Last week in GRAD602, we discussed how different people learn and how that may influence our teaching beliefs and practices. It seemed that there was an overwhelming consensus that there were various learning styles. And as a class, we focused on two distinct learning styles, in particular: the auditory learners vs. the visual learners. However, upon further research, it appears that we only scratched the surface when discussing the various learning styles...
Howard Gardner doesn't even use the coined phrase "learning styles." Instead he addresses that intelligence comes in various flavors and uses the "multiple intelligences" phraseology. Based on his theory, there are 9 different types of intelligences including:
Linguistic
Logical/Mathematical
Bodily
Musical
Spatial
Naturalist
Intrapersonal
Interpersonal
Existential
On the other hand, Anthony Gregorc believes that how a person learns is based on their type or "style" of mind. The theory he puts forth suggests that there are 4 different types of mind styles:
Concrete Sequential
Abstract Sequential
Abstract Random
Concrete Random
Then, there is this 4MAT grouping of learning styles. This system and terminology is based on multiple studies and theories and categorizes people into 4 types based on whether they want to know how, why, what, or what if.
And, I am just scratching the surface here...there are multiple models.
On the contrary, Daniel Willingham believes that the theories of different learning styles is a myth.
So, here's my thought...
The picture above represents 1 student and brings up a valid point. Should teachers teach a certain way based on how the students learn? But, in a class of 20-100+ students, how is that possible? My mind becomes overwhelmed thinking about how many learning styles might be in a class...so much so that some factorial equation comes to mind when I think about how many different learning styles could be in a class of 20. I envision this...45645123564+ combinations of learning styles. With multiple learning styles and intelligences, how can our teaching practices engage all students? Are there some students that don't fit into the mold and would prove Daniel Willingham correct? Or can students be a combination such as a type 1, concrete sequential learner with musical intelligence? Or are students solely one learning style (i.e. type 2 and nothing else)? Therefore, with all these possibilities it is hard to cater to every student's preference of learning. Maybe the best idea is to change teaching practices frequently in order to engage more students. This fits in with what Daniel Willingham recently said in the NPR article (link above)...
Mixing things up is something we know is scientifically supported as something that boosts attention
Furthermore, the article goes on to state that engaging and maintaing a student's attention will help them learn better. So in the end, regardless of whether you buy into the different types of learning styles or not...maybe change and mixing it up is truly the best way to teach.
I pretty much agree with your conclusion at the end about mixing up the way you present material to the class. Now by mixing it up do you mean (text vs. audio vs. video vs. interpretive dance) or presentation style (lecture-style presentation with active learning techniques interspersed, flipped classes, etc.)? I think there's a case to be made for using repetition within your teaching practice as well.
ReplyDeleteOn a sidenote I would bet that Willingham would say (and probably has somewhere) about Gardner's 'multiple intelligences' theory that he is really talking about differences in ability (musical, spatial, etc.) instead of differences in style and so it's not a theory of learning styles at all. But that's just my opinion about what I think his opinion would be...
Ideally, I would like to incorporate everything you mentioned in the class. Different technologies, movement or hands-on exercises, and all types of presentation styles would be ideal. However, I know that would require a lot of work to prepare a course with this type of structure. Therefore, maybe that's why it is not typically seen at any grade level. However, I feel a little preparation and hard work would be valuable if it would help more students learn and retain the information for longer periods of time. Additionally, I agree with you on repetition, although I didn't mention in it my blog post. However, repetition over a long period of time (i.e months) rather than days, which is more likely associated with cramming, is better to retain the information longer and to convert it to short term to long term memory.
DeleteInteresting reading your post right after reading Science Teacher's post - http://scienceteachingblog.wordpress.com/2013/03/19/cognitive-dissonance-about-learning-styles/
ReplyDeleteIn different ways, you both came to a similar conclusion.