I appreciate how well and how carefully this article is written. It is of course the usual argument against learning styles, this time objecting to a linkage between learning styles and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The authors won't cite the article they're responding to (saying "this is not about criticising an individual") but this makes it really hard to know whether they're presenting the argument fairly. Anyhow, the key message is that accommodating for diversity doesn't mean catering to individual preferences, but rather, "considering what makes individual people 'unique'." Individual preferences cannot be relied upon ("people have food preferences, too!" but following them "wouln't be healthy"). We're all the same when it comes to learning anyway ("our sensory memory, working memory, and long-term memory plus the principles guiding their functioning are essentially the same for all of us") and so "we shouldn't waste money on designing different pathways based on learning styles." I think there are numerous flaws in this argument - diversity does include preferences, people's food preferences do matter (can you imagine feeding everyone the same diet?), the common architecture they describe is incorrect (brains are not computers) and elides actual differences in learning, education shouldn't be reduced to creating 'learning paths', and there's no one best way to teach any given content or skill.
Today: 2 Total: 107 [Direct link] [Share]
