The Myth of 'Learning Styles' • Hacker News Board

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#11

Post by innocentoldguy » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 5:47 PM UTC

Personally, I've never put much stock in the "style of learner" mantra. I can learn anything I want to via whatever means I wish. For instance, I can read sheet music and I can learn to play songs by ear.

Having said that, I definitely do have my preferences for learning, and sometimes I decide not to learn something simply because it isn't in a format I'm interested in ingesting at the moment. In nearly every case, it isn't as much about the format, per se, as the time it requires. I don't like spending a lot of time on something if I don't have to. So, if I know I can learn a song in half the time playing it by ear vs. reading sheet music, and all I currently have available to me is sheet music, I'll wait until later to learn the song; not because I can't learn it via sheet music, but because the motivation just isn't there with that particular format due to the time I perceive it will take.

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#12

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 5:48 PM UTC

VyseofArcadia wrote: post #3

If I had a nickel every time a student came up to me and said, "I'm an x learner and your class is very y," I'd have a lot of nickels. Every single time what they really mean is, "I'm doing terrible in your class, and even though it's probably my attitude or study habits or preparedness, I'm going to blame you."

[deleted]

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#13

Post by leetcrew » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

VyseofArcadia wrote: post #3

If I had a nickel every time a student came up to me and said, "I'm an x learner and your class is very y," I'd have a lot of nickels. Every single time what they really mean is, "I'm doing terrible in your class, and even though it's probably my attitude or study habits or preparedness, I'm going to blame you."

i do actually learn best by reading. if the professor produces a set of authoritative notes for the class, i will get an A on every exam. as long as the professor makes it clear exactly what sections of the text are important, i will learn everything and still get an A every time.

if the professor says important stuff during lecture that cannot be read somewhere, i have no chance of retaining that information.

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#14

Post by pphysch » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

VyseofArcadia wrote: post #3

If I had a nickel every time a student came up to me and said, "I'm an x learner and your class is very y," I'd have a lot of nickels. Every single time what they really mean is, "I'm doing terrible in your class, and even though it's probably my attitude or study habits or preparedness, I'm going to blame you."

Likewise, it's not a poor visualization because I/you are not a visual learner, it's a poor visualization because it's a poor visualization.

There's so much depth to presentation and feedback as broad concepts, and it's a real shame when improvement is stifled in favor of reductionist knee-jerk reactions like "This just isn't my style".

I'm sure there are a lot of parallels with "gamification" in learning/workplace environments.

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#15

Post by roywiggins » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 5:53 PM UTC

iamcasen wrote: post #9

This article really just seems to be mincing words and debating what "style" means. The fact remains: some methods of presenting information is worse than others. Some students will think they hate the subject material, but really what they hate is the teacher's relationship to the subject material. The teacher understands a subject a certain way, and that way might not make sense to a student. A different teacher wi…

The myth is that everyone has a learning style, that style can be summed up as one of a few categories, the style never changes, and will be stable year to year, and once you have identified what the style is with a questionnaire, you can tailor teaching to it to target particular students.

Once you weaken all those things, the predictive value of the theory is pretty well nil.

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#16

Post by rafiki6 » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 5:54 PM UTC

iamcasen wrote: post #9

This article really just seems to be mincing words and debating what "style" means. The fact remains: some methods of presenting information is worse than others. Some students will think they hate the subject material, but really what they hate is the teacher's relationship to the subject material. The teacher understands a subject a certain way, and that way might not make sense to a student. A different teacher wi…

In general, I'm of the opinion the current day style of teaching (someone supposed "expert" stands there and tells you stuff) is inefficient and a terrible way to teach anything. The best way to learn any concept, and I mean ANY concept is to see it in an application or tangible example. Without fail, that is how people will learn and retain information. That's why the only way to become proficient at math is to practice problems. The same concept applies in other fields. Receiving and relaying information are actually two quite separate skills. That's why the best way to know if you know a subject is to attempt to teach it yourself. Your knowledge gap should become immediately apparent. https://lifehacker.com/the-science-behind-how-we-learn-new-s...

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#17

Post by innocentoldguy » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 5:58 PM UTC

npudar wrote: post #4

Around 20 years ago, I met Dawna Markova at a conference where she spoke about the work she had done in learning styles. My recollection is that the Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic forms was not about how you "learn", but rather on how you stay "focused". Researchers found that there were three brianwave patterns that corresponded to your level of focus. For me, Visual stimuli kept me focused. Auditory stimuli pract…

I agree with your comment on being "focused." In analyzing my own learning preferences, I found it is much easier for me to stay focused if I can speed my way through something. Speed is the key for me, not the format.

For example, if I have the choice to learn the same information via a video or book, I'd opt for the book because I know I can read a lot quicker than the person in the video is going to speak. This helps me to stay focused. On the other hand, if I can speed the video up to 4 or 5 times its normal rate, I would opt for that over the printed page because I can listen faster than I can read. For me, it isn't the format as much as the speed at which I can complete my learning that is important.

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#18

Post by djsumdog » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 6:00 PM UTC

VyseofArcadia wrote: post #3

If I had a nickel every time a student came up to me and said, "I'm an x learner and your class is very y," I'd have a lot of nickels. Every single time what they really mean is, "I'm doing terrible in your class, and even though it's probably my attitude or study habits or preparedness, I'm going to blame you."

It makes it easier if it's a learning style you enjoy. If a professor is just going to read from a book all day, I'm honestly going to have a bad time. I came to this class for you to convey the concept; hence why I'm paying for said class.

I had a professor who everyone seemed to love, but I did terribly in his class and just hated going. He'd constantly go off on tangents and every day he'd give us a totally illegible, handwritten page of notes. I never did well in his classes. Someone told me, "Well you rarely read the text books right; you just always go to class and take notes? Maybe you're not a book learner and people who like x are book learners?"

No, people who like his class put up with all his idiocy and find it cutsie pootsie. I took architecture classes in grad school that went over the exact same material (op codes and VLIW) and the professor was just better at explaining things. I was like, "Oh...this makes sense .."

It wasn't the teaching style, that other professor was just terrible at explaining these concepts (and really even understanding them).

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#19

Post by djsumdog » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 6:14 PM UTC

npudar wrote: post #4

Around 20 years ago, I met Dawna Markova at a conference where she spoke about the work she had done in learning styles. My recollection is that the Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic forms was not about how you "learn", but rather on how you stay "focused". Researchers found that there were three brianwave patterns that corresponded to your level of focus. For me, Visual stimuli kept me focused. Auditory stimuli pract…

I've never even really considered the different learning styles; maybe because I'm not an educator (other than TAing, tutoring in grad school, etc .. stuff you kinda figure out as you go based on how people taught you).

I've never even though that people used these styles to try and reach everyone as the article suggests. I thought it was always more of a "What will keep me engaged/focused."

Re: The Myth of 'Learning Styles'

#20

Post by unit91 » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 6:27 PM UTC

So glad to see this article. From time to time, my wife will ask me "how do I get the kids to learn X?" My answer is always the same: "Forget about the 'learning styles'. Drill baby, drill!"