividing the world into "neurotypical" and "neurodivergent" people seems like the exact opposite of that. Am I missing something?
  - 3y ago