What's New: Learning Styles and Training
Many people believe that the answers to questions like these reveal your learning style. What exactly is a learning style? It's not easy to get consensus on that.
Theories Abound
Some writers and theorists describe learning style in terms of the senses – how we take in information through hearing, vision, and touch. Others look at it in terms of brain spheres – how we process and assimilate information using the analytical left side of our brain or the creative right side.
A third camp categorizes learning styles in terms of the approach we take to perceiving and processing information – for example, concrete vs. abstract or active vs. reflective. A concrete perceiver learns by doing; an abstract perceiver through observing and analyzing. An active perceiver learns by immediately putting new information to use; a reflective perceiver by mulling it over.
Howard Gardner goes further by asserting that there are eight basic "intelligences" which influence the way we learn: verbal/linguistic, logical/mathematical, visual/spatial, body/kinesthetic, musical/rhythmic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalist.
But Do They Hold Water?
As with all theories, these have their critics. The critics claim learning style theories have no empirical data to support them. They assert that trainers and educators use informal inventories to identify learning styles and the results are unreliable to say the least. How people think they learn best is not necessarily how they do, researchers have found. And even if the results are reliable, there seems to be no hard evidence of a direct match between a particular learning style and specific instructional strategies.
Critics also ask, "Assuming that you can identify someone's learning style, what do you do with that information? Do you teach to
that style or do you use different methods to strengthen various other styles?"
But even if learning styles are no more than "voodoo science," we can still benefit from reading and thinking about them. The main benefit is that they encourage us to vary the way we present information. After all, most of us would agree that people do learn differently, whether we can attribute those differences to learning styles or to other factors. It's also widely accepted that the more senses we engage in learning, the more effective the learning is.
So in designing instruction, what tips can we take from the learning style theorists? Two main ones: appeal to the senses and vary approaches.
Appeal to the Senses
Looks for ways to bring sensory stimulation into the training you design:
- Vary media whenever possible.
- Make use of color.
- Include graphic methods of summarizing information such as mind maps.
- Balance text with pictures, charts, diagrams, and physical models.
- Use a jingle or rhyme as a memory aid.
- Design activities that allow participants to move about.
- Illustrate concepts with analogies and metaphors.
Vary Approaches
Look for patterns in your instruction. If you tend to go from specific to general when you present information, try reversing the order. If you tend to organize information in a linear fashion, start with the big picture first; then get into the details. If you rely heavily on group learning activities, add opportunities for learners to work alone.
Vary the types of skills you require learners to use. If you're heavy on the so-called left-brain side with learning materials that stress analysis, methods, and procedures, try moving into the realm of the right side of the brain. Employ synthesis, design, and creative problem solving using communication and teamwork.
These approaches work, but perhaps not for the "learning style" reasons commonly given. Maybe they work because they bring novelty and variety to the training we develop, things that all learners appreciate. Plus, they get us to move out of those ruts where designers can grow comfortable and into new areas that challenge us and spark our creativity.
Back
