Learning Styles Theory Versus Sustained Hard Work
Steve Hargadon, Weblog, January 8, 2010.


Again with the mantra against learning styles - but what about the evidence that they exist (pictured)? The dilemma posed in Hargadon's title is a load of hogwash - and as nearly as I can tell, simply a fancy way to blame students for all their failings (very handy when statistics show it is the poor and disadvantaged who are mostly failing). But oh! If they just worked harder (their teachers too! let's make them non-union) then everything would be fine. Tom Hoffman writes, "I don't actually have a point about learning styles, except to say that indeed, the hackneyed version that trickles down through professional development lectures to mandated lesson plan requirements is indeed hackneyed. But the truth is out there, and it is subtle and complex." True. But I do have a point, and it's that this anti-learning styles campaign is political, not scientific. (Hits Today: 0 Total: 843) [Direct Link] [Tags: Learning Styles]

Share |

Comments

Re: Learning Styles Theory Versus Sustained Hard Work

Frank Lowney, January 10, 2010

If been following the Learning Styles discussion since the 70s when I was a 'true believer' to the present anti-thesis. Currently, I find both positions highly oversimplified and, therefore, flawed.

Another concept that overlays this debate is whether schools should strive toward compensatory education (adjusting the educational experience to the preferred learning styles of the learner in order that they may learn 'as much or almost as much' as their advantaged peers) OR whether schools should strive toward expanding and building upon those preferred but limiting learning styles to produce a broader and more effective repertoire of learning styles.

The latter tactic is aimed at empowering learners and this makes a lot of people nervous because, while students are learning how to be better learners, they are not learning as much "stuff" as they would in a compensatory program that "breaks down" and "simplifies" the stuff to be learnt so that preferred but weak learning styles (tactics) are rendered more usable.

Thus, my problem with some learning styles (LS) advocates is that they see LS as fixed and immutable, something that has to be adjusted to. When that view is added to a compensatory education program, we see a system that can only perpetuate the basic problem of not having a robust set of learning skills. Implicit in that approach is the notion that these learners will never be able to learn better than they do now and I reject that idea.
[Comment] [Permalink] [Previous][Next]

Comment



Title
Your comment:
Enter email to receive replies:

Your comments always remain your property, but in posting them here you agree to license under the same terms as this site (CC By-NC-SA). If your comment is offensive it will be deleted.

Automated Spam-checking is in effect. If you are a registered user you may submit links and other HTML. Anonymous users cannot post links and will have their content screened - certain words are prohibited and your comment will be analyzed to make sure it makes sense.