Are Learning Styles a Scam?
- on 08.14.07
- Fund The Child, General
- 4 Comments
- Digg
- Del.icio.us
We have all heard the hype about learning styles and how teachers have to identify and then teach each child according to their style of learning. Of course this is then joined with calls for lower class sizes and more money to fund it. The question though, is whether teaching with a particular learning style is better than the traditional methods called “chalk and talk”, also known in some circles as “drill and kill”?
Baroness Greenfield, Director of the Royal Institute and Pharmacology Professor at Oxford University claims the learning styles approach is “nonsense“ and a “waste of valuable time and resources“. The methods are known as “visual, auditory or kinaesthetic (Vak)”. [Emphasis mine]
|
Pupils are instead given questionnaires to discover if they prefer to learn through “visual, auditory or kinaesthetic” (Vak) teaching. Once identified, the teacher will allow a visual child to learn through looking at cartoons, pictures and fast-moving computer programmes. A “kinaesthetic” learner will be allowed to spread their work on the floor, wander round while they are thinking or learn through dance and drama. In some schools, pupils’ desks are even labelled to indicate their learning styles. According to Susan Greenfield, however, the practice is “nonsense” from a neuroscientific point of view: “Humans have evolved to build a picture of the world through our senses working in unison, exploiting the immense interconnectivity that exists in the brain. It is when the senses are activated together – the sound of a voice is synchronisation with the movement of a person’s lips – that brain cells fire more strongly than when stimuli are received apart. “The rationale for employing Vak learning styles appears to be weak. After more than 30 years of educational research in to learning styles there is no independent evidence that Vak, or indeed any other learning style inventory, has any direct educational benefits.” |
In addition, Frank Coffield, a London University Professor, calls learning styles, “theoretically incoherent and confused“. His final comment was as follows:
|
“We do students a serious disservice by implying they have only one learning style, rather than a flexible repertoire from which to choose, depending on the context.” |
I am sure that very soon, there will be a myriad of studies released by the education establishment refuting these claims. In the end though, they will only be doing this to protect their money sources and not for the good of the children. Time and time again we have seen the education establishment release studies that do not rely on scientific methods. We can see this even more clearly in how they choose curriculum that has not been proven with scientifically based research.
The government run monopoly we call public schools is so heavy with bureaucracy that they no longer educate children effectively. They can only find new schemes like “learning styles” to force an unsuspecting public and elected officials to give them more money. Some ready examples of this are the smaller class sizes, universal preschool, and preparing students for the 21st century. These are all slogans and catch phrases that do nothing to effectively educate. They do everything to increase the size of the education bureaucracy.
It is time to end the games played by the government run public school monopoly. It is time to empower parents by funding each and every child equally.
Why do you assume that the public schools are the ones that are pushing the “learning styles agenda”? Charter schools and private schools here run ads in the papers about how they “differentiate teaching to meet your child’s needs”. In fact, that and the lower class sizes are the two facts that they mention most often as selling points although studies show that neither makes a significant difference.
The education schools in general push learning styles. Yes, that does mean both public and private schools. The Ed schools drive most new teaching methodologies. This allows them to set the debate and the language most parents here and are familiar with. This is gradually changing due to bloggers like myself and other who expose the deception and failures of this government run monopoly.
If the private schools lose students, they lose funding. This forces them to change curricula and teaching styles more quickly than government run public schools.
No “learning styles” post should be with out the link to The Onion’s “Nasal Learners Left Behind by Lack of Nasal Curriculum.”
It pretty much says it all.
I’m battling this exact topic in a masters of Ed class I’m taking. We are being taught that we need to use the color of a students skin as a guide to their learning style. Its hidden behind the guise of multicultural awareness but when exposed all you see is encouraged stereotyping. It is widely accepted in my class that “white” teachers need to be re-educated and find humility in order to be able to teach students from other cultures, that to do so will allow us to “acknowledge our inevitable priviege and racism while at the same time actively working to dismantle our legacy of dominance.” That is a direct quote from my lecture. This is scary stuff.
Thanks for continuing the good fight! We need voices of reason to stop this think tank mentality.