Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
6Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Learning Styles- Concepts and Evidence

Learning Styles- Concepts and Evidence

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,617|Likes:
Published by Hob151219!

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: Hob151219! on Jun 20, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/02/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence
Harold Pashler, Mark McDaniel, Doug Rohrer, and Robert Bjork
Introduction
106
An Overview of Learning Styles: Doctrines and Industry
106
How Did the Learning-Styles Approach Become So Widespread and Appealing?
107
Origin and PopularityInteractions of Individual Differences and Instructional Methods
What Evidence Is Necessary to Validate Interventions Based on Learning Styles?
108
Existence of Study PreferencesThe Learning-Styles HypothesisInteractions as the Key Test of the Learning-Styles HypothesisPrimary Mental Abilities: Relation to Learning Styles
Evaluation of Learning-Styles Literature
111
Style-by-Treatment Interactions: The Core Evidence Is MissingLearning-Styles Studies With Appropriate Methods and Negative Results
Related Literatures With Appropriate Methodologies
113
Aptitude-by-Treatment InteractionsPersonality-by-Treatment Interactions
Conclusions and Recommendations
116
Points of ClarificationCosts and Benefits of Educational InterventionsBeliefs Versus Evidence as a Foundation for Educational Practices and PoliciesEverybody’s Potential to Learn
Psychological
Science
in the
PUBLIC
INTEREST
CONTENTS
Volume 9 Number 3
December 2008
 AJOURNALOFTHEASSOCIATIONFORPSYCHOLOGICALSCIENCE
 
About the Authors
Harold Pashler
is Professor of Psychology and a faculty member of the Cognitive Science Program at the University of California, San Diego. His main areas of interest are human learning and the psychology of attention. Pashler’s learningresearch focuses on methods for optimizing acquisition and retention of knowledge and skills. In the field of attention,Pashler’sworkhasilluminatedbasicattentionalbottlenecksaswellasthenatureofvisualawareness.Pashleristheauthoof 
ThePsychologyofAttention
(MIT Press, 1998) and the editor of 
Stevens’HandbookofExperimentalPsychology 
(Wiley,2001). He received the Troland Prize from the National Academy of Sciences for his studies of human attention, and waselected to membership in the Society of Experimental Psychologists.
MarkMcDaniel
isProfessorofPsychologyatWashington UniversityinSt.Louis,withajointappointmentinEducation.He received his PhD from the University of Colorado in 1980. His research is in the general area of human learning andmemory, with an emphasis on prospective memory, encoding and retrieval processes in episodic memory, learning of complex concepts, and applications to educational contexts and to aging. His educationally relevant research includesworkbeingconductedinactualcollegeandmiddle-schoolclassrooms.ThisresearchisbeingsponsoredbytheInstituteof EducationalSciencesandtheJamesS.McDonnellFoundation,andhisworkisalsosupportedbytheNationalInstitutesof Health. McDaniel has served as Associate Editor of the
Journalof Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
and
CognitivePsychology 
and as President of the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association, and he is afellowofDivisions 3and20oftheAmericanPsychologicalAssociation.Hehaspublishedover200journalarticles,bookchapters,andeditedbooksonhumanlearningandmemory,andisthe coauthor,withGilles Einstein,oftworecentbooks:
MemoryFitness:AGuideforSuccessfulAgin
(Yale University Press, 2004) and
ProspectiveMemory:AnOverviewand SynthesisofanEmergingField 
(Sage, 2007).
DougRohrer
isProfessorofPsychologyattheUniversityofSouthFlorida.HereceivedhisdoctoraldegreeinPsychologyfromtheUniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego,andhewasafacultymemberatGeorgeWashingtonUniversitybeforemovingtothe University of South Florida. Before attending graduate school, he taught high-school mathematics for several years.Most of his research concerns learning and memory, with a recent emphasis on learning strategies.
Robert A. Bjork
is Distinguished Professor and Chair of Psychology at the University of California, Los Angeles. Hisresearch focuses on human learning and memory and on the implications of the science of learning for instruction andtraining. He has served as Editor of 
Memory &Cognition
and
PsychologicalReview
(1995–2000), Coeditor of 
Psycholo-gicalScienceinthePublicInterest
(1998–2004), and Chair of the National Research Council’s Committee on Techniquesfor the Enhancement of Human Performance. He is a past president or chair of the Association for Psychological Science(APS), the Western Psychological Association, the Psychonomic Society, the Society of Experimental Psychologists, theCouncil of Editors of the American Psychological Association (APA), and the Council of Graduate Departments of Psychology. He is a recipient of UCLA’s Distinguished Teaching Award, the American Psychological Association’sDistinguished Scientist Lecturer and Distinguished Service to Psychological Science Awards, and the AmericanPhysiological Society’s Claude Bernard Distinguished Lecturership Award.
 
Learning Styles
Concepts and Evidence
Harold Pashler,
1
Mark McDaniel,
2
Doug Rohrer,
3
and Robert Bjork
4
1
UniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego,
 2
WashingtonUniversityinSt.Louis,
 3
UniversityofSouthFlorida,and
 4
Universityof California, Los Angeles
SUMMARY—
Theterm‘‘learningstyles’’referstotheconceptthat individuals differ in regard to what mode of instruc-tion or study is most effective for them. Proponents of learning-style assessment contendthat optimal instructionrequires diagnosing individuals’ learning style and tai-loring instruction accordingly. Assessments of learning style typically ask people to evaluate what sort of infor-mation presentation they prefer (e.g., words versus pic-tures versus speech) and/or what kind of mental activitythey find most engaging or congenial (e.g., analysis versuslistening), although assessment instruments are extremelydiverse. The most common—but not the only—hypothesisabout the instructional relevance of learning styles is the
meshing hypothesis
, according to which instruction is best provided in a format that matches the preferences of thelearner (e.g., for a ‘‘visual learner,’’ emphasizing visual presentation of information).The learning-styles view has acquired great influencewithin the education field, and is frequently encountered at levels ranging from kindergarten to graduate school.There is a thriving industry devoted to publishing learn-ing-styles tests and guidebooks for teachers, and manyorganizations offer professional development workshops for teachers and educators built around the concept of learning styles.The authors of the present review were charged withdetermining whether these practices are supported byscientific evidence. We concluded that any credible vali-dation of learning-styles-based instruction requires robustdocumentation of a very particular type of 
experimental
 finding with several necessary criteria. First, studentsmust be divided into groups on the basis of their learning styles, and then students from each group must be ran-domly assigned to receive one of multiple instructionalmethods. Next, students must then sit for a final test that isthe same for all students. Finally, in order to demonstratethat optimal learning requires that students receive in-struction tailored to their putative learning style, theexperiment must reveal a specific type of 
interaction
be-tween learning style and instructional method: Studentswith one learning style achieve the best educationaloutcome when given an instructional method that differs from the instructional method producing the best out-come for students with a different learning style. Inother words, the instructional method that proves mosteffectiveforstudentswithonelearning styleis
not
themosteffective method for students with a different learning style.Our review of the literature disclosed ample evidencethatchildren andadults will, ifasked, expresspreferencesabouthowtheypreferinformationtobepresentedtothem.There is also plentiful evidence arguing that people differin the degree to which they have some fairly specific apti-tudes for different kinds of thinking and for processing different types of information. However, we found virtu-ally no evidence for the interaction pattern mentioneabove, which was judged to be a precondition for vali-dating the educational applications of learning styles. Al-though the literature on learning styles is enormous, very few studies have even used an experimental methodologycapable of testing the validity of learning styles applied toeducation. Moreover, of those that did use an appropriatemethod, several found results that flatly contradict the popular meshing hypothesis.We conclude therefore, that at present, there is no ad-equate evidence base to justify incorporating learning-stylesassessmentsintogeneraleducationalpractice.Thus,limited education resources would better be devoted toadopting other educational practices that have a strong evidence base, of which there are an increasing number.However, given the lack of methodologically sound studiesof learning styles, it would be an error to conclude that all possible versions of learning styles have been tested and  found wanting; many have simply not been tested at all.
Address correspondence to Harold Pashler, Department of Psychol-ogy 0109, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093;e-mail:hpashler@ucsd.edu.
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST
Volume 9—Number 3
105
Copyright
r
2009 Association for Psychological Science

Activity (6)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Dexter Ebojo liked this
aelbettani liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->