Do you believe in learning styles? If you answered “Yes”, you’re not alone. Things aren’t always as they appear to be, and sometimes it’s challenging to take a critical eye to well prolonged myths about learning that are perceived as facts. This blog will help shed light on what learning is, dispel a common learning myth, and help you understand learning according to evidence-based learning theories.

My Background

Welcome! My name is Tom and I’m a learning designer with interest in evidence-based learning. If I look back on the history of various subject matters, it’s always interesting to see the progress made by the human species due to scientific research. Finding evidence to construct facts have helped shape many parts of our existence. The way humans learn is widely studied and the education field continues to evolve. Therefore, it’s important to ensure the instructional methods we create are being done so using evidence-based learning theories to maximize effectiveness.  

What Is Learning?

Before we dive into a discussion regarding learning myths, learning theories and their educational application, it’s beneficial that we define learning.

Learning is a process that leads to change resulting from experience and potentially increases future learning performance (Lovett et al., 2023). Learning can occur from learners’ performances or products and comprises a change in knowledge, behaviors, beliefs, and attitudes, which occurs over time and has a long-term effect on the way learners think and act. Additionally, learning results from how learners understand and react to what they have experienced.

Furthermore, Alexander et al. (2009) list the following nine principles that comprise learning:

1. Learning is change
2. Learning is inevitable, essential, and ubiquitous
3. Learning can be resisted
4. Learning may be disadvantageous
5. Learning can be tacti and incidental as well as conscious and intentional
6. Learning is framed by our humanness
7. Learning refers to both a process and a product
8. Learning is different at different points in time
9. Learning is interactional

Debunking a Common Myth

Do learners truly know what’s best for themselves?

I am sure at one time or another you may have heard someone say that the phrase, “learning style”, referring to their personal style in which they learn best. For example, some individuals may prefer auditory learning, while other prefer visual learning. The idea of having learning styles seems particularly appealing. This is because if someone has a style of learning that they like best, it may seem logical that this may prove to enhance their learning after receiving instruction according to their learning style. Programs, workshops, and additional efforts have been made over the years to teach instructors how to design educational interventions that cater to various learning styles. Thankfully, this common myth of learning styles has been debunked, and we’ll discuss why below.

There are three central problems regarding learning styles research (Kirschner & van Merrienboer, 2013). First, too many individuals don’t fit into any one style. With the cognition between people being subtle, it is likely that a majority of learners do fit into a specific learning style group. Second, the information that is used to determine and categorize individuals into learning styles is insufficient. Learning style measures are often self-reported by individuals, which poses reliability concerns, especially when people may not be able to report and/or may not be willing to state the learning styles they use to learn (Kirschner & van Merrienboer, 2013). Furthermore, this brings up validity concerns of the measurement of learning styles because the learning preference that individuals is not often what’s optimal for them. The final issue with learning styles research is that there are far too many reported learning styles. So much so that there would be more learning style combinations than people living on earth (Kirschner & van Merrienboer, 2013). With the many learning styles in existence, the amount in which learners differ from one another, it isn’t plausible to account for the wide variance when creating and implementing instruction.

Additionally, although learners may have a preferred learning style, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s the most effective way to learn. Learners who reported a specific learning style don’t typically show educational benefit from experiencing that style (Kirschner & van Merrienboer, 2013). To demonstrate this point, let’s use a comparison with health and well-being. If we asked adults if they prefer to partake in exercise or relax on the couch after a long day at work, it is highly likely the preferred option would be the latter. We know that exercise can provide benefits in health and well-being. In this scenario, an individual may prefer to relax on the couch, but that wouldn’t be a permissible reason to recommend it just because they prefer it, especially because it doesn’t benefit their health. The same can be said for accommodating learning styles in instructional methods knowing that it doesn’t provide optimal learning results.

Kirschner (2017) mentions four conclusions regarding learning styles and the research surrounding the myth after investigating the controversial topic. These conclusions are as follows:

1. The premise that there are learners with different learning styles and that they should receive instruction using different instructional methods that match those styles is not a ‘proven’ fact, but rather a belief which is backed up by precious little, if any, scientific evidence.

2. There are a lot of very fundamental problems regarding measuring learning styles.

3. The theoretical basis for the assumed interactions between learning styles and instructional methods is very thin.

4. Significant empirical evidence for the learning-styles hypothesis is almost non-existent.

Evidence-Based Teaching Practices

By using and implementing evidence-based practices into our instruction, we can make informed decisions regarding our instructional methods, as well as provide learners with enhanced learning experiences. With the ever-evolving research in education, it’s critical that we remain updated on evidence-based practices, so we can continue to hone teaching methods that improve learning outcomes. In this manner, we can move away from practices based on subjectivity and focus on reliable, effective, objective practices based on scientific research. This shift can help advance the field of education for all involved. In the following section below, we’ll discuss some examples that help illustrate this point.

Social Cognitive Theory Concepts/Principles

Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) underlines the continuous interaction between individuals, their behavior, and their environments. Social Cognitive Theory is comprised of a variety of ideas, concepts, and sub-processes into a framework to understand human functioning (Denler et al., 2010). Denler et al. (2010) describes five principles of SCT, which include observational learning/modeling, outcome expectations, perceived self-efficacy, goal setting, and self-regulation. Keep in mind, the SCT principles can intertwine, meaning they can affect one another.

1. Observational Learning/Modeling: Observational learning, also known as observation modeling, is a core SCT idea that refers to individuals learn via observation of a behavior or skill in the environment performed by a model (e.g., teacher, classmate). This is said to be dependent on four associated processes consisting of attention, retention, production, and motivation (Denler et al., 2010).

2. Outcome Expectations: Outcome expectations reflect a person’s individual beliefs about the consequences that would likely occur if specific behaviors were to be performed. This is formed via personal past experiences and through observations of others, and they help determine which behaviors and actions a person decides to make (or not make).

3. Perceived Self-Efficacy: Self-efficacy is an individual’s belief regarding whether or not they can be successful at a specific task. Learners who possess great self-efficacy tend to be more confident in their abilities to be successful than those with lower self-efficacy (Denler et al., 2010). Self-efficacy is also a product of a person’s past experiences and observations.

4. Goal Setting: Goals encompass an individual’s envisionment of anticipated, desired, or preferred outcomes. In other words, people not only learn, but they think about the future, the outcomes they would like to experience, and create plans of action to get themselves there.

5. Self-Regulation: Self-regulation is dependent on goal setting because learners manage their thoughts and actions to achieve desired outcomes from learning.

It should be made clear that the above is not an exhaustive list of learning theories and principles, but rather a look inside of one of many evidence-based practices that exist that can help us understand learning and how to improve our instructional practices to advance education.

Conclusion

In summary, strong evidence doesn’t exist to support learning styles, and the current support in its favor is anecdotal (Kirschner, 2017). Even with this being the case, the learning styles myth has perpetuated for many decades. As the saying goes, old habits die hard and the same can be said for learning myths. If those in the education field lean on evidence-based practices and learning principles to design instruction, myths like these can be squashed and learners will prosper through improved learning experiences. So, don’t be afraid to maintain a healthy dose of curiosity and constructive skepticism when coming across well-known statements that are often passed along as evidence-based facts, and harness the power of designing instruction using evidence-based teaching practices.       

References

Alexander, Schallert & Reynolds (2009). What is learning anyway? A Topographical Perspective Considered. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 176-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903029006

Denler, H., Wolters, C. & Benzon, M. (2010). Social Cognitive Theory. In Anderman, E. M. & Anderman, L. H. (Eds.), Psychology of classroom learning: An encyclopedia. The Gale Group, Inc.

Kirschner, P. A. (2017). Stop propagating the learning styles myth. Computers & Education, 106, 166-171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.12.006

Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.804395

Lovett, M. C., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Ambrose, S. A., & Norman, M. K. (2023). How learning works: 8 research-based principles for smart teaching (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.