The Learning Styles Debate

The other day, I came across a debate on the web: are Learning Styles just a lot of hot air? Those who criticised said things like "Learning Styles are too simplistic", "they are a cog in the wheel of the learning process", "many other factors (am I hungry? do I like the subject? am I tired?) are at play" and "it is not very likely that the self-concept of a student, once he or she has reached a certain age, will drastically develop by learning about his or her personal style".

Let's take these comments one by one.

Learning Styles too simplistic? They may certainly seem simplistic, and some of them probably are. But our Learning Styles on http:\\www.creativelearningcentre.com consider almost 50 different elements and they go waaaay beyond the simple holistic-serial classification. Our report explains all the elements in a simple, accessible way, but let's not confuse "simple" with "simplistic".

A cog in the wheel of the learning process? Well, a cog is a good thing, it's a little gear that drives the learning machine. So if Learning Styles help the learning machine chug along, that's fantastic!

Many other factors (am I hungry? do I like the subject? am I tired?) are at play? You bet! Our Learning Styles on http:\\www.creativelearningcentre.com actually make Food Intake one of the elements of the Learning Style.

Now my favourite: not very likely that the self-concept of a student will drastically develop by learning about his or her personal style? I beg to differ. How can you not benefit from learning about yourself?

If I ever doubt whether Learning Styles worked, I only need to look at my 2 children: one is visual and right brained, one is tactile and left brained. I raised them the same way, but they came out different. That's genes and Learning Styles for you.