April 13, 2011

WWWOS, part 2: Learning With Style(s)

Posted in children, Education tagged brain myth, cognitive, cognitive neuroscience, counterproductive, Education, learning styles, neuroscience, pop psychology, pseudoscience, psychology at 10:49 pm by Matthew

Previously, I argued that schools need more cognitive psychology.  This post continues that argument, specifically dealing with a common educational meme that masquerades as cognitive science.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"As we start a new school year, Mr. Smith, I just want you to know that I'm an Abstract-Sequential learner and trust that you'll conduct yourself accordingly!"

During the last few decades, “learning styles” have gained popularity and momentum in educational settings, but a 2008 study found the most popular interpretation to be scientifically bankrupt.  Specifically, the study debunked the “meshing hypothesis,” which states that students learn best when taught in their own sensory or personality style.  The authors found the popularity of such a baseless concept was, in their words, “striking and disturbing.”

Actually, the popularity of learning styles is easily traced to some accidental benefits wrapped in an appealing concept.  On the appeal side, students get treated as individuals rather than an age group.  This wouldn’t be so bad, except learning styles also appeal to making excuses.  If Sally got a bad grade, it’s because the teacher didn’t teach using her style, not because she slacked off and passed notes when she should have been taking them.

On the topic of accidental benefits, most teachers compromise on the meshing hypothesis, either by making multisensory lessons, or splitting classes into groups based on learning style similarities.  Both multisensory teaching and small group teaching  have been confirmed as beneficial by cognitive science. The result is a seductive illusion:  learning styles may not exist, but teaching as if they existed is sometimes beneficial.  This silver lining is tarnished by overworking the teacher instead of teaching students to do this for themselves.

Can't I choose "all of the above?"

So let’s take stock:

• Teachers treat children as individuals–GOOD
• Students are taught in smaller groups–GOOD
• Lessons are multisensory–GOOD
• Students and parents get to blame the teacher–BAD
• Teachers assume the student’s responsibility–BAD
  
• Teachers are bombarded with over 100 contradictory versions–BAD
• School funds are used to teach pseudoscience to teachers–BAD
• Schools encourage critical thinking while failing to model it–BAD

What’s it going to take to keep the good parts and improve on the rest?

Permalink