Last month I read the delightful book by Bill Bryson: A Walk in the Woods. In there he recalled the Scopes Trial of 1925, where in Tennessee the teaching of evolution was outlawed, and where in 1967 that ruling was reaffirmed. Bryson’s comment was that Tennesseans may not be descended from apes, but are in danger of being overtaken by them. When I worked at CSU Fullerton during the 1990s, I attended a talk given there by RHC Dean Voiza Arnold, whose academic background was English. Her topic was “Learning Styles.” She went on for about an hour, then took questions. I was sitting next to a psychology professor, a pleasant man who asked no questions of the speaker, and I walked out with him. This full time tenured professor had a doctorate from a major research university in the Midwest, and he taught several courses on Learning at CSU.
I asked him if he had learned anything about “learning styles” in his doctoral work.
He said no.
I asked him if that topic appeared in any of the textbooks from which he taught learning at the university.
He said no.
I asked him if he subscribed to and read the journals Verbal Learning and Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance or other APA psychological journals on learning. He said he did. I asked him if the topic of “learning styles” appeared in any of those journals or ever had.
He said no.
I asked him why he had not voiced some objection during the presentation on “Learning Styles.”
He replied “Some times it is just better to keep your mouth shut.”
When I got hired, my interview with the President of RHC was all about Learning Styles. Due to my interest in Behavioral Economics, I knew a little about this topic but I managed to keep my mouth shut! Tenure opened up my mouth again!
ReplyDeleteYou should write about Skinner and consequences.
"Learning styles" are just another way to make teachers adapt to students, rather than seeing it as the way students focus, adapt to learning, and take responsiblity for their education and preparation for the real world (can you imagine telling your boss you can only learn a job a certain way because that's your learning style?). While I use a variety of methods to get information across to prevent boring lectures, I find that the student who reads, does their projects, and pays attention in class ends up learning and doing well. The same student who does well in my class will do well in your class no matter if we teach different subjects in different ways--they'll do the work to learn the topic. The student who doesn't do well will blame the teacher for not teaching to them but won't take responsibility for not doing their work. I think this whole concept of "learning styles" should be revisited as "student study habits and focus styles".
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. If there is any validity - no, not validity: value - If there is any value to typologies at all, such as the VAK/VARK, Multiple Intelligences, or even the Myers Briggs, it can only be to help people think clearly about their strengths so they can exploit them better and their weaknesses so that they can become more proactive about compensating for them. The onus for action - if indeed any is required - MUST remain with the student whose style/type is being defined, not with the teachers who are probably already providing "multi-modal" input in the interest of variety. (BTW - variety in the classroom actually does create a statistically significant learning effect, whereas catering to of the styles/typologies categories of any stripe does not.)
ReplyDelete