Keith Hipolito

BEED-2C
A Reflection on the Validity of Learning Styles
Marshik argued in a TEDx lecture that there was no research to back up the
notion in learning styles. There are tests that suggest there is no evidence for the
existence of learning styles, according to Marshik . Marshik also highlighted a
study that looked into how people wanted to learn, but found that when those
preferences were tested, they did not result in improved learning. Marshik's
glaring lack of evidence and lack of quotes from sources to back up her allegations
left a lot to be desired from an academic standpoint. Marshik's statements are at
best exaggerations, according to a study of the sources mentioned in one of the
presentation's slides. Her views on learning styles appeared to be influenced by
Riener and Willingham's book "The Myth of Learning Styles." The question wasn't
whether learning styles exist, but rather how understanding them may help
teachers improve their teaching methods and improve student outcomes.
Marshik made up for his incorrect assertions by emphasizing the significance of
considering the nature of the learning content rather than relying on sensory
input (auditory, visual, or kinesthetic). Marshik and Riener and Willingham
essentially questioned the idea that an educator can increase learning
performance results by tailoring an instructional technique to the learner's
chosen learning style. It makes no sense to tailor something to learn to a sensory
preference without first examining the structure of the content, as Riener and
Willingham so eloquently explained; learning is not independent of content.
Marshik acknowledged that certain students may have a stronger visual memory
or thrive at aural learning. However, the preponderance of conceptual meaning-
based information in Marshik's appraisal of present educational practices shows
that Catering instructional technique demands based on preferred sensory input
will not make a difference; an intuitively understandable point.
Although his statements concerning the nonexistence of learning styles were
exaggerated, Marshik was correct in turning the focus away from learning styles
and onto other factors that affect learning outcomes. The contextual demands
(online versus face-to-face learning contexts), according to Zacharis, necessitate
inventive methodological foresight in course design.
Wang, Wang, and Huang (as reported in Zacharis, 2010) found one sort of
learning style (as defined by Kolb's Learning Style Inventory) as more proficient
for online learning. Nonetheless, Zacharis found no evidence to support this as
being significant; neither differences in course grades and learning styles, nor
differences in course grades and instructional had any meaningful effect.
Understanding that learning is a continual process that is based on the individual's
unique experiences suggests that a creative mix of activities and support is
required.

According to the literature, teaching one mode provides problems to the learner
that may alter learning outcomes, necessitating the instructor's awareness and
assistance. Some learners flourished in the online learning environment, while
others suffered with the asynchronous form of communication, according to Kim
(2015). Similarly, Kovanovi, Gaevi, Joksimovi, Hatala, and Adesope found that
students' reluctance to participate in online discussions may have been due to a
lack of detailed instructions on how to increase productivity using the chat forum,
necessitating the instructor's foresight and additional support. Olofson, Swallow,
and Neumann noted that one teacher had success using differentiation in her
practice by consistently connecting with her students and understanding about
their skills in a professional development institution in the United States.

Several research studies have emphasized the necessity of addressing students'

learning styles when constructing lesson, however reaching that goal has always
remained elusive. Through weekly learning reflection journals, I've learned about
my students' strengths and limitations.
in the Olofson, Swallow, and Neuman research, an insight that resonates with a
teacher's experience (2016). On a personal level, I've only attempted the Myers
Briggs personality test half-heartedly, with little personal benefit. Furthermore, I
can recognize whether my method of using a visual, aural, or kinesthetic
approach to problem solving has been successful or unsuccessful.

As a potential educator, I recognize that while selecting an instructional

technique, all sensory input preferences should be considered and explored with.
Marshik is a fictional character. Similarly, rather than subscribing to a single
learning style, teachers should be open to mixing a number of preferences in
order to best match the variety of unique learning experiences that our students
bring to the classroom. Intuitively, I combine a number of learning styles, notice
what works best for the majority, and anticipate who might require more help. In
short, while I am sensitive to the preferences of some of my future students, I
also believe that exposure to various styles has the potential to expose hidden
strengths. With the correct desire and determination, you can achieve your goals.
I also feel that a learner, particularly one who is committed to lifelong learning, is
a valuable asset. However, one might be able to achieve some level of mastery in
a learning style that isn't one's strong suit. Depending on the nature of the
learning topic for which it is required, even a weakly established learning
preference may prove valuable. The greater the number of tools from which to
chose, the better.