Different Learning Styles? Not Proven.

Well, the Association for Psychological Science now says that learning styles are all a bunch of hooey.  They have reviewed all recognized studies that claim that a “visual learner” or an “auditory learner” exists, and have concluded that those studies “have not used the type of randomized research designs that would make their findings credible.”  That being said, it is still entirely possible that “learning styles” actually do exist, but basically what APS has declared is that nobody has ever sufficiently proven it.

via mommymythbuster.wordpress.com

Interesting. Yet another parenting theory we just accept as true without sufficient proof.

Posted via Posterous

This entry was posted in From Posterous. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://www.knowhr.com/blog Frank

    Vinnie, I read that study. What they said was that there haven’t been validating studies to prove it works. That’s not the same as saying it doesn’t work. They present a logical phallacy…just because something isn’t proven doesn’t make it so. It’s kind of the argument that people make against gravity…even though they fall down, they still say gravity doesn’t exist because there haven’t been definitive studies. Plus, I think authors like this have a political agenda that they don’t reveal. They define what’s “valid,” then say things don’t fit.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com Vinny

    I chose my words a little more carefully than the story I got my link from, if you noticed. I’m not saying it does or doesn’t matter, just that there’s no proof that it does yet. I think it’s pretty obvious that people do learn things differently which is why the fact that it hasn’t been proven in a study surprised me.

  • http://www.knowhr.com/blog Frank

    Dude, you are always careful and thoughtful. Yeah…I mean, I don’t need double blind studies to know that people learn differently. Look at school…one-third of people do pretty well. For the most part it’s because they are good readers. They learn that way.

    The funny thing about that study is that it has a policy element to it. It’s saying, “It’s not proven, therefore it shouldn’t be done.” That’s my rub.