Evidence-Based Higher Education – Is the Learning Styles ‘Myth’ Important?

Abstract

The basic idea behind the use of ‘Learning Styles’ is that learners can be categorized into one or more ‘styles’ (e.g., Visual, Auditory, Converger) and that teaching students according to their style will result in improved learning. This idea has been repeatedly tested and there is currently no evidence to support it. Despite this, belief in the use of Learning Styles appears to be widespread amongst schoolteachers and persists in the research literature. This mismatch between evidence and practice has provoked controversy, and some have labeled Learning Styles a ‘myth.’ In this study, we used a survey of academics in UK Higher Education (n = 114) to try and go beyond the controversy by quantifying belief and, crucially, actual use of Learning Styles. We also attempted to understand how academics view the potential harms associated with the use of Learning Styles. We found that general belief in the use of Learning Styles was high (58%), but lower than in similar previous studies, continuing an overall downward trend in recent years. Critically the percentage of respondents who reported actually using Learning Styles (33%) was much lower than those who reported believing in their use. Far more reported using a number of techniques that are demonstrably evidence-based. Academics agreed with all the posited weaknesses and harms of Learning Styles theory, agreeing most strongly that the basic theory of Learning Styles is conceptually flawed. However, a substantial number of participants (32%) stated that they would continue to use Learning Styles despite being presented with the lack of an evidence base to support them, suggesting that ‘debunking’ Learning Styles may not be effective. We argue that the interests of all may be better served by promoting evidence-based approaches to Higher Education.

Enhancing the Efficiency of Massive Online Learning by Integrating Intelligent Analysis into MOOCs with an Application to Education of Sustainability

“…Students' learning styles can be determined in many different ways [20].But other scientists state that there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning styles assessments into general educational practice [21], thus this mismatch between practice and evidence has provoked controversy, and some have labeled Learning Styles a 'myth' [22]. However, all these studies or discussion were based on experiments and evidence in traditional classroom, which means, learning style measurement or tailoring teaching to a student's preferred style are low cost-effective.…”

Neuromyths and Their Origin Among Teachers in Quebec

“…However, more empirical data would be necessary to confirm this hypothesis. The second hypothesis is that these results may reflect an international decrease in the belief in neuromyths among teachers (Newton & Miah, ). As a matter of fact, a decrease in the prevalence of the Learning Styles myth in the United Kingdom seems to have occured between 2012 and 2017 (see Dekker et al, ; Newton & Miah, ; Simmonds, ).…”

“…The second hypothesis is that these results may reflect an international decrease in the belief in neuromyths among teachers (Newton & Miah, ). As a matter of fact, a decrease in the prevalence of the Learning Styles myth in the United Kingdom seems to have occured between 2012 and 2017 (see Dekker et al, ; Newton & Miah, ; Simmonds, ). This decrease may be due to efforts to improve the evidence‐based link between neuroscience and education in the United Kingdom in recent years (e.g., Simmonds, ).…”

Myths and social structure: The unbearable necessity of mythology in medical education

“…As scientists, physicians are trained to “view disease in a similar way to other natural phenomena” and as a result are oriented towards evidence in hierarchical terms in which “that which is most universal in its application or most general in its import, is the most significant” . The labelling of various medical theories, claims, practices or healing traditions as “myths” functions as a marker of senescence and progress in medical education . In the Kuhnian sense, myth busting is a natural operation of knowledge‐generating fields, whereby new scientific discoveries produce enough disjuncture in the current way of thinking to necessitate a paradigm shift to maintain the function of the field and to rid it of erroneous former explanations.…”