Learning Styles (Again?)

I often get requests through the professional organizations of which I am a member to participate in research studies being conducted by colleagues and graduate students. I'm happy to do this, if the topic of the study is germane to my experience, education, or context. It's interesting to see what other people in my field (EdTech) are working on, the kinds of questions they are asking, and the connections they are making. It's also a good way to keep up with developments in the field.

Today I participated in a study about preparation for online teaching. I've been part of several studies in this area in the past; with the continuing growth of online education, there is a lot of ongoing research here. What caught my eye was this item on the survey:

A screen-grab from the survey I was taking...

I was not sure how to respond to this one. Here's why:

Reconsidering Learning Styles in Light of Research

Ah, Learning Styles...

This is one of those topics I have to approach with grace and truth, because there was a significant chunk of my own teaching practice in K-12 where I emphasized the idea that different students learn differently, and that we should tailor our teaching based on these learning styles.

And appealing as that idea is...the research just doesn't bear it out.

Are Your Students Olfactory Learners?

I recently read this piece: Parents of Nasal Learners Demand Odor-Based Curriculum. It's a compelling piece of journalism! (It is from The Onion, so take it for what it is, okay?) :-)

This has me thinking about learning styles again. The basic idea: because every student is unique, they all have unique learning styles, and if teachers tailor their teaching to use students strongest styles, in theory, they should learn more.

Image by eltpics [CC BY-NC 2.0]

Is nasal learning a thing? Should we strive to make our classrooms a space welcoming to olfactory learners? For students who are strongly in tune with the odorous cues in the classroom, shouldn't we capitalize on these strengths? What are the repercussions of not teaching a child through his or her strongest learning style? Would such a child be able to learn anything at all in the classroom??

Teach the Way They Learn

My friend, Grace, sent me a message the other day via Facebook. It was an image she had seen online, and she said it reminded her of me. (I was honored by this--I had the privilege of teaching Grace's kids back at the beginning of my career when I was young and foolish and impetuous. I'm thankful I didn't do too much damage.) The image is one of Michael J. Fox with a great quote on it. I think the quote is misattributed though; for all my searching, I believe it actually belongs to Ignacio Estrada. I decided to make my own version...

And, honestly...I'm grateful that Grace saw this quote and thought of me. This has been my goal, my approach throughout my teaching practice.

I'm not trying to brag, and I'd be lying if I said I have done this perfectly. But I think teachers could take this message to heart:

School is not really about teaching. 

School is about learning.

If a child can't learn the way we teach...maybe we're doing it wrong.

I'm not arguing here for a student-centered classroom. I'm arguing for a learning-centered classroom.

This isn't easy. If we are starting from a strongly teacher-centered teaching practice, I don't think we can't just turn a switch and make a change. (At least, I don't think I can.) I think that modifying our teaching from teacher-centered to learning-centered will take concentrated effort, a daily commitment to learning. And this will probably mean opening ourselves up to the fact that we--the teachers--need to keep learning as well!

Maybe it's time to start taking a long, hard look at what we are doing as teachers. I challenge you to reflect with me on this: 

"Am I structuring my teaching practice 

in a way that is convenient for me, the teacher? 

Or am I practicing my craft in such a way 

that I focus on learning?"

Multiple Intelligences are Not Learning Styles

Image from Wikimedia Commons [CC BY 2.5]

Last week I wrote some of my thoughts about learning styles--and how they probably don't actually exist. I was pretty stunned when I originally read the research about this, but as I'm thinking more and more about it, I'm finding myself in agreement.

But my next question is about Howard Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences, which I have closely equated to learning styles, in practice at least, and when I'm honest, in my thinking as well.

Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences, in a nutshell, expresses that intelligence is not a unitary trait; that is, intelligence is not something you have or don't have. Traditionally, this is how intelligence was described: either you are intelligent (you smartypants, you) or you are unintelligent (hey, dummy!) (That's pretty nasty, isn't it? Sorry.)

Wait...Learning Styles Don't Exist?

Image by Ken Whytock CC BY-NC 2.0

Have you heard statements like the one on the above graphic before? If you are a teacher--and even if you aren't--I'm guessing you've heard this argument. Because it's pretty clear that people learn in different ways, right? I mean, some kids learn best by seeing it (visual learners) while others learn better by hearing it (auditory learners) and still others learn best by doing it (kinesthetic learners.)

I've basically believed that idea and taken it as a fact into my teaching practice for...pretty much my entire teaching career.