The theory of learning styles
We speak of learning styles when a difference between groups of individuals allows the
development of distinct learning methods, each benefiting the corresponding group. The theory of
learning styles is based on the idea that some students are "visual", others "auditory" and still
others "kinesthetic". These students learn best when lessons are presented to them according to
their profiles (respectively, in graphic, auditory or tactile form). Memorization and comprehension
would be better when the learning modality used corresponds to the student's preferred modality.
The palette is wide since the learning styles go beyond the visual / auditory / kinesthetic triptych
[ CITATION Cof04 \l 2058 ] listed 71 variations by combining visual, auditory or kinesthetic; right
brain or left brain; analytical or synthetic; rational or emotional; cerebral or intuitive. But why is
this theory still popular if there is enough evidence to prove it wrong? A main factor contributes to
the popularity of the theory of learning styles (with the general public, parents and teachers)
which is business issues, but it exists studies that can prove the inability of this theory to achieve
its main objective.
First, the commercial field has a growing interest in detecting learning styles in each human in
order to exploit them, and many companies have invented things like market tests, learning
methods, teaching materials, and training in order to take advantage of this theory. Moreover, the
publicity to implement this includes the idea that, through instructional methods that take into
account the unique characteristics of each student, talents that may remain latent in a uniform
context will be revealed. Taking into account learning styles would be a guarantee for the success
of all in school.
Second, no study has succeeded in proving the effectiveness of learning styles on academic
performance. Emmanuel Sander, Professor of University of Geneva, in his essay “Likenesses and
blendings: a cognitive approach of learning environments based on analogy making” mentions
several studies without identified methodological weaknesses which report observations going
against the theory of learning styles [CITATION Emm14 \l 2058 ]. Thus, some studies report that
groups who have followed methods adapted to their learning preferences do not learn better than
groups who have followed methods not adapted to their learning preferences. For example, so-
called "visual" students achieve similar performance whether they receive instruction in pictorial
or verbal form[ CITATION Mas06 \l 2058 ]. Other studies report learning methods based on a
particular style leading to better scores regardless of the "style" of the students [ CITATION
Con02 \l 2058 ]. The virtual absence of work highlighting the slightest positive effect of adapting
teaching methods to the learning profiles identified in students suggests that the theory of
learning styles has no place in school. .
Third, focusing learning on a single sensory (or visual, or auditory, or kinesthetic) modality goes
against the results of a body of work on the anatomy of the human brain, and on the functioning
of memory in particular. Emmanuel Sander mentions a study conducted by [ CITATION Cam00 \l
2058 ]. This study consists of presenting auditory stimuli (recorded sentences), visual (videos
showing lips moving during inaudible pronunciation of sentences), or combined (videos of moving
lips accompanied by recorded sentences). The results of this study showed that certain areas of
the brain activated only when a sentence was presented simultaneously in auditory and visual
format. This reveals the mechanism for integrating information from different sensory sources into
the human brain. In general, human activities involve the use of several sensory modalities, and
therefore the integration of information from several sources.
In conclusion, learning styles is an attractive idea because it is human nature to want to categorize
in order to better understand, even if it means oversimplifying and elaborating vague, even
incorrect concepts, however, despite its appeal, students and teachers must graduate from this
theory and leave it in the past, scientific studies that have been done contradict the main thesis
and the main objective of this idea. Continuing to believe in this theory can be dangerous, since it
slows down progress and prevents the development of theories that can be more useful and more
attached to scientific evidence.
Referencias
Baker, C. &. (2002). Stimulus modality and verbal learning performance in normal aging.
Brammer, C. &. (2000). Functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence of crossmodal binding in
the human heteromodal cortex.
Coffield. (2004). Learning Styles And Pedagogy In Post-16 Learning: A Systematic And Critical
Review.
Mayers, M. &. (2006). Testing the ATI hypothesis: Should multimedia instruction accommodate
verbalizer-visualizer cognitive style?
Sanders, E. (2014). Likenesses and blendings : a cognitive approach of learning environments
based on analogy making.
