Website Cookies

We use cookies to make your experience better. Learn more on how here


Are Learning Styles a Myth?

You’ve probably come across various versions of learning styles, with the most familiar being the classification into auditory, visual, and kinaesthetic learners. Auditory learners are believed to learn best by listening, visual learners by seeing, and kinaesthetic learners by doing or engaging in physical activities.

However, the disappointing news is that if you believe in learning styles, you may well be mistaken. But don’t worry, it’s a common misconception. The belief in learning styles is widespread and sounds logical, but when scrutinised, learning styles don’t hold up. Surveys show that over 90% of people, including students and teachers, believe in learning styles, and many teachers are trained to cater to these supposed styles in their classrooms.

Despite this widespread belief, research consistently shows that learning styles do not exist. People may have preferences for how they like to learn or study, but these preferences don’t enhance learning when tested experimentally. Various studies have demonstrated that tailoring teaching methods to learning styles doesn’t improve learning outcomes.

One typical experimental design involves teaching a group of people with different learning styles using various methods and then testing their recall. For example, one group might be shown a list of words, another group might see images of those words, and a third group might hear the words spoken. If learning styles were real, visual learners would recall more words from seeing them, and auditory learners would recall more from hearing them. However, studies show that recall is the same regardless of how the material is presented.

This finding has been replicated across many contexts and populations, and meta-analyses of research spanning 40 years consistently find no evidence that matching teaching methods to learning styles makes any difference.

Most of what we learn in the classroom is stored in terms of meaning, not tied to a particular sense or sensory mode. While some people may have better visual or auditory memories, this doesn’t translate to better learning of conceptual material typically taught in classrooms. Effective learning involves organising information in meaningful ways, making connections to personal experiences, and applying what we learn across different contexts.

Research from the 1970s on chess players’ abilities to recall game positions illustrates this well. Experts, unlike novices, can remember almost all pieces on a board because the arrangement is meaningful to them. When shown a randomly arranged board, experts lose their advantage, demonstrating that memory is tied to meaning rather than sensory mode.

The best way to teach or learn something depends on the content itself, not on assumed learning styles. For example, to learn what different songbirds look like, visual observation is key for everyone. To learn what they sound like, listening is essential. Effective teaching often involves multiple senses, making the experience more meaningful.

The persistence of the learning styles myth can be attributed to its widespread acceptance, its appeal, and confirmation bias. Just because many people believe something doesn’t make it true. Throughout history, widely held beliefs, such as the Earth being the centre of the universe or ice cream causing polio, have been debunked by scientific evidence.

Believing in learning styles wastes valuable educational resources. Teachers already face the challenging task of accommodating diverse student needs. The myth of learning styles adds unnecessary complexity. Moreover, labelling students with specific learning styles can be harmful, leading to reduced effort and engagement when teaching methods don’t match their perceived style.

Understanding that learning styles don’t exist should be liberating. It means we all have the potential to learn in various ways. It’s essential to be willing to challenge our beliefs, consider different perspectives, and seek unbiased evidence.

It’s crucial to move beyond the myth of learning styles and focus on research-supported strategies that truly enhance learning. Embracing critical self-reflection and being open to new ideas will lead to more effective education for everyone.

The Danger of a Single Champion: How to De-risk your Opportunities

Securing a single champion in your opportunities might initially feel like a win. However, relying on just one person within an organisation to drive your deal forward carries risk. This risk is not limited to new business opportunities; even in existing customer accounts or renewal opportunities, having a single champion is a major red flag....

Counterintuitive Sales Advice

I began my career at a major multinational publishing house called Reed Business Information. I was incredibly fortunate that the company invested heavily in employee training. In fact, during my first four weeks on the job, all we did was train. This initial training period was intensive and comprehensive. At the end of our induction,...

Is Sales Enablement Getting in the Way of Selling?

There’s a noticeable trend within organisations today: the overcomplication of sales enablement. While the intention behind sales enablement is to help sales teams this often becomes an unnecessary distraction. As the adage goes; the road to hell is paved with good intention – pardon the dramatics. In the quest for perfection, many enablement strategies lose...
Start a conversation

Get help to improve your sales team’s performance

Speak directly with Raff and Aaron by completing the following form.

This website is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.