23-018 · EVIDENCE A · LOW-RISK READING
Don’t pick learning methods based on “I’m a visual learner, he’s an auditory learner”
别按「我是视觉型、他是听觉型」挑学法
No cost at all. You simply stop using this classification to pick materials or courses, and you also avoid spending money on style assessments.
Many people believe each person has a distinct learning style — such as being visual or auditory — and that teaching should be tailored to that style for best results. Yet there are very few rigorous studies on this, and almost none provide any support for it; several even show the opposite. While people do have personal preferences, there’s no evidence that instruction aligned with those preferences leads to better learning. There’s also no need to spend money on learning style assessments.
A
Move “Don’t pick learning methods based on “I’m a visual learner, he’s an auditory learner”” to Future Me's calendar
The excuse
If I do not open the notes, no new task has technically appeared.
What feels good now
Today I keep a few minutes and avoid interrupting my default routine.
What the source says
The source summarizes the return this way: “Many people believe each person has a distinct learning style — such as being visual or auditory — and that teaching should be tailored to that style for best results. Yet there are very few rigorous studies on this, and almost none provide any support for it; several even show the opposite. While people do have personal preferences, there’s no evidence that instruction aligned with those preferences leads to better learning. There’s also no need to spend money on learning style assessments.” Evidence grade A. The original states the population, caveats, and sources; this is not a personal forecast.
Open the original entry, check who the evidence applies to, then pick one small step that fits.
THE ENGLISH EDITION
Original recommendation and evidence
18. Don’t pick learning methods based on “I’m a visual learner, he’s an auditory learner”
Cost: No cost at all. You simply stop using this classification to pick materials or courses, and you also avoid spending money on style assessments.
In plain terms: Many people believe each person has a distinct learning style — such as being visual or auditory — and that teaching should be tailored to that style for best results. Yet there are very few rigorous studies on this, and almost none provide any support for it; several even show the opposite. While people do have personal preferences, there’s no evidence that instruction aligned with those preferences leads to better learning. There’s also no need to spend money on learning style assessments.
Benefit: A comprehensive review evaluating evidence on learning styles concluded that to prove “teaching according to learning styles” works, students must first be grouped by style, then randomly assigned to different teaching methods, and finally tested using the same assessment. The key indicator of effectiveness would be a specific interaction effect: a teaching method highly effective for one style would be less effective for another. The review found almost no such interaction effects. Although there’s plenty of literature on learning styles, very few studies employ proper experimental designs, and several of those produce results directly contradicting the “match hypothesis.” Based on this, the authors argue current evidence simply doesn’t justify incorporating learning style assessments into educational practice.
Evidence grade: A
Sources: Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x>
Notes: The review also notes this doesn’t mean every version of learning style theory has been tested and disproven; many have never been examined at all. What you should definitely avoid is spending money on learning style assessments or selecting training programs based on such classifications. Criteria for picking training options are outlined in item 9 (prioritizing government-subsidized programs) and item 13 (favoring short-term programs that lead directly to employment).
Read the complete Chinese source and notes
18. 别按「我是视觉型、他是听觉型」挑学法
成本: 不花钱。只是不再按这个分类挑材料、挑课程,也不再花钱做风格测评。
说人话: 很多人相信每个人有自己的学习风格,比如视觉型、听觉型,按风格教才学得好。认真检验这件事的研究很少,几乎没有一项支持它,有几项的结果还正好相反。人确实各有偏好,但没有证据说按偏好上课就学得更好,不用花钱做风格测评。
收益: 一份受托评估学习风格证据的综述指出:要证明「按学习风格施教」有效,必须先按风格给学生分组,再把每组学生随机分配到不同教法,最后用同一份测验考。有效的判据是出现一种特定的交互作用:对一种风格最有效的教法,对另一种风格不是最有效的。综述的结论是:几乎没有发现这种交互作用;关于学习风格的文献虽然很多,但用了合格实验设计的研究极少,其中几项的结果还直接和「匹配假说」相反。作者据此认为,现有证据不足以支持把学习风格测评用进教育实践。
证据等级: A
来源: Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x>
备注: 综述同时说明,这不等于所有版本的学习风格理论都被测过并被否定,很多根本没被测过。要避免的是花钱做风格测评、按风格挑培训班这两件事。挑培训的标准见第 9 条(培训优先走政府补贴渠道)和第 13 条(优先选能直接上岗的短周期项目)。
YOUR PRIVATE LIST