Though Debunked, Idea of Teaching to Learning Styles Endures

The appeal of a tool that offers self-knowledge is immense,hence the continued popularity of astrology and personality tests, for example.The enduring appeal of teaching to learning styles—the idea that teaching toeach learner’s individual, innate learning style is the key to engaging thatlearner and boosting his or her success—is similar. If only evidence supported thispremise!

In TheTruth about Teaching to Learning Styles and What to Do Instead,eLearning Guild research director Jane Bozarth explains that the idea ofteaching to learning styles remains attractive for at least three reasons:

• It purports to offer a way to personalizelearning, which in turn will boost engagement and learner success; the promiseof an easy way to improve results may be irresistible to many stakeholders whopay for training and seek a way to improve the bottom line.
• It plays to everyone’s ego by suggesting thatall learners are equally able to achieve, so long as their learning style isaccommodated; this appeals to both learners and instructors.
• It offers low performers an excuse: the materialwas not presented in a format appropriate for their learning style; this mayappeal to learners who are frustrated by their lack of progress.

To many, the idea of an immutable type, whether apersonality type or a learning style, is comforting. Speakingabout the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, an early and well-knownpersonality test, Merve Emre, author of The Personality Brokers, said, “Onthe one hand, believing that there is something innate or essential about whoyou are means that you don’t have to apologize for who you are—that just is who you are.” She continued, “On the other hand, Ithink it can make you feel like you don’t have to take responsibility forchanging.” Both of these statements could apply to beliefs about innatelearning styles, offering learners a way to justify their preferences—and theirfailures.

An unnecessary crutch

Bozarth cites a plethora of academic literature thatanalyzes the appeal of learning styles while also presenting a mountain ofevidence that teaching to learning styles does not work. One nugget ofparticular note to eLearning developers and other stakeholders suggests thatpart of the appeal is that teaching to learning styles offers a justificationfor using the emerging technology that makes it easy for L&D professionalsto deliver eLearning in a variety of modes and media.

The thing is, L&D doesn’t need to lean on the learningstyles crutch to justifymultimodal eLearning. Plenty of research already shows that offeringcontent in multiple formats improves accessibility—both physicalaccess for learners with disabilities and access in terms of betterunderstanding and retention of the material. It can increase engagement andretention of material as well.

The “multimedia effect,” tested by numerous researchers,shows that learners benefit from having content in both visual andverbal or text formats, regardless of whether they identify as verbal learnersor visual learners—or any other type of learner. And creating multimodaleLearning fulfills the principles of Universal Design forLearning: Present information and content in different ways. Offerlearners different ways to demonstrate their knowledge. And provide multiplemeans of engaging learners.

Providing choices acknowledges that learners have differentpreferences and skills. It differs from teaching to learning styles in that itdoesn’t pigeonhole each learner as a single specific type; it allows for flexibilityand variety. Learners’preferences and choices might change depending on the topic of theeLearning, the circumstances where they need to consume or apply it, or otherfactors. Some learners may consume the same content in multiple formats,feeling that they have mastered it—and demonstrating competence—only afterreviewing two or three eLearning tools that present the information indifferent ways. Labeling learners and teaching to supposedly fixed “types” oflearners denies both learners and instructors the possibility of discoveringcontent in new and innovative ways, exercising their preferences—and fulfillingtheir true potential.