Review of “Maybe They’re Born With It, or Maybe It’s Experience: Toward a Deeper Understanding of the Learning Style Myth”

In their study, Maybe They’re Born With It, or Maybe It’s Experience: Toward a Deeper Understanding of the Learning Style Myth, Shaylene E. Nancekivell, Priti Shah, and Susan A. Gelman investigate the pervasive belief in learning styles—the idea that individuals learn better when taught in their preferred mode, such as visual, auditory, or kinesthetic. The authors argue that this belief, despite being unsupported by scientific evidence, is deeply entrenched and shaped by psychological essentialism.

Understanding Learning Style Beliefs

The paper explores the content and consistency of learning style beliefs through the lens of psychological essentialism, which holds that certain traits, such as learning styles, are innate, biologically determined, and predictive of other characteristics. According to the study, many people believe learning styles are inherent traits that individuals inherit from their parents, remain unchanging over time, and affect brain function.

The study identifies two groups of learning style believers:

1. Essentialist Believers: The authors describe this group as holding rigid views about learning styles, seeing them as biologically hardwired, discrete, and unchangeable. Essentialist believers argue that these traits significantly shape academic and career outcomes.
2. Non-Essentialist Believers: In contrast, this group interprets learning styles as flexible, influenced by experience, and subject to change. The study notes that non-essentialist believers view learning styles as overlapping and determined by environmental factors rather than innate biology.

The paper further emphasizes that belief in learning styles is widespread among educators and non-educators alike. Notably, it found no significant difference between these groups in their likelihood of endorsing learning styles. However, the study highlights a unique trend: educators working with younger children are more likely to hold essentialist beliefs.

Educational Implications

The study critiques the practical implications of the learning style myth, arguing that it diverts resources and attention from evidence-based teaching methods. According to the authors, educators and institutions spend significant time and money tailoring lessons to individual learning styles, despite research showing that such efforts do not improve outcomes. The paper warns that this focus can undermine education by encouraging ineffective study habits and perpetuating myths in teacher training programs and educational products.

The authors also express concern that young children may be particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of this myth. They argue that introducing maladaptive strategies based on learning styles during early education could hinder long-term learning outcomes.

The Persistence of the Myth

The study contends that the persistence of the learning style myth stems from two psychological tendencies:

1. Brain-Based Explanations: The paper notes that people are drawn to explanations linking behavior to brain function, even when such explanations are not scientifically accurate.
2. Categorization: The authors argue that the appeal of learning styles lies in their ability to categorize individuals into types, a cognitive tendency that simplifies complexity but often at the cost of accuracy.

These factors, the study suggests, contribute to the myth’s resistance to change, even in the face of scientific evidence debunking it.

Conclusion

Nancekivell, Shah, and Gelman’s study highlights the complexity of learning style beliefs and their implications for education. By demonstrating the role of psychological essentialism in shaping these beliefs, the paper provides valuable insight into why the learning style myth persists and how it can be addressed. The authors advocate for a shift away from tailoring education to supposed innate traits and toward evidence-based practices that benefit all learners.

This research underscores the importance of critical thinking in education and calls for educators and policymakers to reconsider the role of learning styles in teaching and learning.

Many people, including educators, believe learning styles are set at birth and predict both academic and career success even though there is no scientific evidence to support this common myth, according to new research.https://t.co/czdBvrwmGV pic.twitter.com/51LnNwaePn

— Kiran Johny (@johnywrites) June 5, 2019